Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Office 2007 to Support ODF - But Not OOXML

Andy Updegrove writes "About two hours ago, Microsoft announced that it will update Office 2007 to natively support ODF 1.1, but not to implement its own OOXML format. Not until Office 14 is released (no date given so far for that) will anyone be able to buy an OOXML ISO-compliant version. Why will Microsoft do this after so many years of refusal? Perhaps because the only way it can deliver a product to government customers that meets an ISO/IEC document format standard is by finally taking the plunge, and supporting 'that other format.' Still, many questions remain, such as when this upgrade will actually be released, how good a job it will do, and whether the API Microsoft has said it will make available to permit developers to supply 'save to ODF' default plugins will be supported by a patent non-assertion promise allowing implementations under the GPL (the upgrade supplied by Microsoft will not allow ODF as the default setting)."

24 of 377 comments (clear)

  1. Embrace and Extend by TheSpoom · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Chances of it having several Microsoft-specific "add-ons" that are patent-encumbered and not supported by the actual ODF spec: Approaching 100%.

    --
    It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
    - E. Debs
  2. Victory by tsa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You can say all negative things you will about it, but this is a great victory for ODF.

    --

    -- Cheers!

  3. Larger question by overshoot · · Score: 5, Insightful
    More to the point, how badly will they cripple the ODF support?
    • Will ODF spreadsheets be functionally equivalent to CSV?
    • Will ODF text be functionally equivalent to plain-text ASCII with line breaks?
    • WIll ODF presentations be JPEG renderings?
    • Will ODF import and export take hours?
    • etc.
    I've occasionally been accused of having an evil mind, but I'm sure that professionals given weeks or months can come up with better kneecapping plans than the above amateur hipshots.
    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
    1. Re:Larger question by mysticgoat · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I think what matters most is that MS has committed itself to providing ODF compliance, even if that is a bit limited way, by the end of the first quarter of 2009.

      This means that businesses who have been delaying the normal computer upgrade cycle (sometimes for years) now have a clear pathway: they can immediately migrate to OpenOffice under existing WinXP licenses on new hardware, or they can jump directly to an enterprise Linux with OpenOffice. Either way, they can move forward knowing that before they have finished the rollout, the documents they are producing will be compliant with the Microsoft universe.

      The timing of this is great for the USA economy. It is much less costly to do a major rollout in a slack period, and we can count on slack for the rest of 2008. It will be easier to hire the needed tech support people, and if the rollout involves moving to Linux, it can be done with a lot less expense in hardware than the cost forecasts of even last year. The time and cost for retraining staff can be more easily absorbed during the competitive lull. Then when the economy gets back on track in 2009, these companies will be very well positioned for fast and strong growth.

      I applaud Microsoft for biting the bullet and coming out with this news now. Perhaps now USA IT departments can get out of these doldrum eddies and start making headway again.

  4. OOXML is not an ISO standard by lkcl · · Score: 5, Informative

    well - only if microsoft is able to buy their way through the standards process will anyone be able to buy an OOXML ISO-compliant version.

    UKUUG is currently waiting on the UK judicial system to decide whether to do a judicial review of the British Standards Institute's recent decision to ratify OOXML.

    clonking "comments" together in blocks of 100 for vote "yes no", towards the end of the (only) 5 day process, smells a bit fishy. especially as the comments weren't actually reviewed as having been actioned / corrected (in the 6,000 page document).

    the BSI came up with something ridiculous like 900 comments on the 6,000 page document.

    it's all incredibly fishy - long story. far too much to fit into one silly slashdot comment, so i'll stop.

  5. Results for eggs by pacroon · · Score: 5, Funny

    So I guess speaking Hungarian and throwing eggs at Steve Ballmer actually did pay off.

    --
    It's all fun & games until someone loses the game.
    1. Re:Results for eggs by RealGrouchy · · Score: 5, Funny

      Choose your weapon wisely; it's hard to throw an egg back.

      - RG>

      --
      Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
  6. Re:Wow by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Man, if I was a MS shareholder, I'd be fucking livid. OOXML supporting software won't be available for a long time, and after this move, all the people who care enough about using ISO supported standards are going to be entrenched in ODF.

    Which means that all the administration costs, travel expenses, bribe money, etc that they spent to have the OOXML standard pushed through was just thrown away for nothing, even though they got what they were aiming for.

    Talk about mismanagement. Hey Ballmer, why don't you try hitting yourself with the chair this time. Might knock some sense into you.

    --
    -1 Uncomfortable Truth
  7. Not embrace and extend, but embrace and squeeze by darealpat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It may be that Microsoft is serious about supporting ODF, but I would not be surprised if it is somehow "crippled" or poorly implemented within the word processor and spreadsheet. Somehow I don't feel that you will be able to open an .odf made in Word with OpenOffice and there will be no "artifacts" or some loss of formatting, and vice versa of course. There are already issues with odf's opening across operating systems (usually a font issue causing discrepancy in formatting), and I am sure that Microsoft will use this opportunity to "make its case" for the "superiority" of its native format, whatever that format may be. If this will not be, it will be a most astute business move. Making their office suite cost less would be even better.

    --
    For every present, there is a past
  8. MS BJ's by JeremyGNJ · · Score: 5, Funny

    Jeeeze you people are harsh!

    I think that Microsoft could announce tomorrow that they are giving out free blow jobs to anyone who uses Linux. As soon as the first blowjob was given out, someone would find something negative about it.

