EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

02.14.08

Fighting for Its Survival, Microsoft Corrupts with OOXML

Posted in Antitrust, Apple, ECMA, Finance, Formats, Fraud, ISO, Microsoft, Open XML, Standard at 9:13 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

When logic comes together…

The previous post explained why Microsoft’s strategy is only to drag time when it comes to its unsubstantiated, unproven claims against GNU/Linux. It is very much the opposite when it comes to OOXML, which Microsoft tried to fast-track (and subversively did). The longer it’s out there in the wild, the more scrutiny it is going to fall under. And scrutiny OOXML shall have! Here is some of the latest.

OOXML: Microsoft Windows-only, Microsoft Office-only

Microsoft is striding all over the place (even spamming YouTube) to give people the illusion that OOXML makes not just a representation of a single product from a single vendor. Actual users are not buying it (neither the argument nor Microsoft’s products) and it shows.

First of all, I will like to point out that the format of documents produced by Microsoft Office 2007 is not OOXML (Ecma 376). Microsoft Office 2007 documents contains, according to my sources, many elements not specified in Ecma 376, such as binary code, macros, OLE objects, ActiveX, DRM and SharePoint metadata.

[...]

I do not own a license for Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac, and I will not buy one either. It might be possible to open documents produced by Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac with iWork ‘08, iPhone or NeoOffice, but that is irrelevant. One of the major points with interoperability, is vendor independence. If I have to buy a license for Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac, Microsoft has succeeded in creating a standard so difficult — not to say impossible — to implement, that users will have to buy Microsoft’s software.

As a final statement, I would like to point out that the allegations on OOXML beeing implemented in iWork ‘08, iPhone and NeoOffice are wrong.

How about macros?

The ECMA/Microsoft’s answer is not providing anything to be sure your macro will be interpreted in the same way on all platforms (Windows, Linux, OSX, Plan9, VxWorks, etc…):

ECMA is truly becoming a disgrace because every single country appears to be complaining about unreasonable excuses and no consideration from ECMA. Rather than aspiring to produce standards, ECMA becomes just a tool for fending off critics on behalf on Microsoft, which pays ECMA’s bills.

OOXML is the Past, Not the Future

It is becoming very clear that OOXML is filled with a baggage of legacy code. There is no point denying it, but since the BRM in Geneva has already been corrupted [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]), there is no point raising it, either.

I believe the backwards compatibility with the documents of a single vendor is totally unsuitable for an international standard. And it is impossible to verify if the OOXML formats represents legacy formats more faithfully than the existing ISO standard. Unfortunately the ISO process does not permit to raise this issue at the BRM. This seems to me an indication that the ISO process is broken as it does not offer room to discuss what really matters.

The Open Malaysia blog has some more new examples of this.

The “existing corpus of binary documents” is Ecma’s stock solution to most of Malaysia’s comments. Instead of cleaning things up, they give the impression that they are brushing things under the carpet and putting the burden of document fidelity on the shoulders of future developers instead of addressing it today. This is a fixable problem which can be handled by todays conversion software. Let’s put an end to the propagation of 20 year old bugs once and for all.

The last long post could be put under multiple different headings because it shows:

  1. That ECMA is indeed what some call “a Microsoft shill”
  2. OOXML is all about Microsoft Office
  3. OOXML contains a legacy mess, including software bugs

It is truly shame that the world’s standardisation framework can be not only fooled, but also corrupted like this. In case you did not realise this, the fight for OOXML is the fight for the continued relevance of Microsoft’s biggest cash cow amid serious Microsoft troubles. The company has not only lost a great deal of its cash reserves, but yesterday it also lost some of its most senior people, who abruptly quit the company, joining many others.

As several major publications (including the Wall Street Journal) have stated recently, Microsoft is fighting for its long-term survival. As such, unacceptable (even vile) behaviour is only to be expected from a multiple-time convicted monopolist which is currently under 3 separate antitrust investigations in the European Union.

