Microsoft on NZ ISO delegation

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by peter, Feb 2, 2008.

  1. peter

    peter Guest

    Apparently, the NZ delegation to ISO on the OOxml "standard" has 3 members,
    one of whom is a Microsoft employee [1]. So is this delegation supposed to
    be representing NZ or what? I can't imagine the Microsoft employee is
    there to do anything else than push the Microsoft line, regardless of
    whether it is in NZ interests or not.

    Whatever of the merits of Microsoft's case, surely the NZ delegation should
    be representing NZ, and acting in the interests of New Zealand?


    Peter

    [1] From National Radio, 31 January
     
    peter, Feb 2, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. peter

    shane Guest

    peter did scribble:
    http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-31646/new-zealand-advisory-group
    The full article is published on Scoop.co.nz
    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/SC0712/S00035.htm
    The members of the group will include representatives from:

    - Internet NZ
    - NZ Open Source Society - technical
    - NZ Open Source Society - strategist
    - IBM NZ
    - Microsoft NZ
    - Microsoft NZ partner
    - Archives New Zealand
    - State Services Commission
    - NZ Computer Society

    This sounds very balanced. New Zealand opposed the adoption of the Open XML
    specification in the September ballot vote. You find the New Zealand comments
    here: http://www.dis29500.org/category/countries/new-zealand/
     
    shane, Feb 2, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. peter

    peter Guest

    This is the advisory group that met in December.
    I was referring to the NZ delegation that is going to Geneva in February.
    The NZ delegation has 3 members, and at least one of these is a Microsoft
    employee.

    See also ...
    http://www.standards.co.nz/news/Media+releases/Advisory+group+for+Office+open+XML+Standard.htm
    "The meeting will be held in Geneva in February 2008. 'With the help of
    relevant stakeholders, Standards New Zealand has formed the advisory group,
    and will send two delegates from the group, and a Standards New Zealand
    staff member, to the meeting,' says Grant Thomas, Chief Operating Officer,
    Standards New Zealand."

    That is, the delegation has 2 people from the advisory group, plus a SNZ
    staff member.
     
    peter, Feb 2, 2008
    #3
  4. If every other national body did the same thing and included a Micro$oft
    employee as one of the representatives in the name of being "balanced"
    then wouldn't that really stack that meeting in favour of Microsoft with
    at least 1/3 of the votes going to M$ even before anything is considered?
     
    Smoking Causes Lung Cancer (SCLC), Feb 2, 2008
    #4
  5. Do you have any data to suggest that it isn't ? Paranoia 9while possibly
    warranted) is not data. :)
    Judge by results say I.
     
    Bruce Sinclair, Feb 4, 2008
    #5
  6. What do you think would happen to a Micro$oft representative that was
    sent to a Standards NZ event if it did not continue to represent Micro
    $oft when chosen by Standards NZ to attend the ISO organised meeting of
    _representatives_?

    Micro$oft's delegate is paid by Micro$oft. The person who pays the salary
    controls the vote.
     
    Smoking Causes Lung Cancer (SCLC), Feb 4, 2008
    #6
  7. peter

    peterwn Guest

    I think that each nation has a vote, not each individual delegate.
    The Microsoft delegate would need to convince one of the other two to
    agree to a 'yes' vote.

    Actually I am wondering if it makes any difference whether OOXML is
    voted an international standard or not. Microsoft has given no
    commitment to adhere to it. In such circumstances Microsoft cannot
    really claim that its Office suite reads and writes ISO compliant
    files.

    Having OOXML adopted as a standard may help Microsoft to meet some
    governments' procurement requirements in the short term, but it is
    coming to be generally appreciated that OOXML is a 'dog', and even
    more so as Microsoft has indicated that it does not intend adhering to
    it. On a broader front, the game is nearly up with Microsoft trying
    to force unnecessary obsolesence onto weary customers who crave for a
    bit of stability, especially in the mundane area of office
    productivity suites. One only needs to see what is happening with
    Vista to appreciate this - most people given a choice would rather
    stick with XP.
     
    peterwn, Feb 4, 2008
    #7
  8. It couldn't make that claim, anyway. The version it implements in Office
    2007, and submitted to ISO, was rejected. In addressing the reasons for the
    rejection, it's going to have to make changes to the spec. Which means it's
    no longer the same version as implemented in MS Office.
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Feb 4, 2008
    #8
  9. People who can't spell have no credibility. Using $ signs for the 's' is
    funny the first 2 times you see it. Then it's tedious.

