NZ, Sweden, Hungary Reflect OOXML Turmoil

A number of readers are sending news of the progress of Microsoft's attempt to get OOXML standardized by ISO. First off, New Zealand has voted "no" on the question. In Sweden, after the uproar following the "yes" vote there, a Microsoft representative has admitted buying Swedish OOXML votes (link in Swedish — follow the Read More... link below for some translated quotes). Computerworld has also picked up the Sweden story. Finally, from Hungary, reader ens0niq writes that the Minister of Economy and Transport has sent a letter to the General Director of the Hungarian Standards Institution requiring that the June 25 "yes" vote be re-done because of irregularities. Our correspondent notes, however, that many Microsoft partners have joined the voting committee in the meanwhile, so the result could be a replay of Sweden's experience.

Here are some quotes from the Swedish article translated by our anonymous correspondent.

-We have been informing our business partners about the process at SIS. What is going on, what the time plan is and that Microsoft thinks it is good if OOXML becomes a standard.

-In a letter from Microsoft, our business partners were informed that they were "expected" to participate in the SIS meeting and vote yes. As a compensation they would get "market benefits" and extra support in terms of Microsoft resources.

-This was a mistake and the letter was sent by a single employee on his own initiative without sanctions from Microsoft. He also quickly realised his mistake and tried to recall the letter.

-I can understand the critique about coup-like voting. But I claim the voters knew the issue well and had their own interest in OOXML becoming an ISO standard.

(Interviewer) -Has this harmed Microsoft?

-Time will tell. But almost all customers we have been talking to thinks it would be good if OOXML became an ISO standard.

As I sit next to my colleague...

who just uttered "Fucking Word!", I can't imagine why they'd have to buy the vote...

Re:As I sit next to my colleague...

Even stranger, he looks like a woman from here.

Re:As I sit next to my colleague...

One of the key requirements of this specification is that it preserve all idiosyncracies of the Office file formats so that customers experience no loss of data. It is neither an accident nor a secret plot to keep it bug-for-bug compatible with Office. That is, in fact, the whole point. Whether this is a sound basis for a standard is for you to decide.

Sweden was a Phyrric victory

One can only hope that enough publicity to the "irregularities" will force the votes to be better controlled and conducted in the future.

Yes MS got the Swedish vote - but I think they will find it to be a Phyrric victory.

Re:Sweden was a Phyrric victory

Phyrric victory indeed.

This one is simply devastating. I've made copies of all the articles and documentation- including the spin statement where they spin "It was still within the rules" for the Microsoft partners to join the ratifying body.

Now what I will do with those documents is send them to my board of directors. They will read them.

The result: I have the power when needed to say to Microsoft "Sorry, we like your products, but we can't support your business methods"

I've been reducing the Microsoft presence in my datacenter for a year or so and deploying Microsoft products only where they make sense. That's about 50% of the time, and usually on the desktop.

I don't have a lot of power to be the catalyst for change, and Microsoft isn't going anywhere (Thankfully, they make some good products). However, if I send the Microsoft rep packing enough times with negative comments about ethics... perhaps in a small way I can make things better.

Re:Sweden was a Phyrric victory

I didn't know what a Phyrric victory was, so I looked it up. Here it is for anyone else curious:

King Pyrrhus of Epirus fought a war against the Romans in 280BC. He won the war, but in the process lost most of his soldiers, commanders and friends.
The Romans lost more men in the battle, but had plenty of new men to take their place. Pyrrhus on the other had little left.

He famously said: "Another such victory over the Romans and we are undone."

own interest?

>But I claim the voters knew the issue well and had their own interest in OOXML becoming an ISO standard.

If this is true, then why
1) does MS tell their partners in the letter on which arguments for OOMXL they should use? MS even advises their partners to not use "too technical" arguments (are there "technical" arguments in favour of OOMXL anyway??).
2) does MS tell their partners to go to one or two meetings AFTER the voting to prove they are not only in it for this single vote?