Related articles:

OOXML is fraud

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

6 Comments

  1. Stephane Rodriguez said,

    February 15, 2008 at 3:30 am

    Gravatar

    One fresh news,

    67 bricks CTO (Inigo Surguy) appointed as principal expert for the UK representing BSI in Geneva’s BRM later this month.

    http://www.openpr.com/news/37305/67-Bricks-Chief-Technologist-appointed-Principal-UK-Expert-in-OOXML.html

    A quick Google research on Inigo Surguy shows up the following,

    http://www.xmlopen.org/ooxml-wiki/index.php/User:Inigo.surguy

    “Inigo Surguy, former employee of CSW Group who are members of the ODF Alliance, as well as being a Microsoft Gold Certified Partner. My current employer is 67 Bricks, who are in the Microsoft Empower programme.”

    Which is confirmed by this :

    http://www.csw.co.uk/about/partners.asp

    Color me unimpressed. One more bribed Microsoft-sponsored business partner speaking on behalf of an entire country…

    And, of course, UK’s BSI voted NO back in September. So that makes perfect sense to appoint a Microsoft-compatible person.

  2. Stephane Rodriguez said,

    February 15, 2008 at 3:35 am

    Gravatar

    In your post, you said “That ECMA is indeed what some call “a Microsoft shill””

    In fact, no, ECMA TC45 is owned by Microsoft since they are co-chairing it. (Jean Paoli and someone else). If you don’t know what to expect from this guy, just read Tim Bray’s XML 10-year anniversary.

    Whenever you hear about Microsoft employees talk about working in tandem with ECMA TC 45 people, going at great length to refer to them as external and independent persons, you really have to make an effort not to laugh hard.

  3. Roy Schestowitz said,

    February 15, 2008 at 4:15 am

    Gravatar

    Thank you, Stephane. I’ll blog your insights, spread the word and cite them as valuable reference in the future.

    BSI: Another crack in the BRM. Are Ireland and Portugal still sending Microsoft to represent them?

  4. hAl said,

    February 15, 2008 at 3:30 pm

    Gravatar

    Strange the BSI is apperantly represented by a ODF alliance member.
    I wonder how many ODF alliance members will be present in Geneva, and especially how many IBM, Sun and FFII members as well.

    Also strange, Microsoft has only one vote out of 12 in the ECMA TC (as Ecma member always can have only one vote on a matter) whilst IBM and Sun together own 70% of the votes in the OASIS TC.

    Mainly strange because you are not mentioning these facts

  5. hAl said,

    February 15, 2008 at 3:32 pm

    Gravatar

    [quote]Microsoft Office 2007 documents contains, according to my sources, many elements not specified in Ecma 376, such as binary code, macros, OLE objects, ActiveX, DRM and SharePoint metadata. [/quote]

    All of which does not make the files nonconforming to OOXML.
    You should note that all of these item can also be part of ODF files.

  6. Roy Schestowitz said,

    February 15, 2008 at 4:09 pm

    Gravatar

    But they are not.

    I know your position, hAl. I’ve seen your feedback elsewhere and the following reply was about to be sent (I don’t know if it was):


    OOXML getting ready to load up the Geneva room

    Hal is one of the key people pushing for the ISO standardization of OOXML, for Microsoft left the following comment in response to the article OOXML questions Microsoft cannot answer in Geneva:

    “You suggest these are questions about OOXML that can’t be answered by Microsoft during the BRM. But point you are totally missing is that Microsoft is not a party in the BRM meeting and as such cannot even comment on things in the BRM until after it is been completed. The BRM is a meeting between ISO members and standards group Ecma about improving the OOXML specification and not about 90% of the questions you suggest.

    Your post shows a complete lack of understanding of the standardization process. I suggest you read up on the blog of the BRM convernor Alex Brown who for instance states that non comments can be handled which regards to any (reference)implementations of OOXML as that falls outside of the scope of the BRM meeting. So any of your questions about MS office are totally inappropriate for this meeting.
    http://adjb.net/

    Hal, you are right, I have a complete lack of understanding of the standardization process and “standard” you are participating in and aggressively promoting for ISO approval. Frankly, it is egregious that the format being submitted is not even the format implemented and will never be. Yes, Microsoft cannot answer those questions on Microsoft Office, IPR, contradictions, goals/policies and other issues at the BRM as per the rules. It is only about the new cosmetic text! But what I am suggesting is that, not only can they not, they could not or would not in general. They are trying not to!

    So, under no circumstances should there be a vote at the BRM until all the issues/comments raised by all the NBs are resolved. They are entitled to it and so are the citizens of their countries. The BRM is closed to the media and the public, essentially closed just like the whole standardization process of “Office Closed XML” has been. Everything is almost done secretly. What is there to hide? Why the fear of scrutiny?

