The Chavez people's front supports Microsoft. Venezuela was totally stuffed and voted approval in September!
The open question is why Cuba was recorded as approval. Did Microsoft pass a Dollar to them? Uhmm, what about the trade sanctions imposed by the US. Just curious...
> ODF used the fast-track process too.
No. "OASIS submitted the ODF specification to ISO/IEC Joint Technical Committee 1 (JTC1) on November 16, 2005, under Publicly Available Specification (PAS) rules."
Why are they fighting that hard then?
ISO/IEC is mandatory for some government and governments are strong in procurement. ODF is already an ISO standard. So governments would be likely to adopt ISO 26300:2006 as their standard. Microsoft reacted by pushing their own second standard through ISO.
The claim that they standardize via ISO because the EU told them so, it simply not true.
It is not ownly government users. Microsoft is afraid of the underlying domino effect.
All market players can implement the ECMA standard. They don't need the ISO stamp.
It has no implementation. Microsoft does not fully implement the standard yet. That would be a matter of further pressure. And it is a good reason why it is politically unwise - even if all issued were addressed (which is NOT the case) - to say: We approve the OOXML spec as shitty as it is.
This is a standard war about billions, and Microsoft has much to lose. Governments can actually force Microsoft through their procurement policies to support ODF. The Netherlands are a perfect example. If they stay strong Microsoft will get real.
While should an ISO member vote for OOXML unless they get an advantage over the ECMA-376 version?
Microsoft offered nothing additionally.
The specification as it came out of the BRM is totally immature. Most comment resolutions were block approved because the BRM had limited time. We can expect that there are still hundreds of problems, which is totally unsuitable for an international standard.
It is a multi-billion dollar bet and Microsoft fights with all legal means.
What happens when ISO members disapprove the standard:
- ECMA 376 II will adopt the changes made by the 5 days Ballot Resolution Meeting - ECMA 276 II will be reintroduced using the usual procedure and get much more review - the reputation of ISO will prevail. - participants in the ISO standard process will stay involved with OOXML longer. - OOXML will get better and better. - Microsoft will need to make a better offer and you can use the process to make pressure to
- get a better patent deal
- ensure that converter projects are seriously continued
- ensure that Microsoft does not bitch with the existing standard ODF via the SC34 it totally controls - show that you cannot fight a community with an actually immature standard.
No national body, no market player except Microsoft loses when OOXML does not get ISO stamped right now.
They tried to rush an immature specification through the ISO rubber stamp fast-track process. And we already have it: It is called ECMa 376, free to download and implement.
Microsoft failed in september, now they can fail just another time which would bring them to reason.
Exactly, ECMA will take the changes of the BRM on board and then everyone will get a partly bugfixed ECMA standard and a specification that is available to everyone
No one needs the immature buggy spec to become also an ISO/IEC standard DIS 29500 except Microsoft who uses the whole standardization project to undermine ISO 26300:2006 (ODF) that is already an ISO/IEC standard.
If the specification is not sufficiently mature there is absolutely no reason to vote YES. Microsoft can reintroduce OOXML in the normal process, the process that was used by ODF.
The fact is that all nations which vote for the standard have stuffed committees where gold partners were sent to vote in favour or no commitees at all. In almost all nations new committee members arrived just to vote in september. The rules are depending on national rules and most of them do not prevent committee stuffing. Only in Sweden it was turned into a real political scandal but it happened everywhere.
And then you have corrupt nations that sell their voice far too cheap. Standard people need to eat and play Judas.
OOXML as amended by the BRM is technically inferiour.
The greatest surprise is probably the support by the standard bodies of some South Amerian countries.
P-member Venezuela for instance has actually an open standards law but voted Yes in the september ballot because the standard body is totally corrupted. Or think of Cuba which voted No, but submitted a YES vote in September. You only need to switch very few YES nations to NO ("DISAPPROVE") and the noooxml ISO standard is gone. Esp. the P-members. No one takes any risk here except Microsoft. We already have the specification from ECMA, the only party that invests 100 of millions in getting the ISO stamp is Microsoft and they played dishonest, violated all available rules. Even the ISO fast-track rules were rewritten. And the ECMA International general secreatary was hired by Microsoft's lobby outfit CompTIA, who was instrumental to the ISO fast-track process rewrite.
