Summary: New ODF developments and observations
A reader has just sent us a pointer to
the following:
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2009 11:58:15 -0500
From: Wade Smart <wade at wadesmart.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Subject: [users] Windows Vista Search doesn't find ODF files....
Gordon wrote:
> I have two documents, one a .odt and one a .doc. (They are the same
> document, just different formats).
> If I search using Vista Advanced Search by Modified Date, (they both
> have the same Modified Date) ONLY the .doc file is shown.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe at openoffice.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help at openoffice.org
>
20090609 1157 GMT-5
I have noticed that too. A little preferential treatment maybe?
Wade
This just shows how much Microsoft likes ODF, does it not? Microsoft has fought against ODF all along [
1,
2] and now it is trying to fragment it with its pseudo-ODF (MSODF [
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7]).
At the same time, Microsoft
is subverting Wikipedia's article on ODF in order to hide the effect of its actions. Just looking at the past couple of days, there are many edits from the usual suspects, e.g."Ghettoblaster" [
1,
2] and Albert Zonneveld (
most people know him as "hAl"). Look how hard he has been working in tandem with "Ghettoblaster" in the past couple of days, all to glorify Microsoft [
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7] (and not just in the article on ODF by the way).
The Microsoft proponents are editing so quickly that those correcting them with messages like "
suspected advertisement in promoting microsoft's product, please provide valid source" are being overridden vainly and swiftly. When it comes to "Ghettoblaster", here is a person
trying to correct his/her promotion of Microsoft and another one
correcting an insult of OpenOffice.org.
How about
interesting edits that
state:
"(Undid revision 295165923 by user:HAl how is it not relevent that Rick Jelliffe has admitted recieving money from Microsoft to edit wikipedia, and demanding a sources for unsourced fact)"
For more information about what the Microsoft folks have been doing in Wikipedia (to the ODF article alone), see:
What Microsoft is doing
gets noticed too. Make no mistake. Microsoft
"technical evangelists" (TEs) and staff are participating in this from a distance. We offered proof.
The FSF has meanwhile joined wide opposition to what Microsoft is doing to ODF. The headline states,
"Microsoft Office tries to break ODF."
Just a quick update to our OpenDocument campaign, with news that Microsoft Office has added support for ODF, but in a state that leaves it incompatible with every other ODF capable application out there, including OpenOffice.org and KOffice.
Microsoft has many reasons to be afraid of ODF (which is interoperable). Brazil makes
more obvious
moves to ODF and as Tony Manco puts it, "
open office brasil (BrOO.org) adopts odf and uses more foss software like firefox. [...] BB accepted foss since 2001. 60% of there computers use Linux [...] the rest use another os but have OOo and Firefox installed."
In other very interesting ODF news, there is
more support for this standard from Google.
Google Translator Toolkit currently only allows users to upload HTML, Microsoft Word, OpenDocument Text, Rich Text and Plain Text documents up to 1MB for translation. Alternatively, it's possible to enter the URL of a file on the web, select a Wikipedia article or a Knol for translation.
Google was among those publicly opposing OOXML, which is proprietary.
⬆
“It’s a Simple Matter of [Microsoft’s] Commercial Interests!“
--Microsoft on OOXML
Comments
A Wiki Admin
2009-06-10 23:39:30
Needs Sunlight
2009-06-10 10:31:12
pcolon
2009-06-10 12:05:58
Roy Schestowitz
2009-06-10 12:12:33
pcolon
2009-06-10 12:23:17
twitter
2009-06-10 14:58:47
The simple solution is to dump M$. Because they continue to prove their malice, "Mixed environments" should be viewed as worse than an all M$ environment no matter how many features are lost. No feature added to M$ Windows by a "third party" can be counted on because M$ will eventually sabotage it. I've been using free software exclusively for close to ten years now. The trouble saved by escaping M$ malice far outweighs the few times I've had to find a Windows box to cooperate with some ignorant institution or other. I think I've only had to do that once in the last three years. My case is not isolated as massive migrations such as Lowes, IBM, the French National Police, West Point and many other prove.
The sooner the world gets away from non free software, the sooner the malice will end. Only non free software people bother with sabotage like this. You don't find schools, doctors and lawyers doing these kinds of things to their peers. RMS pointed out early that NDA's were like an agreement to "be a bad person" and that non free software was unethical at its very foundation. We should not be surprised when non free software companies behave in an unethical manner. The sooner non free software is over, the less damage their poor ethics will do to society at large.
Moo
2009-06-10 15:25:52
David Gerard
2009-06-10 19:16:45
David Gerard
2009-06-10 19:18:25
Roy Schestowitz
2009-06-10 19:23:09
David Gerard
2009-06-10 19:35:57
manul
2009-06-11 05:18:18
Federal Anti-Monopoly Service Russia opened a case against six major notebook producers (namely Acer, Asus, Toshiba, Hewlett-Packard, Samsung and Dell), following consumers' complaints that they were being forced to buy Microsoft's Windows operating system along with new computers.
genuine announcement (in Russian) http://www.fas.gov.ru/news/n_24601.shtml google translate http://translate.google.ca/translate?pr ... ry_state0= Moscow Times: http://www.moscowtimes.ru/article/600/42/378477.htm