Permission granted to use this plot, which has been slightly modified (annotation)
Rob Weir has just published an excellent new post which describes not only how far ahead of OOXML OpenDocument Format has already gone, but also shows how Microsoft deception (or “spin”, or “lies”, depending on whose side you’re on) is used to hide this fact. The first comment from Stephane Rodriguez is worth reading also.
There are fewer than 2,000 OOXML documents on the entire internet (as indexed by Google at least) and the trend is flat.
What about ODF? Almost 160,000 and growing strongly.
Looking at the comments, Microsoft has not yet found a response or a decent rebuttal. The silence speaks volumes.
Several times in the past we have shown cases where Microsoft uses the tricks such as (selective) statistics to pretend that OOXML is spreading quickly. It’s a case where the “numbers game” is called “statistics” or “study”, just as “lies” are called “marketing”, "astroturfing" is called “evangelism”, and "bribery" is called “marketing help” (yes, that’s how Microsoft sneaked out of the recent fiasco in Nigeria).
The title of this post is intended to contain a bit of a pun. David Berlind reminds us yet again that the entity which goes by the name “Foundation” has very little to do with the future and great success of ODF. The “Foundation” has become more of an excuse for Microsoft to push some lies into media streams, which it virtually controls.
OpenDocument Format community steadfast despite theatrics of now impotent ‘Foundation‘
…Microsoft, the company whose Office empire is probably more threatened by ODF than most people realize, capitalized on the confusion by spreading its own FUD on the story.
The headline says “theatrics”. Dare I say that Sam Hiser himself has told me that it’s all theatre? Yes, his own words.
Other concerns to bear in mind here include journalistic integrity, which has been put to question. Time after time. After time. After. Time. Peter Galli from eWeek spreads FUD (no, he hasn’t stopped yet) which is based on the Foundation’s views. He seems to have joined the more Microsoft-dependent ‘journalists’, such as Mary Jo Foley.
This isn’t the first time that we catch Peter Galli spreading some FUD (see this open letter). Be cautious whose word you take (possible for granted, without doubts). A few weeks ago Peter wrote an article whose headline was not correct (about Obama’s policy on formats) and some months ago there was unnecessary outrage because of an incorrect headline in an article that speaks about Microsoft and virtualisation.
I have personally given hope on the mainstream media, which now more than ever is inclined to please its advertisers, sponsors, and benefactors. I’ll say more about this in the next post. █