This is the first *real* standard war between Microsoft and the rest of the world. It is about a market monopoly worth billions. Basically the mechanics is: for some nations ISO/IEC standards automatically become government standards. The standard bodies are mostly not politically controlled but private NGOs.
Deadline for submission of the disapproval is 29 of March!
P members that can make a difference: Costa Rica, Cyprus, Kazakhstan, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Bulgaria, Colombia, Kenya, Malta, Singapore, Switzerland, Turkey, Uruguay, Australia, Belgium, Finland, Italy, Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain, Trinidad and Tobago, UK
Slow down, cowboy. They will be forced to support ODF out of the box when governments switch to ODF as the standard format. The DIN conversion study clearly shows that OOXML is not rich enough to represent ODF 1.0 features, not the other way around.
All people want is an ODF import and export filter as part of Office09. ODF beeing an ISO standard would make governments to default to ODF.
Actually it the whole contribution of "Rob isn't Weird" is pointless. Of course Microsoft is absolutely free to publish it comments resolutions but they would be pointless anyway
The real question that matters is if your national Committee is really working on the comments and proposes resolutions for the Ballot Resolution Meeting (BRM). ECMA as its proxy or Microsoft as the originator are just third parties in the Ballot Resolution Meeting. The national bodies matter and they will take a decision which comments to resolve.
Surprisingly some nations, just to name Ireland and Portugal are represented by Microsoft.
Microsoft is free to leak its comment resolutions to DIS29500.org. If third parties do so this would give them means of legal action against the website of Alan. I just received an email from Benjamin Henrion, the campaign leader against Open XML:
... Microsoft is trying by all means to get its "standard" adopted without substantial changes despite of its thousands of officially reported technical flaws and the pre-existence of ISO 26300:2006 (OpenDocument, ODF) as the most appropriate international standard for the representation of office documents.
By Dec 11 2007 delegates from your National Standard Office who will participate in the BRM have to be announced to ISO. At least Portugal and Ireland will be represented by Microsoft. In many other countries, we know that Microsoft gold partners are proposing themselves as heads of national delegations. Many of them will prevail if we do not take action.
Are my national delegates for the BRM are independent from Microsoft? I don't know. At least our Committee is totally stuffed with them and no substancial comments were submitted. It is a great farce. Will Steve Ballmer become the Ballot Resolution Meeting representative of Cote d'Ivoire?
ODF is an international standard, no wonder the French adopt it. Open XML is a lost cause. It attempts to become the second standard for the same purpose.
Well, actually the post tries to invoke anti-French sentiment which seems to be very common in some parts of the states but let's keep the record straight.
Microsoft insulted the French Committee and put them under pressure. Then the French kind of bailed them out. This happens when you let Redmond go on a diplomatic mission.
France is very committed now but Microsoft tries to resolve the conflict with all means.
Anyway: OOXML is a bad standard. France sides with the Free Software Community and independent standard experts. Why should slashdot readers be against France when France promotes ODF?
The French proposal is to make OOXML ODF compatible and ressolve all possible incompatibilities. I find that a good approach.
There are many persons in Russia who don't like the software company. Just think of the scale of opposition to Open XML in Russia.
It is a kind of base in Russia for Microsoft's interests. A minor investment.
Microsoft lobbied with all means to hinder all the National Committees to submit comments despite obvious and real flaws in the specification submitted by ECMA International. It is ridiculous spin that they now praise the number of comments received. After all fast-track is not a standard development process but for rubber-stamping ready specifications.
You find a collection of comments here compiled. The comments submitted are a tip of an iceberg. Some National bodies submitted bullshit for instance the Turks. Or Tunesia which sent Microsoft advertisements around to other national standard bodies.
More than 67000 persons signed a petition against the Open XML fast-track so far. The largest specification that was ever ISO fast-tracked. You can buy Yes Men to let national bodies conclude a "chair" is a "knife". But at the end of the day your opponents will slay you or stab you in the back. Open XML is tainted because Microsoft played against the rules. Real standardization experts get alienated by the ruthless moves of Microsoft. Either we will see an uprise against Microsoft in the standard community or a tyranny that needs to defend itself against common sense. In France Microsoft was already bailed out when they bluntly tried to put the French under pressure. More to come. The political prize of a "win" will be defeating.
