MS will be MS
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| r_a_trip May 08, 2009 10:27 AM EDT |
Unfortunately it seems we have here a poor implementation of ODF. If further reports confirm it (and I have no serious doubt they will), we will have the case of a monopolistic vendor messing up its own implementation of an open standard and have no viable excuse for doing so. Well, this is Microsoft we're talking about. I'll bet they already have their PR ducks in a row, so when the manure hits the fan, they will be able to deflect accusations with excuses. They could say that ODF is not sufficiently specified or that they didn't have enough time to implement it completely and that future revisions will make up for the shortcomings. We all know the true reason why Office 2007 SP2 is useless with ODf and OOXML. MS likes the fact that the world is dependent on their proprietary formats and that near 100% fidelity can only be achieved with the same version of MS Office. This lock in is their gravy train. Adhering to standards, be it ODF or even their own OOXML, would threaten the lock in dependence on their Office cash cow. So MS sabotages interoperability to keep their revenue safe. They have invented a new M.O. though. It's no longer EEE, but EME. Embrace, Mess up, Extinguish. Proprietary extensions don't fly any longer, but shoddy implementations serve the same purpose just as well or even better than extending. |
| gus3 May 08, 2009 10:31 AM EDT |
Pam Jones at Groklaw is already on the case: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2009050712493241 |
| bigg May 08, 2009 10:37 AM EDT |
I wonder if there are any laws against saying something is ODF if it is not. I could fork OOo and add any flaws to it that I want, but I certainly could not call it OOo. Unfortunately I am not aware of anything wrt file format names. |
| gus3 May 08, 2009 11:47 AM EDT |
Yes, it's called "false advertisement." My guess is it would be easier to confront in the EU than in the USA. They take a dimmer view of FUD there. |
| vainrveenr May 08, 2009 1:24 PM EDT |
Quoting:Pam Jones at Groklaw is already on the caseAs PJ writes in this particular piece (http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2009050712493241) : Quoting:Rather than fix the problems that have surfaced by responding to what is essentially a bug report, Microsoft chooses to attack the messenger and ODF, going so far as to call for Rob Weir to step down as co-chair of the ODF Technical Committee. Is the penalty for disagreeing with Microsoft a smear campaign and loss of a job?Who here can forget what happened to Peter Quinn a few years back ???!!! Anyone who only vaguely recalls this ODF-related fiasco ought to seriously consider reviewing PJ's piece 'Peter Quinn's First Interview' at http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20060123132416703 Another possible threat against someone (Rob Weir here) who speaks out against Microsoft's ongoing implementation of a supposedly "open" standard ??? |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!