    Critical issues have not been addressed. OOXML will not be voted on based just on the synthetic changes to a pieces of paper which looks goods, but still has many problems. Only because of an effective presentation and the loading up of the room ready to vote “Yes” does it stand a chance.

    Yes, Microsoft is back to playing games and Stuffing It UP ready to ramstack the room with pigeons from the Philippines, Chile, Portugal, Venezuela, Spain And other countries with no interest in standards, never even reviewed the spec and request a vote. THEY TRY TO STEAL IT RIGHT THERE BY CONSENSUS!

    I believe most people would agree at this point that ECMA is simply acting as a proxy for MS. MS does pay their bills, doesn’t it? In Geneva the bus system works on the honor system. You buy a ticket and get on. You can also get on without a ticket. MS has gotten on the bus without one too many times. An erroneous un-reviewed spec such as the one ECMA/MS submitted (fast-track even) to ISO is then being pushed through by subversive tactics, but it still has no ticket. It’s time for an inspector to get on the bus and throw Microsoft out.

    To our readers, we ask that you please contact the National Board in your country, and request complete resolution for all issues raised by the comments to Microsoft’s OOXML ISO application. Please be sure to insist that both the technical and non-technical issues be completely resolved as a pre-condition before OOXML is granted ISO status. You can find your delegates here: http://www.noooxml.org/delegations

What Else is New


  1. Alice Continues to Smash Software Patents So Patent Lawyers, Monopolists' Lobbyists Etc. Now Attack the Supreme Court for Doing This

    Corporate lobbyists and patent lawyers are trying to put Alice in the grave, for its impact on software patents is very profound and thus far almost unstoppable



  2. How to Salvage the EPO's Reputation: Create More Boards of Appeal in Europe and Abolish the Misguided UPC Fantasy

    A critical evaluation of what goes on at the European Patent Office (EPO), which is quickly descending down (and overall degrading) to the level of Chinese systems, along with the corruption, the abuses, and the low quality of patents



  3. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) Has Just Sided With Patent Trolls

    The notorious CAFC, which manifested software patents in the United States, has just given a gift to patent trolls that typically use software patents for extortion down in Texas



  4. Analyses of the Latest Data From Lex Machina About Patent Litigation Show Some Litigation Declines

    Professor Mark Lemley's Lex Machina highlights litigation trends by collecting and analysing data related to patents and pertaining to intellectual monopolies in general; now it shows litigation droughts



  5. India is Having Another Taste of the Dangers of Western Patents, Must Learn to Reject Software Patents in the Face of Great Pressure

    The growing software giant which is India continues to face cruel and aggressive lobbying from the West, enabling the West to control India by patents that should not exist in the first place



  6. Links 29/4/2016: GNOME 3.21.1, Fairphone

    Links for the day



  7. Microsoft Says It Will Continue to Extort Companies That Distribute Linux, Using Software Patents As Usual

    Microsoft's war on Linux, a war which is waged using software patents (for revenue and/or for coercion in bundling deals), is still going on in spite of all the PR tactics from Microsoft and its paid partners



  8. Australia Might be Next to Block Software Patents If Commission's Advice is Followed

    Australian advice against software patents, which can hopefully influence Australian politicians and put an end, once and for all, to all software patents in Australia



  9. [ES] ''Si la Forma de Pensar de la EPO fuese Seguida, Guantánamo Sería Posible en Suelo Alemán.”

    La EPO está todavía bajo fuego, pero mucho de ello pasa detrás de las cortinas y envuelve abogados y/o burócratas



  10. The European Copy-Paste Office (EPO)

    This morning's example (not the first) of how the EPO uses 'social' media



  11. Links 28/4/2016: Fedora 24, EE Goes Open Source

    Links for the day



  12. Amid Referendum “the New European Unitary Patent System is Likely to Collapse Before It Started”

    The Unitary Patent Court (UPC) vision seems like it may be just one month away from its gradual death, depending on British voices amongst other key factors



  13. USTR is Trying to Shame and Bully India Into Introducing Software Patents in India

    Lobbying body of the US (corporations-led) is trying its usual dirty tactics against India's sound policy which excludes software/algorithms from patent scope



  14. No, Visual Studio is NOT Open Source and Xamarin Openwashing is NOT News

    The latest example of Microsoft openwashing, courtesy of confidants of Microsoft and those who got bamboozled by them