Does not convince me. They are not looking for an experimental solution. to be fair all mail clients are immature. Thunderbird is one of the best despite of few missing features and annoying bugs.
I don't see much a difference between FF 1.5 and FF 2.0
Mailody is an interesting lightweight product.
But for most user Thunderbird is just fine. Mozilla Foundation has *so much* money but no money for Thunderbird development anymore?! That is ridiculous.
As of Mailody, I guess it is a zero-budget project.
It is very annoying to see that those who can don't do. With 50 Million annually just from Google you can finance 4-5 developers for Sunbird and 10 for Thunderbird.
But they have cash unlike other Open Source projects. Mozilla sits on money. I don't understand this. When Mozilla was experimental we used their x crappy products. And I thought when firefox gets a success Thunderbird will get appropriate cross-financing, and then Sunbird as well. But nothing happened. NVU is patched externally as Kompozer. Does Mozilla support these volunteers? No. Not our code. They apply a totally broken business ideology.
Would be great fun if they could not offer a restricted iphone in Europe for legal reasons. A restriction on reimports as decribed is a trade barrier ans combatted as such by the governments.
Is "killing the music industry" good or bad for musicians and society at large? Radiohead made their decision. More to follow. Suicide is always the preferred strategy for creative fields.
I am sorry, there is no way to cooperate fair with lawyers. They don't treat you right. What will the OIN do against the typical lawyer deception? How will they ensure that we don't believe they will deceive us in the future. Do they support the anti-software patent movement or do they nurture the parasite?
Microsoft's "standard" is a farce and everyone in standardisation knows that. It is bad for a personality to watch a farce. It is even more dirty that someone gets fired for a reporting a farce.
"Open Standards" are a solution. Openess about what is broken. Experts have to talk openly and express their expert opinion. Finding bugs and fixing them. Standard Stalinism sucks. The blood standard found its first victim.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly, it is all about another round for fixing the bugs.
No, OOXML is XML. The Microsoft legacy formats are binary!
ODF has a clear design. Microsoft can use it.
The Chavez people's front supports Microsoft. Venezuela was totally stuffed and voted approval in September!
The open question is why Cuba was recorded as approval. Did Microsoft pass a Dollar to them? Uhmm, what about the trade sanctions imposed by the US. Just curious...
> ODF used the fast-track process too. No. "OASIS submitted the ODF specification to ISO/IEC Joint Technical Committee 1 (JTC1) on November 16, 2005, under Publicly Available Specification (PAS) rules."
Why are they fighting that hard then? ISO/IEC is mandatory for some government and governments are strong in procurement. ODF is already an ISO standard. So governments would be likely to adopt ISO 26300:2006 as their standard. Microsoft reacted by pushing their own second standard through ISO. The claim that they standardize via ISO because the EU told them so, it simply not true. It is not ownly government users. Microsoft is afraid of the underlying domino effect. All market players can implement the ECMA standard. They don't need the ISO stamp.
It has no implementation. Microsoft does not fully implement the standard yet. That would be a matter of further pressure. And it is a good reason why it is politically unwise - even if all issued were addressed (which is NOT the case) - to say: We approve the OOXML spec as shitty as it is.
This is a standard war about billions, and Microsoft has much to lose. Governments can actually force Microsoft through their procurement policies to support ODF. The Netherlands are a perfect example. If they stay strong Microsoft will get real.
While should an ISO member vote for OOXML unless they get an advantage over the ECMA-376 version?
Microsoft offered nothing additionally.
The specification as it came out of the BRM is totally immature. Most comment resolutions were block approved because the BRM had limited time. We can expect that there are still hundreds of problems, which is totally unsuitable for an international standard.
It is a multi-billion dollar bet and Microsoft fights with all legal means.
What happens when ISO members disapprove the standard:
- ECMA 376 II will adopt the changes made by the 5 days Ballot Resolution Meeting
- ECMA 276 II will be reintroduced using the usual procedure and get much more review
- the reputation of ISO will prevail.
- participants in the ISO standard process will stay involved with OOXML longer.
