03.26.08
Posted in Boycott Novell at 11:31 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in America, Asia, Deception, ECMA, Europe, Formats, Microsoft, Open XML, OpenDocument, Standard at 11:07 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Poland
A couple of days ago we covered the situation in Poland, mainly by pointing to a variety of old and new reports from local observers. According to noooxml.org, they may be trying to pull a trick by pretending to be impartial while in fact endorsing Microsoft’s broken specifications, despite objections that led to somewhat of a fiasco back in September. Watch this troublesome assessment:
Evil! “Abstain from voting” means no new vote will get submitted, so the September vote will be carried! In the case of Poland it was an approval vote for the OOOXML standard with comments attached. Yes, Poland felt it could support the approval of a standard candidate that got more than 2300 pages of dispositions of comments. And now the logic I fail to get is: if we fail to approve we do nothing and carry the previous approval vote. ISO procudures sometimes feel like a witch test.
“Abstain from voting” != submission of an “Abstain” vote.
Czech Republic
Earlier today we also mentioned what had happened in the Czech Republic. Watch what Groklaw had to say about this unpredictable outcome. It came as an update to the news from Brazil.
Here is one comment that must have slipped off the table and got overlooked, a comment the Czech Republic attached to its vote in September:
Coexistence of two very similar international standards such as ODF and OOXML is undesirable in a long term perspective. Therefore we ask JTC1 to start work on a progressive harmonization of both formats in cooperation with OASIS and ECMA organizations which are originators of these document formats.
Durusau Again
There’s too much ‘funny business’ to keep track of at a national level. But never mind that. What seems even more troublesome is the tactical timing of all these Durusau letters. We looked at this issue before [1, 2, 3, 4]. LXer rebuts that latest letter of his, which contains absurdities.
The only one who loses if DIS 29500 fails is Microsoft, who’s Office 2007 cashcow will run into trouble. Everyone else, including the OpenDocument Format, do not need an ISO stamp of approval on DIS 29500. The current Ecma 376 standard, flawed as it is, is more than enough to work with. Putting an ISO stamp of approval on that document does not suddenly make it “more interoperable” or a better spec. Unless Microsoft stops working with Ecma, but that is not ISO’s problem. It’s Microsoft’s and Ecma’s problem. Besides all that, Ecma can still resubmit Ecma 376 through the regular ISO process and gain approval in a few years when the standard has been properly reviewed and fixed. That’s too late for the Microsoft Office cashcow of course, but that is not ISO’s concern.
Here are PJ’s remarks on this:
[Re:] “1) National bodies loses an open and international forum for further work on DIS 29500.”
[PJ: This is not true. If it is disapproved, it goes off the Fast Track and can the be considered on the regular track, which obviously gives national bodies the time they need to actually discuss and resolve the issues. Like Durusau doesn't know that.
Not that they can fix it. The intellectual property issues can't be resolved without changing the Microsoft OSP. But the fact is, even that could be resolved if everyone wasn't being rushed like some old folks getting phone calls from smarmy salesmen telling them to agree to buy fast, fast, fast, without a chance to read a contract first. If OOXML is capable of being fixed, it will not be harmed by taking the time to fix it.]
The deceptions galore has a Microsoft lobbyist cited as well. He is described in the press as a “standards expert”, but his new affiliation gives too much away.
Over at Malaysia, some articles begin to show up, such as this one.
I am no supporter of Microsoft but I believe that any decision on this issue should be devoid of personal grudges, vested interests or software politics.
This case is actually quite simple but it has been complicated, wittingly or unwittingly, by the intrigues and conduct of several parties involved.
Lots of technical jargon is bandied about to confuse and scare people away from the key principles involved. The market for e-document or productivity software is gigantic and growing. It is used by consumers, businesses and governments, which explains the huge interest in this case.
They conveniently try to warp the question of standardisation to one of market share and business needs alone, never mind quality.
Needless to say, these article neglect to mention and take into accounts the full story. They seem to shy away from the controversy and play safe by wrongly assuming that Microsoft plays by the rules. All along, Microsoft’s strategy has been to dismiss critics by calling them Microsoft haters. The company even tried to put that label on Andy Updegrove, who has been exceptionally forthcoming and polite all along. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Europe, Microsoft, Office Suites, Open XML, Standard at 6:36 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
A new report found in LinuxWorld says that the Czech Republic votes “Yes” to OOXML, but it says very little beyond it.