    1. Re:MS BJ's by Uncle+Focker · · Score: 5, Funny

      or of them biting down and demanding to be paid to let go. That's one way to achieve vendor lock-in.
  9. Re:Q: Will this signal the end of Excel dominance? by AmaDaden · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Very true but this is the foot in the door people have been waiting for. The problem I have always had was not opening up DOC docs but not being able to trust the ones I send from OO. Now that I know MS office can read ODF I can safely make and send them out with out worrying. Making ODF common is step one. Making DOC and XLS uncommon is step two. Making DOC and XLS so uncommon that people go through the hassle of converting them is step three.

  10. Re:Wow by mrslacker · · Score: 5, Funny

    Talk about mismanagement. Hey Ballmer, why don't you try hitting yourself with the chair this time. Might knock some sense into you. Will this do?

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/7412417.stm
  11. Re:Typical Tactic by mhall119 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It could also back-fire. If users are required by business requirements to exchange files as ODF, and MS Office makes this difficult while OO.o makes it default, it's more incentive to switch.

    Obviously Microsoft is counting on this to let them sell MS Office to governments as "ISO compatible" until they can properly implement the OOXML standard, while still trying to keep everyone using their proprietary formats. It's a risky gamble, and with Office 14 having no announced release date, not one I'd be comfortable making.

    --
    http://www.mhall119.com
  12. Re:Sinking Ship. by baggins2001 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    They may be selling it like pancakes, but I have also seen an upsurge in dissatisfaction.
    1) Why do I have to learn a new interface?
    2) Why is user X not able to open my files. Why can't we open our shared files?
    3) Why is our file corrupted.
    This issue has become so great that department managers have been asking me if we can go to OpenOffice.
    Current plan is to minimize purchases of systems with Office 2007 and switch to OO next year, after the new version with file sharing comes out.

    --
    He who said 1,000,000 monkeys on 1,000,000 typewriters would eventually type the great novel, never saw an AOL chat room
  13. What people want by Reality+Master+201 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If they don't give people what they want, which is honest standards, they will just speed migration away from them.


    Sorry, but most people actually couldn't give a crap about standards. Most people just want a functional suite of office applications that works more or less the way they've come to expect such programs. Most people aren't even aware that there is such a thing as a file format, or that there are different types of them.

    Most people also want to be able to easily exchange documents with other people. That's part of the reason why Office is so well entrenched. Sure, you can download a copy of OO to open an ODF file, but if you're running a business, you don't want to make your clients do that, because it's a hassle. Nearly everyone has Office, and practically nobody has OO (this is in rough marketshare percentages).

    Don't get me wrong. I would rather have a clear, open standard with a decent existing implementation that's not tied to the whims of a vendor. But I and people like me really are a very small part of the market.
  14. Will be in Office 2007 SP2, link to press release by quazee · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://www.microsoft.com/Presspass/press/2008/may08/05-21ExpandedFormatsPR.mspx

    Also, ODF will be allowed to be configured as the default format for documents.
    SP2 will also include support for PDF and XPS export.

    --
    throw new SuccessException("Sig read successfully");
  15. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Informative

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  16. Re:Sinking Ship. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Office 2007 has some really excellent improvements over previous versions of office. Not the least of which is the awesome Sharepoint integration.


    I agree! I can't count the number of times I've been writing a letter to family and needed the wife to put in a few words. With the new Sharepoint integration its been a snap for us to collaborate on docs together (like the grocery list). All it took was an extra server, and new licensing seats. ~
  17. Re:An Empire in Rapid Decline, said Time Magazine. by clampolo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm more scared of them supporting ODF than I am of OOXML. How do we know they aren't going to try to do what they successfully did to Netscape. They could easily add a bunch of their own stuff into ODF so that nothing but Office would be able to read the ODF files Office puts out.

    If however they are really trying to comply with ODF then hats off to MS for being serious about embracing standards.

  18. Re:Wow by Gauthic · · Score: 5, Funny

    That gentleman certainly had some balls, knowing full well that any retaliation fire would be in chairs, not eggs.

  19. Re:An Empire in Rapid Decline, said Time Magazine. by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    How do we know they aren't going to try to do what they successfully did to Netscape. Oh please, let them try. Have you forgotten that Mozilla rose from the ashes of Netscape, and Firefox from the ashes of Mozilla?

    If however they are really trying to comply with ODF then hats off to MS for being serious about embracing standards. It might be the first time they've done this in good faith...

    But then, look at IE. It took some serious competition, in the form of Firefox, but IE finally did shape up and start adding features (tabs) and reasonable standards compliance.

    All we really need, then, is an ACID test for ODF, in which we can show that OpenOffice, KOffice, Google Docs, and even isolated projects like AbiWord and Gnumeric do better than Office, thus shaming Microsoft into doing it right. That assumes they don't get it right the first time, although that does seem unlikely.
    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  20. Re:Sinking Ship. by pjt33 · · Score: 5, Funny

    I can't tell if this was sarcasm or not. In that case I'm surprised you've even heard of sarcasm.
  21. Re:An Empire in Rapid Decline, said Time Magazine. by holloway · · Score: 5, Informative

    All we really need, then, is an ACID test for ODF, in which we can show that OpenOffice, KOffice, Google Docs, and even isolated projects like AbiWord and Gnumeric do better than Office, thus shaming Microsoft into doing it right. That assumes they don't get it right the first time, although that does seem unlikely.
    This is what Rob Weir has proposed (he's an ODF chair).