    Yes, they would have to bear MS interests in mind ... but if they try to
    'vote' (assuming there is one) against the NZ position, they would have no
    cred. Neither would they be there next time. They would lose much more than
    any short term gain ... I'm sure they are at least that clever (well, fairly
    sure :) ).
    Believe whatever you want ... I'll judge by results. :)
     
    Bruce Sinclair, Feb 5, 2008
    #9
  10. peter

    ~misfit~ Guest

    Somewhere on teh intarweb "Bruce Sinclair" typed:
    http://digg.com/linux_unix/microsoft_forced_partners_to_vote_yes/all

    I don't have the link, it was a couple months ago, but apparently NZ is one
    of several countries that have MS employees representing them. It's enough
    to cause concern amongst a large contingent. I'm concerned at least.

    BTW, judging by results is too late if it's a vote over what standards to
    ratify. What are you going to do if you don't lkke the result? Ask them to
    convene again and reconsider?

    Cheers,
     
    ~misfit~, Feb 5, 2008
    #10
  11. M$ doesn't need a "next time" - it only wants this time. Why else do you
    think it tried to bribe its way into getting results from several of the
    other national bodies?

    Yes - and Micro$oft's track record speaks very loudly and very plainly
    about the results that it wants.

    Remember - Micro$oft is on public record as having lied even to its own
    staff.
     
    Smoking Causes Lung Cancer (SCLC), Feb 5, 2008
    #11
  12. That's backfired, though. In fact, it's left such a bad taste about OOXML in
    people's mouths that it could very well have lost all hope of becoming an
    ISO standard.
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Feb 5, 2008
    #12
  13. With "several" of Micro$oft's employees attending the Ballot Resolution
    meeting as "representatives" of various national bodies that voted "no",
    I'm not so convinced that this won't pass.

    i don't want such a bitching dog to pass into being an ISO standard -
    it's simply nowhere near ready to be published as a standard. Not to
    mention the lack of even ONE reference installation.
     
    Smoking Causes Lung Cancer (SCLC), Feb 5, 2008
    #13
  14. That's what they tried last time, and see what happened.
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Feb 5, 2008
    #14
  15. peter

    ~misfit~ Guest

    Somewhere on teh intarweb "Bruce Sinclair" typed:
    Heh! Thanks for clearing that up. ;-)
     
    ~misfit~, Feb 11, 2008
    #15
  16. :) Happens all the time :)

    I would expect some MS people on in any conputer based delegation. Many of
    them are knowledgable ... and some certainly can look at the "big picture"
    with little apparent bias. It's in their interests to be right about future
    directions too. Trust them ? ... never said that. :)
     
    Bruce Sinclair, Feb 11, 2008
    #16
  17. Some at MS (note) may not realise they need next time. They do. They always
    have and will if they want to continue to exist. Their choice. :)
    I never said I trusted MS (note). I don't. Their business practices can
    indeed be appaling. But their bias is known and therefore their views can be
    discounted. IMO, vista is the best thing to happen to linux in years - many
    users are upgrading to XP. We will see where the future leads ... but MS
    (note) will certainly have to do better in many areas. :)
     
    Bruce Sinclair, Feb 11, 2008
    #17
  18. And the revolt over the SP1 delay is just icing on the cake.

    Have you read this account
    <http://blogs.technet.com/markrussinovich/archive/2008/02/04/2826167.aspx>
    of how complicated a matter it has been to get something as basic as good
    file-copying performance out of Dimdows? Mark Russinovich may be a smart
    guy, but I think the Microsoft corporate body has assimilated him into a
    collective cancellation of intelligence.
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Feb 11, 2008
    #18
  19. I think your key phrase is "...with little _apparent_ bias."

    If a MS employee did anything at that meeting that was not fully
    conformant with the wishes of Balmer et al, then there will be more
    thrown chairs while that poor bewildered employee eventually gets
    "managed out".

    Remember - it is on public record that Micro$oft has lied to its staff in
    order to achieve a business objective. Why should it behave any
    differently with this issue?
     
    Smoking Causes Lung Cancer (SCLC), Feb 11, 2008
    #19
  20. The big question is: why are they only upgrading to WinNT5.1 and not all
    the way to Linux?
     
    Smoking Causes Lung Cancer (SCLC), Feb 11, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.