The Czech Standards Institute (CSI) has voted to make Microsoft’s Open Office XML format a standard, the organization said Tuesday.
Let’s look back again at stories we have gathered over the past year. The CSI is not to be confused with another CSI that goes by the same acronym. The Croatian Standards Institute (CSI) is not the Czech Standards Institute (CSI), but the story from the neighbors at Croatia was appalling. Be sure to read it.
Another report from last year adds little credibility to the whole ‘political’ side of the situation: Microsoft’s man in Europe carries communist-era baggage
That report sparked a flurry of speculation in Czech media and online chat rooms about Muehlfeit’s role under the communist regime, and it elicited a public statement at the time from Microsoft, which supported Muehlfeit’s integrity.
The story is probably a distraction at this stage, but a more descriptive item is this one which contains dead links to expired items.
Just recently, Pavel Janik from Czechoslovakia together with some friends also printed out the specification. In this case, they printed it one page per sheet which resulted in this towering stack; 6 bindings of 1000 pages each. This was for a workshop on MSOOXML at ČNI (Czech standardisation institute), the equivalent of SIRIM in Malaysia.
[...]
This is probably the reason why Microsoft continually seems to be sending non-technical people (to Malaysia and Czech ) to these workshops probably to try to convince us of the merits of the specification not on a technical level, but on a “political” level.
[...]
Judge for yourself if Czechoslovakia’s recommendation back in February 2007 still seems like a practical request:
“Open documents, generally open standards, are very important for global information exchange and therefore they need very broad discussion of all interested parties.
For this reason the Czech Republic suggests using the standard procedure for the development of ISO/IEC standard from the document ECMA-376.”
The most information you can probably find here.
Can you imagine better way to spend 4 hours of your Friday afternoon time than discussing OOXML problems with non-techies from Microsoft?
[...]
I simply can’t believe that developers and or TC45 members from Apple, Barclays Capital, BP, The British Library, Essilor, Intel, Microsoft, NextPage, Novell, Statoil, Toshiba, and the United States Library of Congress actually read the final document. I can’t believe it. If I ever write such document, I surely won’t sign it by my name. Why?
It is very simple and I wrote it several times. I do not like to look like idiot. After reading few pages of the specification, I think TC45 members simply like it OR they never read the specification OR something else ($$$$$)…
It’s a long and very memorable journal item. Be sure to read it if you are curious. Microsoft has a track record of manipulating and corrupting many countries for their “Yes” vote, so suspicion is muchly justified here. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in News Roundup at 5:41 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in GNU/Linux, Microsoft, Mono, Novell, Patents at 5:28 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Who doesn’t like an intellectual monopoly?
In the following new report you will find some additional information about a development that we covered earlier today. It’s about Microsoft’s move against (X)HTML and AJAX. Microsoft has its own acronym to rave about: XAML. Watch the resemblance to terms which exclude the GPL and thereby combat Microsoft’s #1 competitor.
The [XAML] information is covered under Microsoft’s Open Specification Promise, which is meant to protect third parties from patent infringement.
XAML is the markup language designers use to lay out an application’s front end. Microsoft’s Silverlight Web browser plug-in for displaying media can render XAML along with JavaScript and HTML.
By all means remember that Moonlight is based on Mono, the use of which only Novell received ‘protection’ for. What does this mean to users of the World Wide Web? Over at IAM Magazine, Microsoft gets its share of FUD with a proud outline of the company’s “IP rethink”.
Gutierrez talks about deals done with the likes of Nokia, Siemens, Toshiba and SAP; he explains the thinking behind tie-ups with Novell (“For the first time anywhere, a working model of cooperation with a major Linux provider had been created that not only enhanced the interoperability of Windows and Linux software through joint technology development, but also indemnified customers using such software from legal concerns over intellectual property licensing requirements.”) and Linux distributors Xandros, Linspire and TurboLinux. A deal with Samsung was groundbreaking, Gutierrez says, because it was the “first patent agreement with a consumer electronics leader in which we agreed on a model to provide coverage for certain types of Linux devices all within the context of a broader cross-licensing arrangement”.
There is nothing apparent in this article which rebuts or adds balance. It makes it very clear, however, that Microsoft will do everything it can to charge money for the use of Linux not only on personal computers and servers, but also in devices (embedded). Once again, using precedence and questionable payments to weak parties, Microsoft tries to set a precedence and create a new business model for other to give in to. Novell is the father of this. █
Other patent news of interest (25-26/03/2008):
But in case flash prices continue to plummet and the flash drives really do catch on, Watkins has something else up his sleeve. He’s convinced, he confides, that SSD makers like Samsung and Intel (INTC) are violating Seagate’s patents. (An Intel spokeswoman says the company doesn’t comment on speculation.) Seagate and Western Digital (WDC), two of the major hard drive makers, have patents that deal with many of the ways a storage device communicates with a computer, Watkins says. It stands to reason that sooner or later, Seagate will sue – particularly if it looks like SSDs could become a real threat.
Typhoon specifically cites Xplore’s iX104C series of tablet PCs, Electrovaya’s Scribbler SC4000 tablet, and four of TabletKiosk’s ruggedized tablets.
MacNN summarized the four patents, awarded based on applications filed as far back as 2002. The most familiar ones involve the scroll wheel for the iPod and the flexible support arm used on the iMac, but the other two appear to involve sound or video editing on a split screen and speech recognition
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Africa, Deals, Deception, Free/Libre Software, GNU/Linux, GPL, Microsoft, Patents at 5:04 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Response to "Linux/open source is stealing from Microsoft"
A reader told us about South Africa. He highlighted Microsoft's response to Geraldine Fraser-Moleketi. Glyn Moody says more about this tactless response, having seen the same article. It’s right to the point:
So there we have it: Microsoft’s world, there is no such thing as disinterested generosity, no such thing as altruism. Which means, of course, that Richard Stallman, Linus Torvalds and Tim Berners-Lee – to name but a few of those so-called “altruists” – are, in Microsoft’s opinion, nothing but liars or utterly self-deluded….
What a sad, cold, lonely little circle of hell Microsoft inhabits.
You can add lack of ethics and disregard for the law. Watch this comical image of Doug "Elephant in the Room" Mahugh.
I have not got any cards which portray me as a Vice President of IASA Malaysia though. Doug Mahugh of Microsoft has…
“The older tactics which include characteristic open source and “communism” truly backfired for Microsoft, which hopes we will forget.”The cheap shots are probably beside the point, but as Groklaw pointed out when Microsoft snubbed GPLv3 about 9 months ago, it essentially spits in Stallman’s face (PJ was paraphrasing con-sys). This type of arrogance can probably be explained by Microsoft’s belief that free is evil and that GNU/Linux deserves no place in this world. The older tactics which include characteristic open source and “communism” truly backfired for Microsoft, which hopes we will forget. We mustn’t. In case you ever wonder why Microsoft approaches open source companies at the moment, see these diagrams and remind yourselves of Steve Ballmer’s remark from last October.
Microsoft, which attends OSBC (thanks, Matt) continues to present its portfolio of olive branches and defections. Watch what Microsoft is up to with JasperSoft, which uses GPL for portions of its work.
Excel is the focus of a technology interoperability initiative between Microsoft and open-source BI specialist JasperSoft.
[...]
Work between the companies continues Microsoft’s strategy of ensuring that Windows remains the platform of choice for users running open source applications and middleware, so they do not drift into using Linux instead.
This ought to have become common knowledge by now. Microsoft knows that it cannot eliminate open source software or its developers, so it tries hard to eliminate one's core and foundation, primarily GNU, Linux, and the GPLv3. Microsoft is trying hard to ‘steal’ projects from GNU/Linux. █
Microsoft motto: If you can’t destroy something, subvert it to your advantage
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in DRM, Interoperability, Microsoft, Novell, Patents, Protocol, Samsung, Standard at 4:37 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Microsoft’s way or the highway
We recently saw Microsoft redefining "cross-platform", among many other terms. Groklaw just has dug up this old document [PDF] which shows how Microsoft views and defines standards and interoperability. The document dates back to the patent deal with Samsung.
Q: What role do standards play in achieving interoperability?