Have they no shame or ambition?

Microsoft, it offends me that you don't even try to hide your manipulations anymore. It's all out in the open. Everybody can see that the whole process is bullshit. As long as it's legal or can be twisted to look legal, you don't seem to mind anymore. Other businesses at least make an effort not to upset the public that is being raped.

Re:Not all countries are like America

While Americans consider graft to be wrong, many American companies find the only way to access foreign markets is to pay off the corrupt gatekeepers.

If you bribe someone in a foreign country, it is called graft/corruption/bribery/etc and is a crime.

If you do that in America, it is called 'lobbying' and is as American as apple pie. If only those corrupt foreigners stop calling it bribery and call it lobbying, the pure as milk American companies would not have to engage in this crime.

And everyone who agrees should do something

Whatever little thing you can. Even small steps count.

It's easy to bemoan the fact that there's this large corporation with a virtual monopoly on desktop operating systems and office tools. The wailing and gnashing of teeth across slashdot about this is almost ceaseless.

My suggestion (and something I'm doing myself) is to think of ways to encourage people to move away from Microsoft products. If you "support" family and friends, recommend Firefox if they ask you about security. Encourage someone to try out a live CD of Ubuntu. If you know someone who is thinking about buying a new computer who is considering a Mac, provide arguments in favor and offer support.

I've moved every computer I own (five) off Windows. My wife and I both have Mac laptops (good riddance to that Dell crap), our HTPC is a mini, our server and the PC in our garage are running Ubuntu. When my sister-in-law wanted a Mac, I encouraged her husband to get her one, and offered to her with support (he's a Windows guy). When my dad asked about internet security problems, I pointed him to Firefox and gently suggested that IE/Windows isn't the best choice.

I'm not suggesting (as some here do) that you should be ramming Open Source or a non-Windows OS down someone's throat. I wouldn't ever advocate being pushy about it, since you catch more flies with honey... but when it comes up (and for those of us who are "support" for family and friends, that's pretty often) it never hurts to gently, subtly point out alternatives to MS. If every geek who villifies MS on slashdot does their small bit, we can eventually make a difference.

Just my $.02

Microsoft gets to eat their cake, and keep it too!

This is awesome. Microsoft buys votes, and then, after voting has been completed, they can simply turn around and claim that they will not follow up on their promises given to their vote-selling partners!

Let me get it out of my system...

We have been informing our business partners about the process at SIS. What is going on, what the time plan is and that Microsoft thinks it is good if OOXML becomes a standard.

Alright people, you heard The Man, put on your blindfolds and get in line...

In a letter from Microsoft, our business partners were informed that they were "expected" to participate in the SIS meeting and vote yes. As a compensation they would get "market benefits" and extra support in terms of Microsoft resources.

And don't forget to tip your valet... wouldn't want anything to happen to your car, ya know...

This was a mistake and the letter was sent by a single employee on his own initiative without sanctions from Microsoft. He also quickly realised his mistake and tried to recall the letter.

Way to go, Scooter. Now let's pretend we never met.

I can understand the critique about coup-like voting. But I claim the voters knew the issue well and had their own interest in OOXML becoming an ISO standard.

They sure did... "In a letter from Microsoft, our business partners were informed that they were "expected" to participate in the SIS meeting and vote yes. As a compensation they would get "market benefits" and extra support in terms of Microsoft resources."

Time will tell. But almost all customers we have been talking to thinks it would be good if OOXML became an ISO standard.

We're ignoring the small companies with little stake in the matter. like these "IBM" people, and "OpenOffice".

Yeah, I know, nothing new here. Just needed to vent :o).

Why?

Why is it always the fault of a single employee if something goes wrong, and the success of the team if things go right? Where is their fucking backbone to stand with the people in the company?

I mean, what incentive to the employees now have to do the right things? Well, if there's going to be blame, you're literally on your own, and always have been. If there's a success, it's definitely not your success.

