Indeed, the data would be interesting - I suspect that it will show less income, but will also could potentially show considerably less cost. For Murdoch it will be profitability that matters, not revenue.
Actually, under the FCPA being an employee of an American company is enough to subject you to this federal statute. You don't have to be American, or in America.
A facinating slashdot headline.
IBM isn't a "member" of ISO today, so can't exactally leave.
ISO is made up of national standards bodies, there is no concept of corporate membership.
He doesn't expect it... look up the deffinition of FUD on Wikipedia, Gene Amdahl defined the term to describe IBMs marketing techniques. Bob is just doing all he can to try and muddy the waters.
No, that is WRONG. ODF went through PAS which is near identical to Fasttrack, comments were raised, no BRM was held and as yet non of the maintenence (which is all done in OASIS still) has been handed back to ISO for any further approval.
It is indeed an interesting request, especially when you consider that the office binary document format specification (older and current versions) is already available to any developer under a royalty free license.
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/840817 - the relevant section is about 2/3 of the way down the KB article. The process to get the documentation could be slicker, but it is at least available.
Alex Brown, the BRM convenor, talks a little in his blog about the issues in SC34 and how things are not quite as they are portrayed in various discussions on the internet.
I can confirm that Microsoft's plan all along was to get Rob to publish something like this, then have it pushed to/. to ensure that all sites quickly become unavailable!
Hopefully, normal service should be resumed shortly.
Here is a blog entry from Jason Matusow where he responds to some of Bob Sutor's recent comments and in the process explains that the purpose of the upcoming Ballot Resolution Meeting is the change the specification.
For all the noise they made it was the FFII who publically put money on the table, in the form of this award, with the goal of recruiting people to subvert the standards process. It is good to see that they have seen sense and chosen this route of getting out of their fix, good to see a little humer from them as well.
That gets to the core of much of the confusion here, if your primaly sources of information has been noooxml.org, Rob Weir and Andy Updegrove then I would wager that you have been exposed to slightly less than one side of the debate.
In many countries this is how it works today... I live in Singapore, we can opt to take a handset from one of the three main wireless providers or you can just pick up service from them and then grab a handset from one of the IT malls, some of the supermarkets or an electronics shop.
... I intend to smash a window in the back of my neighbours house, then stick a postit note on his front door letting him know that I have discovered a potential problem with his home security.
While it is fun to lay the blame outside of Linux, the community should really be looking at the product provided and working out how to make it deployable for every one of the 6.2bn folks on the planet if it is going to get the pervasive desktop deployment that some seem to be looking for.
It will only take a small number of stories like this before IT managers around the world take the decision not to look at Linux at all. Adding the threat of the pointless wrath of the community to that (as per your post) and the decision not to even look at Linux is a really clear one.
Slashdot Mirror
Indeed, the data would be interesting - I suspect that it will show less income, but will also could potentially show considerably less cost. For Murdoch it will be profitability that matters, not revenue.
Microsoft has made contributions to the Linux Kernel over the last twelve months, I'm not sure that the GPL is much of a roadblock anymore.
... of the 730k patents mentioned are software related?
Shouldn't it be - "Project Natal Named 'Kinect'"?
http://www.bing.com/community/blogs/search/archive/2009/11/21/committed-to-comprehensive-results.aspx
Filed under "weirdest story ever to appear on /."
Next week we can discuss the outrage that stems from Microsoft's refusal to offer free back massages on the New York subway.
Actually, under the FCPA being an employee of an American company is enough to subject you to this federal statute. You don't have to be American, or in America.
That is absolutely not the case, there is full support for ODF in Word, Excel and Powerpoint.
The video I have linked in the post below will give you an idea of how quickly we'll solve this problem...
http://osrin.net/2008/12/the-rapid-deployment-of-electronic-health-records/
A facinating slashdot headline. IBM isn't a "member" of ISO today, so can't exactally leave. ISO is made up of national standards bodies, there is no concept of corporate membership.
... it really has nothing to do with Gates moving on, MS learning how to understand OSS and work with it has been happening for a while.
http://osrin.net/2008/06/im-a-believer/
... didn't exist when the document used for the test was saved, this should not really be much of a surprise.
http://osrin.net/2008/04/22/office-2007-is29500-conformance/
He doesn't expect it... look up the deffinition of FUD on Wikipedia, Gene Amdahl defined the term to describe IBMs marketing techniques. Bob is just doing all he can to try and muddy the waters.
No, that is WRONG. ODF went through PAS which is near identical to Fasttrack, comments were raised, no BRM was held and as yet non of the maintenence (which is all done in OASIS still) has been handed back to ISO for any further approval.
It is indeed an interesting request, especially when you consider that the office binary document format specification (older and current versions) is already available to any developer under a royalty free license.
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/840817 - the relevant section is about 2/3 of the way down the KB article. The process to get the documentation could be slicker, but it is at least available.
... is now called "a standards war". This is a complex and self serving world that we live in.
Alex Brown, the BRM convenor, talks a little in his blog about the issues in SC34 and how things are not quite as they are portrayed in various discussions on the internet.
http://adjb.net/index.php?entry=entry071215-123604
I can confirm that Microsoft's plan all along was to get Rob to publish something like this, then have it pushed to /. to ensure that all sites quickly become unavailable!
Hopefully, normal service should be resumed shortly.
Here is a blog entry from Jason Matusow where he responds to some of Bob Sutor's recent comments and in the process explains that the purpose of the upcoming Ballot Resolution Meeting is the change the specification.
http://blogs.msdn.com/jasonmatusow/archive/2007/11/20/open-xml-brm-a-response-to-bob-sutor-s-assertions.aspx
I think there is general acceptance from all involved that there are still changes to come.
For all the noise they made it was the FFII who publically put money on the table, in the form of this award, with the goal of recruiting people to subvert the standards process. It is good to see that they have seen sense and chosen this route of getting out of their fix, good to see a little humer from them as well.
That gets to the core of much of the confusion here, if your primaly sources of information has been noooxml.org, Rob Weir and Andy Updegrove then I would wager that you have been exposed to slightly less than one side of the debate.
Try the showcase site, from the Silverlight home page.
http://silverlight.net/Showcase/
In many countries this is how it works today... I live in Singapore, we can opt to take a handset from one of the three main wireless providers or you can just pick up service from them and then grab a handset from one of the IT malls, some of the supermarkets or an electronics shop.
... I intend to smash a window in the back of my neighbours house, then stick a postit note on his front door letting him know that I have discovered a potential problem with his home security.
While it is fun to lay the blame outside of Linux, the community should really be looking at the product provided and working out how to make it deployable for every one of the 6.2bn folks on the planet if it is going to get the pervasive desktop deployment that some seem to be looking for.
It will only take a small number of stories like this before IT managers around the world take the decision not to look at Linux at all. Adding the threat of the pointless wrath of the community to that (as per your post) and the decision not to even look at Linux is a really clear one.