A: While standards frequently play a role in either creating or enhancing interoperability, they are not the only way to deliver interoperability in the marketplace. Three other key ways include: designing products to offer technical interoperability out of the box with software and hardware from other vendors; directly collaborating with partners to deliver more integrated and interoperable solutions for customers; and sharing technology and related intellectual property to encourage interoperability and enable the creation of translation tools across systems.
[...]
Q: How can standardization be balanced with innovation?
A: While standards are frequently a robust and practical solution for solving interoperability, standardization should be treated as just one of several ways to build interoperability between products. In fact, solely relying upon standards can limit innovation by restricting further development in a given market segment or technology area.
[...]
Q: What are the benefits of market-driven standards and the drawbacks of government-imposed procurement preferences?
A: Voluntary, market-driven standards facilitate market access and growth that promotes global competition and innovation in these dynamic and emerging areas. Market-driven standards often result when people or organizations have the flexibility to collaborate voluntarily on the development and implementation of that standard. However, standards can also be used to impede market access, with governments imposing procurement-based preferences or outright regulations and effectively raising barriers to purchasing and free trade.
Watch the con-standards fragments of the text. This should not surprise you at all. Microsoft is keen on coining terms like “market-driven standards”, which is probably just a positive connotation added to de facto standards, passing liability and responsibility from lock-in-loving vendors to the “market” (think pro-consumer). It’s a PR-targeted illusion. It’s akin to describing DRM as a case of “Rights” or “Enablement” instead of “Restriction” and “Disablement”, which is exactly what DRM achieves (the latter of course). No wonder there is poor interest in Microsoft’s new interoperability forum. [mind our emphasis in red]
When Microsoft laid out its broad commitment to more openness last month, one of the concrete steps it said it would take was the opening of the Interoperability Forum to allow customers around the world to have an open dialogue on how Microsoft products could work better with those of other vendors. That forum is now online, albeit empty and unannounced.
Unsurprisingly, Novell found the same lack of interest in Microsoft's "interoperability". Indifference is all they seem to get. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Deception, Formats, Free/Libre Software, ISO, Microsoft, Novell, Office Suites, Open XML, OpenDocument, Standard at 4:06 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Jeremy Allison: “Go on. Eat a bug. Go on. Go on. Here’s some money. Eat a bug.” (context)
It did not matter if people insisted that Apache by no means supports OOXML [1, 2]. Microsoft had already had a story manufactured and a press release planned for delivery. The story Microsoft needed to pass on is this.
Microsoft has announced that it will – with a European partner – contribute to an open-source project for reading and writing Excel, Word, PowerPoint and Visio files.
The Apache POI API is already used by various open source projects to handle Microsoft Office documents, but work is needed to add Office Open XML support as used by Office 2007 and 2008.
It’s yet another example in a long series of pseudo-grassroots support. Novell too is among those who took money to fake acceptance.
This Apache thing was a ‘plant’ job. Only yesterday in fact, Microsoft even bothered to announce this to the world using a fancy press release with promotional language. It uses a ‘partner’ to do the job.
All in all, what we have here is compliance by force-feeding. When you don’t want OOXML, Microsoft will shove it down your throat and call it a voluntary contribution. Here are Glyn Moody’s remarks on Microsoft’s attempt to avoid the real standard at all costs. He concludes with the truth that Microsoft strives to hide (confusing choice of applications with choice of standards):
Multiple implementations of a single standard are a good thing, because they encourage competition between products that can be swapped in and out easily. This puts users firmly in control, and makes software suppliers responsive to their needs. Multiple standards for a given domain such as document formats are a bad thing, because you cannot move easily between them as a result of high switching costs. They are likely to reduce the pool of potential competitors for each standard, since not every company can support every standard. Less competition encourages lazy programming and lock-in by suppliers who know that users are unlikely to make the huge effort to move to a totally different standard.
Why is Microsoft so allergic that standards that are vendor-neutral? █
“Microsoft looks at new ideas, they don’t evaluate whether the idea will move the industry forward, they ask, ‘how will it help us sell more copies of Windows?’”
–Bill Gates, The Seattle Weekly, (April 30, 1998)
Permalink
Send this to a friend
« Previous Page — « Previous entries « Previous Page · Next Page » Next entries » — Next Page »
Content is available under CC-BY-SA