Is it me, or is there a shift towards a "something wrong? blame the individual!"-style behaviour?

B.

Scapegoat

It's just a simple excuse that people can't counter easily. Everybody knows it's effectively Microsoft the corporation that sent those letters, but for Microsoft it's simple to use a, real or imagined, employee as shield.

Had it been a real rogue employee that had sent those letters then we'd be hearing he/she had been fired instantly - since this is effectively fraud/falsification in the company's name. We haven't seen any such firing, hence it must be supported from higher above.

The problem for Microsoft is how much publicity this story got. Apparently more than they had anticipated.

A question? why does this matter?

BTW I am against the obvious M$ practice of buying a standards committee vote so blatantly . But I do have a question along the lines of "what happens if I throw a huge ($) party and nobody comes?"

What I am asking is this: let's assume that Microsoft spends major bucks to get their OOXML stuff accepted in a few different countries through a standards committee, but then the standard is proven to NOT be open -- as is being shown by work already in progress -- but that the lack of openness and the bad press generated by their blatant vote buys in the mean time pretty much corrupts the market value of their standard anyway.

What do you think?

Re:A question? why does this matter?

Microsoft stands to lose an incredible cash cow and market control.

Political bodies are starting to pass laws requiring that official documents be published in an open format. If Microsoft doesn't rush their format through standardization, these governments will start moving to ODF. Once the ship of state starts moving, it is very difficult to stop or turn. When the ship of state moves in the ODF direction, a huge portion of the economy, every vendor or contractor supply that government, will move with it. The government's power to set standards is that powerful. For an example, just try to find a new CRT monitor that isn't Energy Start compliant.

If this huge section of the market moves to ODF, Microsoft will no longer have the ability to lock users into MS-Office and force upgrades. Now if you open a DOC file in OpenOffice and it doesn't look right, it is OpenOffice's fault. Once there are several vendors selling ODF solution, resolution of fault will fall back to does it comply with the standard. User's have been forced to pay for the latest releases of MS-Office just to remain compatible with the latest format tweaks (that a partner may be using). MS has long been suspected of making gratuitous changes to the format just to force users to buy a new version. They won't be able to tweak an open and published standard, users won't be forced into gratuitous 'upgrades'. The market power and the cash cow will both disappear very quickly.

The countries need to vote 'no' as you state, but they don't have to do it in a hurry. A delayed approval will allow many of the laws to go into effect and start turning the ship of state. Each day the approval is delayed is another day of erosion of the DOC file format.

Was he fired?

This was a mistake and the letter was sent by a single employee on his own initiative without sanctions from Microsoft. He also quickly realised his mistake and tried to recall the letter.

Was this employee fired?

I am glad for Hungary...

..at least they are re-doing the vote, and that's good, even if the end result will be the same. Considering how egregious the irregularities were, for example, in Portugal, and yet noone seems to give a duck, it's nice that some hungarian senior officials are making a stand of principle.

I should disclose that I am half hungarian.

Now I hope the other countries where MS did their dirty deeds to get OOXML ISO-standardized, will have an epifany of sorts and cancel the fraudolent voting results.

Aren't they missing something?

Aren't Microsoft missing something here?

Surely the whole point of standards, be they national or international, is that they are not allowed to depend on encumbered "intellectual property". So if OOXML is adopted as an ISO standard, then all the necessary patents will have to be annulled!

Requiring a person to pay patent royalties to one person or corporation merely in order to comply with the law of the land is extortion, plain and simple.

Better tag: Business as usual

I know that everyone on slashdot is <Cpt. Renault voice> shocked, shocked <\voice> to find Microsoft twisting the arms of their partners. I mean, it's not like they've ever done something like with with PC manufacturers who want to pre-install another OS, or anything.

