Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > NZ Computing > ODF for MS Office

Reply
Thread Tools

ODF for MS Office

 
 
impossible
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-15-2006
"Have A Nice Cup of Tea" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Mon, 15 May 2006 01:00:06 -0400, impossible wrote:
>
>> You're missing the point about the whole "standards" debate.
>> Microsoft
>> (and Apple, etc) see a business opportunity here, just as IBM,
>> Adobe,
>> and the OSS crowd opposing them do. Each side is heavily invested
>> in a
>> certain way of doing things that they are at pains to portray as
>> being responsive to consumer "needs" -- and each would like to
>> disadvantage the other in pursuit of market share.

>
> How is it "disadvantaging the other" when a government requests the
> use of
> a particular file format, and has publically stated that it does not
> particularly care which piece of software it uses so long as it can
> read
> and write to its chosen file format?
>
> Remember - it has even asked for information on a plugin for M$
> office so
> that it's already installed infrastructure would be able to be used,
> and
> thus so that they could continue to use their investment in M$
> software.
>
> The software in that instance is unimportant. The ability to read
> and
> write to the chosen file format is the important thing - and
> Micro$oft
> chose NOT to provide that capability in its M$ Office suite.


The term "chosen file format" applies to only one government authority
that I am aware of -- the State of Massachusetts, USA. Time will tell
if they made the right choice, since the specification of a format
that is not tied to any proprietary applications is pretty open-ended.
The revised XML format submitted to ECMA by Microsoft, Intel, Apple ,
NextPage and others could arguably fill the bill, in which case
Microsoft's investment in Office 12 would be rewarded. Alternatively,
the standard backed by IBM, Sun, Novell, and Adobe could win out, in
which case these companies would gain the competitive advantage.

>
> The real issue driving M$ is, frankly, is its desire to lock-in its
> victims into using only its own software and no other.
>


We've been over this before. Just a different business model from IBM
and all the OS wannabes, whose aim is to lock in their "victims" to
their own software service contracts and none other.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
shannon
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-16-2006
impossible wrote:
> "shannon" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:44680cd7$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> impossible wrote:
>>> "shannon" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>> news:4467e714$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>> impossible wrote:
>>>>> "shannon" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>>>> news:4467b10d$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>>>> impossible wrote:
>>>>>>> No need for an open document format to perform searches either.
>>>>>>> Plenty of tools already exist that can do this very nicely.
>>>>>> Microsoft have submitted their open document xml format to ECMA
>>>>>> Any clues why ?
>>>>> Microsoft's submission to ECMA was made jointly with Apple,
>>>>> Barclays Capital, BP, the British Library, Essilor, Intel,
>>>>> NextPage, Statoil and Toshiba. Microsoft's account of things is
>>>>> summarized here:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/office/xml/ecmaletter.mspx
>>>>>
>>>> So why would they do that if an open document format is not needed
>>>> ?
>>> You're missing the point about the whole "standards" debate.
>>> Microsoft (and Apple, etc) see a business opportunity here, just as
>>> IBM, Adobe, and the OSS crowd opposing them do. Each side is
>>> heavily invested in a certain way of doing things that they are at
>>> pains to portray as being responsive to consumer "needs" -- and
>>> each would like to disadvantage the other in pursuit of market
>>> share.

>> But surely the point of an interchange standard is for Microsoft's
>> users to be able to export their documents in a format which is easy
>> for everyone else to use.

>
> When virtually all of the world's desktops are running Word and Excel
> (or some application that reads that format), it's hard to make the
> argument that Microsoft's document formats -- open or closed -- aren't
> easy for people to use.
>
>> Like documentation where the same file will be formatted as a manual
>> and online and embedded help.
>> Microsoft hasn't got a great track record at that sort of thing

>
> With its new XML format, Microsoft appears to be bidding for precisely
> the sort of market you describe, where developers can treat MS Ofice
> documents as native to whatever specialized applications they might
> have in mind. We'll see how that works out, standards-wise. But
> end-users of MS Office products will certainly benefit.
>
> The problem for OS developers seeking to wring market-share from
> Microsoft is that they have no track record at all when it comes to
> developing credible desktop applications for the business, government,
> and academic communities. They have "standards" in spades, but end
> users don't give a darn about that if those standards don't help them
> get their work done any better.
>
>


All the mark up languages have been developed by open source developers.
Mark up languages are open source.
The browser is the desktop application that is most used by those
communities, and that was developed by open source developers.
You need to take those blinkers off.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
impossible
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-16-2006
"shannon" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> impossible wrote:
>>
>> The problem for OS developers seeking to wring market-share from
>> Microsoft is that they have no track record at all when it comes to
>> developing credible desktop applications for the business,
>> government, and academic communities. They have "standards" in
>> spades, but end users don't give a darn about that if those
>> standards don't help them get their work done any better.

>
> All the mark up languages have been developed by open source
> developers.
> Mark up languages are open source.


Open-standards, you mean, not open-source. Tim-Berners Lee was not an
"open-source developer". He was a researcher who freely shared his
ideas for a standard graphical interface with other researchers and
computer enthusiasts. He later helped to form the World Wide Web
Consortium, which was sponsored by Hewlett-Packard, IBM, Microsoft,
and Sun, among others.

> The browser is the desktop application that is most used by those
> communities, and that was developed by open source developers.


No Both Mosaic and Spyglass, the most popular browsers in the early
1990s, were proprietary programs. Mosaic was later spun into Netcsape
Navigator, another proprietary program, while Spyglass became the core
of Internet Explorer, likewise proprietary. After IE buried Navigator
in the "browser wars" of the late 90s, Netscape then released the
Navigator code base it owned as open-source.

> You need to take those blinkers off.



 
Reply With Quote
 
Jasen Betts
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-19-2006
On 2006-05-14, shannon <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Microsoft have submitted their open document xml format to ECMA
> Any clues why ?


Because microsoft knows that ECMA won't make a fuss if the microsoft product
only adheres 95% to the published standard.

--

Bye.
Jasen
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Python library for reading ODF Spreadsheets Jonathan Hunt Python 2 12-04-2006 04:48 AM
ODF leaves disabled out in the cold Fred Dagg NZ Computing 14 05-20-2006 02:17 AM
ODF Plug-ins and a Microsoft Promise of Cooperation Have A Nice Cup of Tea NZ Computing 0 05-07-2006 05:44 AM
interesting twist to the on-going odf saga in the US thing2 NZ Computing 0 11-03-2005 03:13 AM



Advertisments