These diagrams seem to indicate Word doesn’t support ODF yet, but consider the following.

That is the problem with a monopoly. When most businesses and users use a specific product, the vendor calls the shots. What the user sees is “an illegal …blah blah….” They know next time if they want to “preserve” their work to use Monopolyware and not take chances with other products. This is FUD that helps keep the monopoly together to be leveraged another day.

The user also eventually will recognize the .odt ending and avoid it like the plague.. so much that those advocating it will have another hurdle to overcome to get their legitimate message across or sell their product.

[Hypothetical] Without a monopoly, it would be much clearer to many users that this product was badly designed in assuming OOXML formatting and in not adequately supporting ODF by this time. Rather than to hold the monopoly fort, in such a hypothetical case, this product would rightly lose marketshare. Thus, even this “innocent” error interaction serves to strengthen the monopoly, and few would claim Monopolysoft was playing dirty. Most would attribute this to incompetency, sloppiness, negligence… point is, all of these natural human failings help support the monopoly automatically.

Better formats and products get marginalized severely as long as you have a monopoly. It pressures vendors of new products and those contemplating format changes to do so on the monopolist’s terms and timeline. This defeats major advantages of innovators.

And who can outmarket a Monopolysoft backed by its cashcows and controlled marketing venues (your *desktop* and the many partners kept in line through fear and NDA secrecy).

Monopolysoft has numerous interlocking monopolies not just one.

[IMO] Monopolysoft will fight ODF by helping to create the appearances of ODF products and documents that “don’t work”. This is a major facet of what they mean by “supporting” ODF today but “OOXML is the future”. They will partake in the poisoning of the ODF well until they have “fixed” ISO OOXML and changed their software to “match” it.

The purpose is to show that Microsoft Word is deliberately misleading.

This is what Word will give you if you try to “recover text from any file”:

mimetypeapplication/vnd.oasis.opendocument.textPK
Configurations2/statusbar/PK
Configurations2/accelerator/current.xml
Configurations2/floater/PK
Configurations2/popupmenu/PK
Configurations2/progressbar/PK
Configurations2/menubar/PK
Configurations2/toolbar/PK
Configurations2/images/Bitmaps/PK
content.xml½–MoÛ0
7Uz{oª±V`[Oô
8i“#xyt4
h
styles.xmlÍZ[oÛ6
D[\%R )_úëw
;˜±ÂÈ{“K×ã-[æP:Ut?V
>èœl$IdQR
;(
5S£]C
=‹ªÞmGgÄn;àš$£jtnXæ
RAm+Ã!ÉqÒ­tFS¹’ _3C
UÁÜØH‡HóÏ€4^”Æ®åTl+º…%&ìB”+a
SYé¬ÃòŒ2±•²°›å,Ì wi[K…U)
M
9Øjk_ñ^
:yB
OpenOffice.org/2.4$Win32 OpenOffice.org_project/680m12$Build-9286Agent Smith2008-06-20T11:32:54Agent Smith2008-06-20T11:33:141PT25SPK
Thumbnails/thumbnail.pngë
&+KV]i
/ÝÙó´lþõyÇvÍÿ\5ãrfÌúã…ök’uNGðï~k ÷¹Tâùñs;ìïçÙÚÊ/8n=ßn]muŒ
settings.xmlµYQWâ:
-d*R-ÁbP-
7ÞBë¤U¯/—ËÓåù)Êy½yuuU•o7C
Y>k^6.
qÂéoGy2d H
g
&__WtÜ‚ñ>íÈIEà’ _?*
N]¥¡Ï£¹ ðŽ5&CTÑGn*
-
P5o¶æk-MQEM]
META-INF/manifest.xmlµ•KjÃ0
‘Ú@,ƒ
¥Ð`žú(UŠq:bÎbqW
*긓ý½_PrSõ4I7
Z
bþK|0H³c-2
mimetypePK
Configurations2/statusbar/PK
Configurations2/accelerator/current.xmlPK
Configurations2/floater/PK
Configurations2/popupmenu/PK
Configurations2/progressbar/PK
Configurations2/menubar/PK
Configurations2/toolbar/PK
Configurations2/images/Bitmaps/PK
content.xmlPK
styles.xmlPK
meta.xmlPK
Thumbnails/thumbnail.pngPK
settings.xmlPK
META-INF/manifest.xmlPK

“It looks like they fed Word an ODT file” – Yes I did.

“but implied (or word assumed) that it was OOXML” – Microsoft knows what an ODT is. Word could simply report that the format is unsupported, but it doesn’t do that.

“Dialogue 3 says it’s a malformed OOXML file, which it likely is.” – It was a simple text document that was not malformed at all. This supports my point – Microsoft’s dialogues have made an impression on you.

“It’s also likely a malformed mpeg file” – I don’t know why you think that.

No ODF plugin was used. Office assumes it is OOXML.

You can also choose “recover text from any file”, and Word will spit out some revealing information: It correctly identifies the document type as an OASIS open document, it can output all of the meta data, it knows what version it is, but it absolutely will not at any time output the single line of text that the document contained.

The purpose of this exercise was simply to show that Office will give the user information that is misleading in response to a perfectly good ODT file. It is easy enough to replicate.

I hope some of the readers actually have office 2007…

I’m not sure about the word “hope”.

Either way, about half of the visitors of this Web site use GNU/Linux.

I’m not sure if you read the previous post. We show here only the fairly intimidating dialugues that discourage ODF use or at least introduce doubt (even for future use). We also mentioned how this relates to the fiasco around DR-DOS in this IRC Chat (full logs posted this morning)

A reader wrote to tell me about another example a couple of hours ago (E-mail):

In regards to this one ( or another on the same topic )
http://boycottnovell.com/2008/06/19/microsoft-mso-mocks-odf/

I’ve noticed, second hand, that MSIE gives a ‘security’ warning when accessing Gmail.

See those ‘smoking gun’ from DR-DDS again. This may not be deliberate this time around, but it does not help, either.

Is that worth a blog post? Who said Word 2007 natively supports .ODT ?

What ODF plugin is being used here? Word doesn’t support ODF natively, yet, right?

When you had the open file dialog, what filter for file type was applied, or was it all files? Then, did it ask you to choose a file type because this format was unrecognized, or did it just assume it was OOXML?

I know MS said that ODF support was coming, fulfilling the last of Stafford Masie’s prophecies, but it’s not here yet that I noticed – something about a service pack, I don’t use Office so I dunno. We’ll also have to wait and see on how well it is implemented, I suppose.