- OOXML will get better and better.
- Microsoft will need to make a better offer and you can use the process to make pressure to
- get a better patent deal
- ensure that converter projects are seriously continued
- ensure that Microsoft does not bitch with the existing standard ODF via the SC34 it totally controls
- show that you cannot fight a community with an actually immature standard.
No national body, no market player except Microsoft loses when OOXML does not get ISO stamped right now.
They tried to rush an immature specification through the ISO rubber stamp fast-track process. And we already have it: It is called ECMa 376, free to download and implement.
Microsoft failed in september, now they can fail just another time which would bring them to reason.
Exactly, ECMA will take the changes of the BRM on board and then everyone will get a partly bugfixed ECMA standard and a specification that is available to everyone No one needs the immature buggy spec to become also an ISO/IEC standard DIS 29500 except Microsoft who uses the whole standardization project to undermine ISO 26300:2006 (ODF) that is already an ISO/IEC standard. If the specification is not sufficiently mature there is absolutely no reason to vote YES. Microsoft can reintroduce OOXML in the normal process, the process that was used by ODF.
The fact is that all nations which vote for the standard have stuffed committees where gold partners were sent to vote in favour or no commitees at all. In almost all nations new committee members arrived just to vote in september. The rules are depending on national rules and most of them do not prevent committee stuffing. Only in Sweden it was turned into a real political scandal but it happened everywhere.
And then you have corrupt nations that sell their voice far too cheap. Standard people need to eat and play Judas.
OOXML as amended by the BRM is technically inferiour.
The greatest surprise is probably the support by the standard bodies of some South Amerian countries.
P-member Venezuela for instance has actually an open standards law but voted Yes in the september ballot because the standard body is totally corrupted. Or think of Cuba which voted No, but submitted a YES vote in September. You only need to switch very few YES nations to NO ("DISAPPROVE") and the noooxml ISO standard is gone. Esp. the P-members. No one takes any risk here except Microsoft. We already have the specification from ECMA, the only party that invests 100 of millions in getting the ISO stamp is Microsoft and they played dishonest, violated all available rules. Even the ISO fast-track rules were rewritten. And the ECMA International general secreatary was hired by Microsoft's lobby outfit CompTIA, who was instrumental to the ISO fast-track process rewrite.
This is the first *real* standard war between Microsoft and the rest of the world. It is about a market monopoly worth billions. Basically the mechanics is: for some nations ISO/IEC standards automatically become government standards. The standard bodies are mostly not politically controlled but private NGOs.
Deadline for submission of the disapproval is 29 of March!
P members that can make a difference: Costa Rica, Cyprus, Kazakhstan, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Bulgaria, Colombia, Kenya, Malta, Singapore, Switzerland, Turkey, Uruguay, Australia, Belgium, Finland, Italy, Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain, Trinidad and Tobago, UK
by voting disapproval to DIS 29500.
http://www.openxml.info/index.php
Slow down, cowboy. They will be forced to support ODF out of the box when governments switch to ODF as the standard format. The DIN conversion study clearly shows that OOXML is not rich enough to represent ODF 1.0 features, not the other way around. All people want is an ODF import and export filter as part of Office09. ODF beeing an ISO standard would make governments to default to ODF.
Actually it the whole contribution of "Rob isn't Weird" is pointless. Of course Microsoft is absolutely free to publish it comments resolutions but they would be pointless anyway
The real question that matters is if your national Committee is really working on the comments and proposes resolutions for the Ballot Resolution Meeting (BRM). ECMA as its proxy or Microsoft as the originator are just third parties in the Ballot Resolution Meeting. The national bodies matter and they will take a decision which comments to resolve.
Surprisingly some nations, just to name Ireland and Portugal are represented by Microsoft.
Microsoft is free to leak its comment resolutions to DIS29500.org. If third parties do so this would give them means of legal action against the website of Alan. I just received an email from Benjamin Henrion, the campaign leader against Open XML:
Are my national delegates for the BRM are independent from Microsoft? I don't know. At least our Committee is totally stuffed with them and no substancial comments were submitted. It is a great farce. Will Steve Ballmer become the Ballot Resolution Meeting representative of Cote d'Ivoire?
ODF is an international standard, no wonder the French adopt it. Open XML is a lost cause. It attempts to become the second standard for the same purpose.
Bush said (2003): "Bring 'em on". "We got the force necessary to deal with the security situation"
So actually his soldiers are to blame. In Japan two Atom bombs solved the problem. Let's think about it. Behave or the US will nuke you.
Well, actually the post tries to invoke anti-French sentiment which seems to be very common in some parts of the states but let's keep the record straight. Microsoft insulted the French Committee and put them under pressure. Then the French kind of bailed them out. This happens when you let Redmond go on a diplomatic mission. France is very committed now but Microsoft tries to resolve the conflict with all means. Anyway: OOXML is a bad standard. France sides with the Free Software Community and independent standard experts. Why should slashdot readers be against France when France promotes ODF? The French proposal is to make OOXML ODF compatible and ressolve all possible incompatibilities. I find that a good approach.
There are many persons in Russia who don't like the software company. Just think of the scale of opposition to Open XML in Russia. It is a kind of base in Russia for Microsoft's interests. A minor investment.
Microsoft lobbied with all means to hinder all the National Committees to submit comments despite obvious and real flaws in the specification submitted by ECMA International. It is ridiculous spin that they now praise the number of comments received. After all fast-track is not a standard development process but for rubber-stamping ready specifications.
You find a collection of comments here compiled. The comments submitted are a tip of an iceberg. Some National bodies submitted bullshit for instance the Turks. Or Tunesia which sent Microsoft advertisements around to other national standard bodies.
More than 67000 persons signed a petition against the Open XML fast-track so far. The largest specification that was ever ISO fast-tracked. You can buy Yes Men to let national bodies conclude a "chair" is a "knife". But at the end of the day your opponents will slay you or stab you in the back. Open XML is tainted because Microsoft played against the rules. Real standardization experts get alienated by the ruthless moves of Microsoft. Either we will see an uprise against Microsoft in the standard community or a tyranny that needs to defend itself against common sense. In France Microsoft was already bailed out when they bluntly tried to put the French under pressure. More to come. The political prize of a "win" will be defeating.
Does not convince me. They are not looking for an experimental solution. to be fair all mail clients are immature. Thunderbird is one of the best despite of few missing features and annoying bugs. I don't see much a difference between FF 1.5 and FF 2.0
Mailody is an interesting lightweight product. But for most user Thunderbird is just fine. Mozilla Foundation has *so much* money but no money for Thunderbird development anymore?! That is ridiculous. As of Mailody, I guess it is a zero-budget project. It is very annoying to see that those who can don't do. With 50 Million annually just from Google you can finance 4-5 developers for Sunbird and 10 for Thunderbird.
But they have cash unlike other Open Source projects. Mozilla sits on money. I don't understand this. When Mozilla was experimental we used their x crappy products. And I thought when firefox gets a success Thunderbird will get appropriate cross-financing, and then Sunbird as well. But nothing happened. NVU is patched externally as Kompozer. Does Mozilla support these volunteers? No. Not our code. They apply a totally broken business ideology.
You mean those 3000 "artists" who signed up with majors? That is life. I am for creative destruction of the music industry.
If you are not in France why don't you complain here and request a similar unrestricted iPhone product:
http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/forms/consumer_form.html
Would be great fun if they could not offer a restricted iphone in Europe for legal reasons. A restriction on reimports as decribed is a trade barrier ans combatted as such by the governments.
Is "killing the music industry" good or bad for musicians and society at large? Radiohead made their decision. More to follow. Suicide is always the preferred strategy for creative fields.
I am sorry, there is no way to cooperate fair with lawyers. They don't treat you right. What will the OIN do against the typical lawyer deception? How will they ensure that we don't believe they will deceive us in the future. Do they support the anti-software patent movement or do they nurture the parasite?
Microsoft's "standard" is a farce and everyone in standardisation knows that. It is bad for a personality to watch a farce. It is even more dirty that someone gets fired for a reporting a farce.
"Open Standards" are a solution. Openess about what is broken. Experts have to talk openly and express their expert opinion. Finding bugs and fixing them. Standard Stalinism sucks. The blood standard found its first victim.