backtop


Print 50 comment(s) - last by Oregonian2.. on Apr 4 at 10:04 PM

Microsoft takes important step in crushing its rival's format

Microsoft has long profited from proprietary formats, occasionally at its competitors' expense.  However, with open standards coming into vogue, Microsoft adopted an "if you can't beat them, join them" approach, creating its own open document format.

However, its new format was not warmly received.  Microsoft hoped its Office Open XML (OOXML) format would become the office file format of choice for the industry.  The OpenDoc Society, a long term opponent of Microsoft, did not believe in Microsoft's sudden change of heart.  It sought to outcompete OOXML, with its existing format, Open Document Format (ODF).

The ODF format is already ratified as a standard by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), solidifying its place in the academic and business communities as a viable option.  When Microsoft sought ISO ratification, the OpenDoc Society lobbied against it.  It argued that having multiple open document standards defeats the purpose of having standards and that the standard would allow Microsoft to tighten its grip on computer systems.

In the end the OpenDoc Society's campaign was an exercise in futility as Microsoft's OOXML has finally been ISO certified.  The decision was leaked Tuesday ahead of the official ISO announcement, which came today.  Microsoft lauded the move, saying that it created a "level playing field" for OOXML to competed with ODF and other formats. 

Tom Robertson, Microsoft's head of interoperability and standards, stated, "Open XML joins the ranks of PDF, HTML and ODF among the ranks of document formats. I think it makes it easier for governments to offer users choice.  The control over the specification now moves into the hands of the global community. This is going to be one of the most, if not the most important document format around the world for years to come."

James Love, director of Knowledge Economy International, an organization campaigning for more open access to knowledge critical of OOXML, stated, "We are disappointed.  Microsoft's control over document formats has destroyed competition on the desktop, and the fight over OOXML is really a fight over the future of competition and innovation."

Microsoft lost an initial first vote, putting the format's future in jeopardy.  The format was allowed a second balloting, though, and this time it passed.  Of those voting, 86 percent of voting national bodies and 75 percent of the voting members -- known as P-members -- moved to approve the format.  A two-thirds approval among P-members was sufficient to ratify the format.  Voting for Microsoft's OOXML were the United States, Britain, Germany and Japan.  Voting against it were China, India and Russia.

The committee had a tough job just reaching the vote, having to deal with the 6,000 pages of code that define OOXML and with over 1,000 points of order, topics to be discussed before the vote.  Critics of OOXML point out that ODF is only 860 pages of code, making it difficult to guarantee true interoperability between the formats.  Microsoft continues to insist that OOXML will be fully interoperable with ODF.

Michiel Leenaars, OpenDoc Society boardmember and ISO voting member, stated that the standard should not have been ratified and the ratification process was too hasty.  He states, "It was mission impossible.  The process wasn't meant for this type of thing."

Nonetheless, Microsoft has secured ratification and fulfilled its critics worse fears by moving one step closer to domination of the next generation industry standard for office documents.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Controversy?
By BZDTemp on 4/3/2008 10:48:00 AM , Rating: 1
The main thing and the reason Microsoft used all sorts of tricks to get their POS approved is that more and more companies and organizations even governments require their software to follow open standards.

Microsoft want to maintain control over the software market and open standards was one of the great arguments for Linux which Microsoft had no real come back on. Microsoft can pay Gartner and who else to make studies that say TCO is lowest with MS software but no amount of money could pay for a study which said they used open standards - Now they can.

Open standards means it is easier to change platform which again means more competition which means lower prices and/or better software.

Imagine all US and Asian cars ran on some special fuel which would mean the Gas in the US would not work in European cars. That would mean the Europeans auto makers had to pay a royalty to use the technology or not sell their cars in the US. That would make European cars more expensive and also mean the US and Asian car makers made money every time an European car was sold. In other words bad for competition and bad for the consumers due to higher prices and/or less choice.


"This week I got an iPhone. This weekend I got four chargers so I can keep it charged everywhere I go and a land line so I can actually make phone calls." -- Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki