Microsoft's Open XML Project A Short-Term Fix
Posted by
Zonk
on Fri Jul 07, 2006 03:26 PM
from the patching-a-sinking-ship dept.
from the patching-a-sinking-ship dept.
TechPro writes "In an interview with eWeek the managing director of the ODF Alliance (Marino Marcich) was pretty dismissive of Microsoft's Open XML Translator project. While the move was a recognition of the ODF Format's acceptance by government's around the world, the installable software plug-ins that would be created under the project were really 'only a bridge, a stopgap measure that will probably not be acceptable to government's around the world over the long term. Plug-ins simply don't give the benefits of open file formats and standards,' he said."
Related Stories
[+]
IT: Microsoft to Support ODF via Plug-In 269 comments
Apache4857 writes "It appears that Microsoft has finally caved. BetaNews is reporting that Microsoft is sponsoring an open source project to enable conversion between Open XML in Office 2007 and OpenDocument formats. The project, hosted on Sourceforge.net, made its initial release today. The Word 2007 conversion utility is expected to ship ship by the end of 2006, and similarly conversion utilities for Excel and PowerPoint are expected early next year." See the announcement in Brian Jones' blog (Jones is the Microsoft program manager responsible for Office file formats).
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Microsoft's Open XML Project A Short-Term Fix
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 94 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
No Technical Support For The Plugin (Score:5, Informative)
(http://aymanh.com/ | Last Journal: Wednesday October 25 2006, @04:23AM)
Quoting the blog entry:
I don't understand how it is different. (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't understand the problem. If it's a plug-in, and it reads and writes to the ODF standard, where is the problem?
The only thing I can think of is if people worry about a Microsoft "upgrade" breaking this plug-in. And then having to wait for the patch to the plug-in.
Excuse me, but, fuck "translating". This isn't about "translating". This is about being able to read ODF files and save your work to the ODF format.
"Translating" only comes into play when you're talking about:
a. Converting all your previous work to a new format.
b. When some people you are communicating with are restricted to the
c. And Microsoft's "Open" XML format will only be available in their NEXT release so it won't affect anyone who is still using their current or a previous release.
Am I missing something, somewhere?
Microsoft's claims seem to center around an organization upgrading to the next release of MS Office and then migrating to the ODF format.
While I see most situations as an organization migrating to the ODF format from an existing installation of MS Office 2000 or previous.
Re:I don't understand how it is different. (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://dotfuturemanifesto.blogspot.com/)
If you have a genuine interest in ODF then the Microsoft news should be wellcomed. It will mean that there is a way for Office users to generate documents in a format that can be easily read by applications that comply with the ODF standard. I will probably get the plug in so that I can send editable documents to Linux users.
The ODF standard is far too new to be considered as a government mandate. UNIX was around for a decade before POSIX was mooted and then there was another decade before there was a requirement to support POSIX.
If there is a government mandate for a particular format then one would expect that Microsoft would provide a supported version of the plug in. At this point though there is no proven market for ODF and one can hardly expect Microsoft to commit to building the ODF market.
A much better way to deal with the news would have been to have hailed the step as an endorsement of ODF and glossed over the limited nature of the support on offer. As it is the article does more to highlight the contentious nature of ODF, the belief that Microsoft continues to be hostile to it and the beleif that the whole point of ODF is simply to attack Microsoft.
That might be an accurate description of the actual situation but that is hardly one that I would want to spend company time encouraging journalists to publicize.
Re:wHAAAAA? (Score:4, Informative)
(http://aymanh.com/ | Last Journal: Wednesday October 25 2006, @04:23AM)
In short, OO.o natively supports ODF and has technical support, MS Office has an ODF plugin in development, but MS won't offer tech support for it.
short term - but does it matter? (Score:2)
(Last Journal: Wednesday September 20 2006, @10:30AM)
Java Redux (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://slashdot.org/~Shadow%20Wrought/journal | Last Journal: Wednesday November 07, @02:46PM)
Re:Java Redux (Score:5, Insightful)
Interesting. Care to elaborate/give a link?
Surprised? (Score:1)
(http://intolerant.blogspot.com/)
But given our current systems, no one can really "stick it to the man" and force Microsoft to do anything. It's their software, their format.. and really whose to force them to do otherwise? So to speak, we are a slave to the machines we use.
We can't expect a self serving corporate body to really care for us unless it of course, benefits them in some way.
Oh Come On Now... (Score:2, Flamebait)
Oh come on now. You didn't really think Microsoft was going to give ODF equal billing with their own preferred (and proprietary) Doc and Xml did you? And about this only being the start of creating an open source converter plug-in, you don't really accept that the reason we don't have a plug-in now is because Microsoft has done no work at all on integrating ODF into MSO right up until the minute of this announcement, do you? That they haven't had running converters in their labs for years in the event they actually had to ship something on short notice? That we still have to wait many months and pay the MS-tax for MSOffice 2007 to get this because it has never existed at MS before.
You do?
Really?
About this bridge I have for sale...
I could never take a job at Microsoft, because then I'd have to quit bashing them again and again for either lying to me -- or just plain being stupid in the first place about understanding their market. Even being a monopoly can only get you so far.
MODF (Score:3, Insightful)
ODF great for freedom, but needs better tech info (Score:5, Interesting)
There really needs to be a reference renderer for ODF. Something independent from OpenOffice, with examples of all of the grammar and semantics in the spec.
Emphasis on 'Short Term' (Score:3, Interesting)
(http://www.infinitisystems.com/)
Microsoft takes considerable heat from many sources that it's development process is dragged out far beyond need or reason. Look at the long development cycle with consideration of anti-trust verdicts, agreements, etc. and you begin to see some logic.
Microsoft is under some legal obligation to de-bundle or make removable certain components of their preferred distro. These obligations have an expiration date in the not very distant future. That expiration date is also not rediculously far beyond the historic release cycle for MS product upgrades.
Given the choice of re-engineering my product so a specific component MS wants to become ubiquitous may be removed, or delaying release a few months and using the time to tie it in so tightly that the notion of removal becomes irrelevant, guess what Microsoft will choose to do.
With delayed release they allow themselves to present that they are in compliance with all orders in effect at time of release, without having to de-couple anything. As a result, your filesystem browser is also your internet browser, is also your front end for all GUI desktop apps... Nevermind that this is in complete opposition to the expectation that the kernel is the interface between hardware and all other software, and that the command shell, filesystem browser, web browser, GUI windowing system, etc. all fall into the category of 'all other software.'
MOX = "Soon" (Score:2)
(Last Journal: Sunday February 05 2006, @06:11PM)
And MOX is Latin for "soon". Coincidence?!
yeah, prolly
BUT: a cute synchronicity, nonetheless.
Ok.... (Score:1)
Those ticks (Score:1)
(Last Journal: Saturday October 14 2006, @08:57AM)
So what? (Score:2, Interesting)
OpenXML provides full-fidelity for all 97-2003 documents, which means that users can upgrade their files to OpenXML without losing anything. In contrast, 97-2003 documents cannot be converted without any loss to ODF, as ODF doesn't support everything in those formats. This means in a few years, the vast majority of documents will be in the OpenXML format and everyone will be wondering why we even need ODF.
Microsoft providing an OpenXML-ODF translator is a stop-gag measure to prolong the eventual death of ODF.
All Products of US are short term fixes (Score:1)
This actually shows a lack of understanding (Score:2, Informative)
(http://jaqui-greenlees.net/ | Last Journal: Tuesday April 04 2006, @10:17PM)
eXtensible Markup Language is meant for a base specification to ensure portability. Anyone can add to an xml based specfication for their product / needs. that is the idea.
if Microsoft's openxml format for office 2007 is an xml format, then they will have a dtd and reference url for the dtd that will enable any xml based application to use the format. If this is not possible, then it is another case of Microsoft lying to their customers about Microsoft products.
The above is the comment I made on Techrepublic in response to the article at the url below.
Since the Article I'm referencing is about the plugin for office 2007, it's a related story.
http://techrepublic.com.com/2100-3513-6090912.htm
Re:I am a mortal enemy of grammar nazis normally b (Score:2)
Dammit, learn to use semicolons! Two complete sentences separated by a comma make a run-on sentence.
Re:I am a mortal enemy of grammar nazis normally b (Score:1)
Re:What if... (Score:2)
Have you had your eyes closed or what? MS pulled out from the ODF group. They can rejoin at any time.
And The MS format is just evil. The license agreements are unclear. This is what MS said:
"We are acknowledging that end users who merely open and read government documents that are saved as Office XML files within software programs will not violate the license."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument_vs._Mic