  15. Latest Black Duck Puff Pieces a Good Example of Bad Journalism and How Not to Report

    Why the latest "Future of Open Source Survey" -- much like its predecessors -- isn't really a survey but just another churnalism opportunity for the Microsoft-connected Black Duck, which is a proprietary parasite inside the FOSS community



  16. If EPO “Form of Thinking Were to be Followed, Guantanamo on German Soil Would be Possible.”

    The EPO is still under fire, but a lot of it happens behind the scenes and involves lawyers and/or bureaucrats



  17. Links 28/4/2016: Tomb Raider for GNU/Linux, Proxmox VE 4.2

    Links for the day



  18. [ES] La Departura de la Readidad de la EPO Y Su Entrada en la Esféra Industrial China de Propaganda

    La deceptiva trampa del maximálism de patentes, donde se asume que artficialmente aumentando el número de patentes otorgadas traerá el resultado esperado



  19. [ES] Una Fársa de Sistema: ¿Cómo la SIPO, USPTO, y cada vez más la EPO se Convierten en Llenado de Patentes (No Se Requiere Propia Examinación)

    Una crítica al decline en la calidad de patentes en algunas de las más grandes oficinas de patentes del mundo, donde aspiración parece ser neo-liberal en el sentido económico



  20. [ES] Microsoft ‘Asalto con Todo’ Contra Android, Java, y GNU/Linux, Usando la Clásica E.E.E. Táctica de Nuevo

    Otro recordatorio de la realidad que Microsoft está muy activo en el frente E.E.E., not no sólo contra GNU/Linux pero también Android y Java



  21. [ES] Más Rumores y Llamadas Acerca de Prospectos de Microsoft Vaya a Comprar Canonical (Ubuntu con todo y Zapatos)

    Teniendo en cuenta los últimos movimientos de Canonical, algunos expertos piensan que es posible que Shuttleworth elija el dinero a Microsoft sobre principios sino también inste para que esto ocurra



  22. Links 27/4/2016: A Lot About OpenStack, Vivaldi 1.1 Released

    Links for the day



  23. A Farce of a System: How SIPO, USPTO, and Increasingly the EPO Too Turn Into Filing Systems (No Proper Examination/Filtering Required)

    A critique of the declining quality of patents in some of the world's biggest patent offices, where the aspiration seems to be neo-liberal in the economic sense



  24. Microsoft's 'Full Assault' on Android, Java, and GNU/Linux, Using Classic E.E.E. Tactics Again

    Another reminder of the fact that Microsoft is very active on the E.E.E. front, not just against GNU/Linux but also Android and Java



  25. More Rumours and Calls Surrounding Prospects of Microsoft Buying Canonical (Ubuntu and More)

    Taking some of Canonical's recent moves into account, some pundits not only think it's possible for Shuttleworth to choose Microsoft money over principles but also urge for this to happen



  26. [ES] El Nuevo Impulso Finánciado por Microsoft Para Reforzar las Patentes de Software en los EE.UU., Apoyado por los Sospechosos Usuales (La Sagrada Familia) Mientras que Microsoft Cada Vez Más Lucha Como Compañíá Productiva

    Una mirada al esfuérzo de trae una resurgencia de las patentes de software en los Estados Unidos (con un clarísimo rol de Microsoft en él) y la fundación/conf ianza de Microsoften las patentes de software como arma contr Linux/Android porque las ganancias de Windows se están secando y el Windows Phone está al borde del colápso



  27. Links 26/4/2016: Firefox 46.0, Thunderbird's Stewardship

    Links for the day



  28. Links 25/4/2016: Kodi 16.1, OpenStack Summit

    Links for the day



  29. New Microsoft-Funded Push to Make Software Patents Stronger in the US, Backed by the Usual Suspects as Microsoft Increasingly Struggles as a Producing Company

    A look at the effort to bring about a software patents resurgence to the US (with clear Microsoft role in it) and Microsoft's reliance on software patents as a weapon against Linux/Android because Windows profits dry up and Windows Phone is on the verge of collapse



  30. Patents Roundup: Marijuana Patents, Patent Satellites, Patent Trolls, Wars, and Merchants (Notably Lawyers)

    Various strands of news about patents, focused on issues raised in the latter half of last week


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts