Counter-Claims On Flaws In OOXML Meeting 96
ericatcw writes "Critics have charged that last week's ISO Ballot Resolution Meeting (BRM) to decide the fate of changes to Office Open XML standards proposal was too perfunctory and deviated from accepted ISO practices, possibly in an attempt to smooth the passage of the Microsoft format. This week, the ISO 'convener' of the BRM disputed those charges, saying that voting to dispose of 900 changes to the spec at once and allowing 'O' Observer countries to vote were the correct moves. ISO released a statement backing him up. Also, Patrick Durusau, editor of the competing OpenDocument Format specification and a late convert to OOXML's passage, also said that claims the process was flawed were overstated."
This whole mess smells (Score:5, Interesting)
And now this? The stench of corruption is unbearable.
Alex Brown (Score:2, Interesting)
Mr. Durusau, do you actually believe that?!?! (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm sorry but I have no idea how you can possibly believe what you wrote.
I've followed this fairly closely and am EXTREMELY ANGRY at the crap MS has pulled trying to force this through!
Microsoft has been talking out both sides of its mouth for the last 15 YEARS and up until about 6 months ago has shown no intent of changing their ways and you think that they have because they honestly want interoperability. !?!?! There is a reason almost noone who's done business with MS trusts them, and it ain't jealousy.
You need to read 'The Scorpion and the Frog'. But MS will not sting you until you've carried them across the river (voted YES on dis29500).
They might be hearing you but they are NOT listening. They'll nod their heads and look like they're interested in what you're saying, but if (God forbid) this bullshit format gets accepted as an ISO standard, they will go back to their old way of doing things. Go peek at the anti-trust transcripts.
They threw some table scraps on the floor and you think they're welcoming you to the table and are going to treat you like an equal. Seriously? Seriously!?!?!
If they want OOXML to be an ISO spec, they need to go through the normal route. No fast track!
Say NO to Microsoft (Score:4, Interesting)
Microsoft is only going to start listening when people talk with their wallets. Until then, whatever EU does will only make them use big words as interoperability while disguising their efforts to lock in people to their products.
That's why we should say NO to Microsoft.
Start by saying NO to Internet Explorer and saying YES to Firefox. You won't regret it.
Say NO to Outlook, and say YES to Mozilla Thunderbird, or start using GMail.
Then, try to install Open Office along with Microsoft Office, although you may have problems opening some old documents, in general Open Office has very good quality. Open Office default format is the ISO standard ODF, which is gaining momentum and will start to have mass adoption after OOXML flops in this fiasco.
Say NO to Microsoft's Silverlight, since it's just another attempt to hijack the web. Developers, stick to Flash. Users, refuse installing the plugin and complain to the webmasters whenever you visit a site that requires it.
Say NO to Microsoft's XPS, since PDF is ubiquitous and it's an ISO standard as well.
And finally, if you've come so far, you should start saying NO to Windows and saying YES to Ubuntu. You may be impressed.
I'm not trolling here, this is not open source zealotry. It's only the realisation that Microsoft will only improve if there's competition, and there won't be any competition unless people start realising they have alternatives. Just look at IE, Microsoft didn't improve it at all, until it started having competition from Firefox, which by now has 25% market share for browsers, thanks to people who adopt it and spread the word. It's time we give them reason to do the same with their Office suite and Operating System as well.
Re:This process was flawed from the begining (Score:1, Interesting)
You flaws 1 and 2 also applied to the ODF ISO standardization. If ODF had been subjected to the same level of scrutiny as OOXML, it would also have hit your flaws 4 and 5 and 6. But it wasn't subject to such scrutiny. so sailed through, with the knowledge that it could be finished in later revisions. (And it needed fixing...see the massive changes in ODF 1.2 and compare to 1.0).
So why is Microsoft being required to operate under different rules? People seem to want theirs to be flawless before allowing it to be an ISO standard--a requirement no one else has been subject to.