It's mildy amusing to hear the feigned shock and dismay when Microsoft pulls their antics. At this point, behavior of this stripe should the expected outcome of any situation where Microsoft is involved. Whatever they may have done right in the past, for the last seven or eight years they've been heading down a path that makes it clear they'll do anything to crush competition (except actually produce a better product)

We all know what they're going to do before they even get their PR machine going. One hint: it won't be the right thing.

Why even vote on it?

OOXML seems to be, from a technical standpoint, such a poorly constructed format that voting on whether or not to name it a standard is just silly. It should have been turned down long ago for its flagrant stupidities and sent back to Redmond with a post-it saying "nice joke!" attached.

Check list for OOXML

A thin veneer of XML over the old binary data? Check.

Encumbered by patents and other "intellectual property"? Check.

Unimplementable without 500 man-years of effort and a whole lot of inside knowledge? Check.

You've got to hand it to Microsoft, this is brilliant stuff. It's just as much of a lock-in as the old binary data ever was but they've got ISO voting to make it a new standard. It's amazing what a few free lunches can buy.

Where is the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act?

Foreign Corrupt Practices Act does not work for Working Groups?
You have governments interested and 'market subsidies'?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Corrupt_Pract ices_Act [wikipedia.org]

Why is that?

"...Microsoft thinks it is good if OOXML becomes a standard."
O rly? I couldn't have guessed!!

"But almost all customers we have been talking to thinks it would be good if OOXML became an ISO standard."

And I suppose you talked to other companies customers and not just your own?

Ban the new members!

For corrupt practices. Or at least, ban them from this vote in particular.

single employee sent letters

"In a letter from Microsoft, our business partners were informed that they were "expected" to participate in the SIS meeting and vote yes...
This was a mistake and the letter was sent by a certain chair-throwing employee on his own initiative "

Standard practice

Influencing the market by throwing money at legislation and standards bodies instead of improving your product and becoming more competitive has become a standard way of doing business for years. In the 70's, rather than improve their product at the time, car manufacturer's in the US successfully lobbied for and got quotas on Japanese cars which were pound for pound far superior at the time.

Full Translation

here's a translation of the full article, to the best of my anonymous coward capacities. English is not my native language (but Swedish is).

------------

Microsoft admits voting coup at SIS

Microsoft admits that the company is behind the voting coup at SIS where the document format OOXML became proposed as a new standard.
- Mistakes have been committed on our part, says Klas Hammar, Microsoft.

The majority of the 23 companies that showed up at the institute of standards SIS at the last minute to vote yes on making Microsoft's document format OOXML an ISO standard did so at the request of Microsoft.

- We have continuously informed our partners about the SIS process. What is happening, what the timeline looks like and that Microsoft thinks it is good if OOXML becomes a standard, says Klas Hammar, business unit director at Microsoft.

- In a letter from Microsoft partners have been told that they were "expected" to participate in the ISI meeting and vote yes. As compensation they would receive "market assistance" and "additional support in the form of Microsoft resources".

Is this ethically defensible?

- This was a mistake and the letter was sent out by a single employee completely on his own initiative without any sanction whatsoever from Microsoft. He also quickly realized his mistake and tried to recall the letter, says Klas Hammar.

- If the person promises "market assistance" and other things he must supposedly have authority for such a promise. Was he a director of some kind and therefore in the position to take such a decision by himself?

- He was not a director and Microsoft has not sanctioned any such promises, says Klas Hammar.

- Have you made any more mistakes in this issue?

- Time will have to tell, says Klas Hammar.

- Do you understand the critique about "voting coup"?

- I can understand the critique about voting ways in a coup-like way. But I maintain that those who voted were well informed in the question and have their own interests in making OOXML an ISO standard, says Klas Hammar.

- Is it really ethic to act as you have and gather "voting cattle" to SIS?

- It has been a process where both those who have been for and against OOXML have engaged themselves very hard and mobilized their respective partners. And according to SIS there has been tactics from all sides, says Klas Hammar.

Microsoft should have an interest in standardization work being conducted in a good and credible way. Do you consider the current SIS rules for participation in a work group to be unfortunate?

- I am not knowledgeable enough in standardization to be able to comment on how a standardization work should be done, says Klas Hammar.

- Has this hurt Microsoft?

- Time will have to tell. But almost all customers we have spoken to think it is good if OOXML becomes an ISO standard, says Klas Hammar.

Norway, too - sort of.

The following letter was sent to the Norwegian ISO member by 37 Microsoft customers and partners. Look for the whole story on Groklaw soon. To
Standard Norge

for the attention of JCT-1 SC34 committee

Declaration in support of ISO acceptance of Open XML

I have been made aware that Norway is going to vote on the ECMA-standard Open XML some time in 2007, and that the Norwegian position in the matter will be decided in the Norwegian ISO committee (JCT-1 SC34) in Standard Norge. In this connection we feel that it is important that Standard Norge has knowledge of the position to this standard in the undersigned's activity.

By signing this declaration we want to point out the following to Standard Norge:

an ISO standardization of Open XML has large positive spin-off effects for IT industry in Norway, including our activity, our clients and business partners. Standardization will also have a large effect on future document standards in Norway.

We base this assertion on the following considerations:

A standardization of Open XML will insure backward compatibility with billions of existing documents — other existing formats do not satisfy this criterion.

Several coexisting standards are not unusual. For example, in imaging there are the formats JPEG, GIF, PNG and TIFF. These exist side by side and serve different and overlapping purposes to the advantage of users.

OpenXML does not rule out the use of other standards such as RTX, TXT, ODF, PDF etc. ISO standardization will on the other hand benefit interoperability among these standards. By making Open XML an internationally approved standard, it is ensured that the standard can communicate with other standards.

Therefore we wish, hereby, to express our full support for Open XML as an ISO standard.

Microsoft statement on the Swedish vote 'buying'

It's not a surprise that slashdot only references the anti-Microsoft articles on this issue, but for the readers sake, I post Microsoft's side of the story regarding Sweden.
This was posted by Microsoft's Jason Matusow yesterday:
Matusow's Blog: Open XML - The Vote in Sweden [msdn.com]

The latest chapter in the Open XML standardization story is focused on Sweden. There are accusations flying, emails floating around, and no shortage of theories about what has been happening there. As you can image I have been following up with a number of people and here are the issues and what I have found out so far.

Microsoft encouraged partners to participate in Sweden:

An employee in Sweden sent an email to 2 partners that was inconsistent with company policy. When he realized what he had done, he did the right thing by immediately reaching out to the two partners to address the situation. He contacted them by phone and email letting them know that they should disregard the mail. Here is what I know about this situation so far:

* 2 partners were sent an email making a request to participate in the Swedish process, telling them that they would be responsible for paying the membership fee if they did, but also making a related reference to marketing activities and extra support.
* Within hours both partners were contacted by the same MS employee who initiated the mail to notify them that the information in the email was incorrect and that they should disregard it.
* When the Microsoft Sweden management team became aware of the situation they proactively notified SIS, the national standards body, of this situation and shared the communications with them. There was no impact on the vote due to this situation.
* It is important to note that instructions from corporate to our regional teams around the world throughout this process have been to completely adhere to the rules of the national standards bodies, and that any party wishing to take part in the national standards body is directly responsible for paying any related fees. This means partners must decide whether to participate and vote based on their own determination as to the importance of this standard to their business. To say it more directly, offers to pay standards participation fees are totally inconsistent with our internal policy.

Organizations joining the committee late in the process:

Yes, many organizations joined the committee very late in the process. There were parties both for and against the vote that joined late. The local team did reach out to partners and encouraged them to join the process. Many of the partners had been called by IBM as well, encouraging them to join the process and to vote against the proposed standard. Many of these companies are business partners for both IBM and Microsoft and have business interests related to office automation technologies - thus, they were contacted by both firms. It is critical to note that the addition of voting members at that time was completely within the rules of the national standards body. While there are many arguments to be had over the relative merits of this rule...it is a rule nonetheless. If you are looking for other situations to think about - look at the late addition of Red Hat (and many others...I know) to Committee V1 in the United States. Their presence was simply to vote no - not based on deep technical review - but because it is in their business interests have Open XML fail to achieve ISO/IEC standardization. Google joining the SIS late is the same thing. So - for both sides, seeking to have participation of organizations with interests is within the boundaries of the rules.

The issue with the email is extremely unfortunate as it casts a pall over the hard work of so many, and the process as a whole. The S

For "benefits", read "cash"

The Slashdot translation says:

In a letter from Microsoft, our business partners were informed that they were "expected" to participate in the SIS meeting and vote yes. As a compensation they would get "market benefits" and extra support in terms of Microsoft resources.

What is translated as "market benefits" is originally "marknadsbidrag" - which, assuming Swedish is the same as my native tongue Norwegian in this area - means marketing subsidies, which would as far as I know usually be in the form of Microsoft paying for their partner's advertising. This is more or less direct cash for the companies, and can be substantial amounts.

Eivind.

There are days...

There are days when I want to see the corrupt, lying sons of bitches at Microsoft lined up against the wall and shot.

Single emplyee sending letters?

This was a mistake and the letter was sent by a single employee on his own initiative without sanctions from Microsoft

I wonder if this single employee sent the same letter to companies in the other countries where the same thing happened?

"Open" or "OPEN" is not the generic term "open".

I agree, the term "Open Standard" is used very inappropriately by RAND, M$ ... and many others.

Correctly stated it is simply an "Industry Standard", not "Open".

By accepted technologist and L/FOSS convention dating back to the 1980's the usage of the term "Open" is conceptually reserved to products/ideas... that closely follow the "Public Property" [GPL, "Open Content", "Open Standards" ...] concept/intent/ideals.

If you want to use a two word phrase, then the correct phrase for a few decades now has been and still is an "Industry Standard" accepted by the "International Community" (maybe ISO, ASCII, IEEE ...) as a proprietary functional (not open) standard.

When M$ and others present proprietary content for use in a standard (legally) it is not "Open" and/or freely available to anyone, and by making basic (non-creative/non-original) technology requirements private/property is anti-competitive and anti-capitalist corporatist-welfare.

Marketeers' (M$, HP ...) use of the term "Open" as false advertising to imply a non-proprietary product/standard. Companies obvious fraudulent use of the capitalized term "Open" is criminal misrepresentation of the now decades old technology term "Open". This proprietary flimflam on governments, citizens, businesses, and legal institutions is to subvert "Open-Market" dynamics, injure the "Open" market/industry sectors of all markets globally. It is unfair and a fraud for proprietary companies over the past five years (+/-2) to start using the term "Open" to dilute the competitive real value of the term "Open", which injures those business that require the term "Open" to have specific meaning and use in the "Global Open Markets". These activities by M$ and others smack of a "New World Order Communism (NWOC)" where ideas and property are all company-owned, cripples freedom, innovation, and economic forces.

Just like a public park, which is always paid for by the public or philanthropic individuals/foundations, the property is provided and developed for the public (benefit, competition, participation ...) welfare. Software patents and industry standards (using the term "Open") are an obvious attempt by totalitarian corporatist to inflate (by anti-competitive tactics) the proprietary property owners' wealth, while limiting/preventing [easement] access to public property by citizens.

"Open" when capitalized or in all caps (like an acronym) should have as much legal standing as the term "Microsoft", "California", "Navajo" "The United States Constitution" "Organic" .... Repeated misuse of the term "Open" by industry, governments, agencies, foundations ... should not be allowed. The term "Open" when used in medicine, science, engineering, communications, literature, music, art, technology ... has a definite (though unregistered) trademark value in business and international economics that is being intentionally misused by corporate-fascist to financially harm individual programmers/entrepreneurs..., the public good, "Open Economics", and "Open Businesses" globally.

Revisionist-spin is never reality, but can be dogma for fools and "Exploiticians" to use for legal
property rights to the wind, they may even stupidly try to hold the wind for themselves.

M$ OOXML IPR will never be "OPEN"

JUST IN: Sweden will abstain

The Swedish standards body SIS just issued a press release (pdf in Swedish) [www.sis.se] where they say that the vote has been declared invalid by the board of SIS, and that Sweden will abstain in the international vote (unless they manage to organize a new national vote before September 2, which the consider unlikely).

According to the press release, the reason for the decision was a technicality (that information suggested that one of the members had voted twice).

- Well, be that as it may, say I, but perhaps the uproar against the decision both in Sweden and internationally had something to do with. In any case, it sounds like a very fortunate technicality. ;)

Same on other countries ... and nobody do anything

I received emails telling me how to vote (I quote and translate) "... to vote do click on the link below and write on the body: YES and your information ..." I think about how many companies affiliated to the CANIETI (the Mexican chamber for technology, telecommunications, etc.) followed the directions without even thinking about what they where doing. Today Microsoft reach my limit on acceptance about what a company can do or should do to support their business assets. I was worried about receiving calls (from Microsoft) with instructions on how to vote (as YES) or receiving emails with direct links to an email to vote... until I received a new email from them. The email I received included a direct link which opens my email client and puts on the body 'A Favor' which means 'I AGREE' o 'YES'. The recipient for this email was the person in charge of the votes, but this link included CCs to Microsoft emails! ... What!? .... They want to know how many of us voted and what was the vote? Why? Is this illegal? Is this ethic? Why nobody here in Mexico sees this clear illegal and biased tactic to ensure a Mexico vote on YES to the standard? I don't want to start a flame war over who is right, what standard is better or what the ISO should do with the OOXML. I'm against the techniques and wrongdoing of Microsoft regarding how they are manipulating the vote in Mexico and how nobody seems to see this as I do. I ear this is happening in almost al the countries; I just don't want believe what I see. PD. The only option, abstention. Why? because if you vote NO you should put the technical reasons why your vote was no and if microsoft fixes the issues your answer is YES anyway. If you vote with abstention then there is a way to limit the quorum required to approve the Micro$oft initiative. - Omnia iam fient fieri quae posse negabam."

the "all customers"???

-Has this harmed Microsoft?

-Time will tell. But almost all customers we have been talking to thinks it would be good if OOXML became an ISO standard.

Reading between lines. Who are the "all customers" of Microsoft who think it would be "good"?? (*)

Does M$ still sell anything directly? I doubt it.

That leaves us with only option: the "customers" are partners/channel partners of M$ who do real deals selling hardware and OEMs. Shortly - partners.

Now, the phrase "almost all [snip]partners[/snap] we have been talking to thinks it would be good if OOXML became an ISO standard" as opposed to original quote sounds logical: for M$'s partners OOXML being a standard means more sales.

(*) I was alarmed by the phrase, because when refusing to implement some features, M$ always refers to the mythical customers who did not ask. You know, all internet - blogosphere and magazines included - retell story that feature is demanded by many many users. But then M$ PR droids come out and say: "we see no customer demand." "We see" part is pretty clear - they "see" only what they want to see. But the "customer" part was always puzzling.

Not really

It was not just America's DOJ that nothing. It has been ALL of the ocuntries DOJ that have done nothing. Has EU fined AND collected MS? Has EU punished MS by telling them that they can only sell x # of copies? Have they limited MS in anyway or shape that prevent this kind of BS over in Europe? How about in Japan? Canada? China? Russia? Mexico? Where ever? Is there ANY country that has had the balls to do what is right?

Near as I can tell, NOT A ONE. Welcome to the global economy.

Re:Simple solution

How do we register for this? Does it really cost $2,300?