More Document Format Links; OOXML is Disliked Even by Microsoft Employees, Apparently
Dr. Roy Schestowitz
2007-09-24 12:45:59 UTC
Modified: 2007-09-24 12:50:57 UTC
At this point, it should be very important for Microsoft to have a Novell VP say that OOXML is a "superb standard" because, on the face of it, some of Microsoft's own employees understand that OOXML deserves to be disliked. Watch this:
What does it say about Microsoft and its current OOXML push that our readers -- essentially, the home field for Microsoft in this contest -- are so clearly opposed to the Redmond-sponsored technology?
Be aware that the guy whom Microsoft paid to edit Wikipedia's article on OOXML advised Australia to vote against OOXML. Even Brian Jones, who orchestrated a lot of the OOXML fiasco, has admitted that OOXML isn't ready (or suitable) for standardisation. Surely, corruption which was identified (e.g. [1, [2]) had a lot to do with the final vote on OOXML. The ISO's broken system did not help here. Nothing stands in the face of greed.
In the following new article about the ruling in Europe, it is advised that people should take a lesson and be steered away from Microsoft's proprietary format, of which OOXML is one.
More importantly, people should save document files in a format that can be read by any word processor. It is called rich-text format, or RTF, and it keeps all the attributes (font, margins, indents etc) that most people need.
And do not give in to paying needlessly for software upgrades, particularly Office. The upgrades give you precious little extra for the money and indeed give you grief because you have to learn a whole lot of new tricks. And the stuff you create won't be able to be read by people with older software unless you use RTF.
Yes, this is working copy of KWord 2.0 alpha running on KDE 4 under MS Windows, compiled during KDE-On-Windows meeting in Berlin. I must say local Trolltech's office is great environment for developing.
In case anyone is interested, here is a video extolling the virtues of real standards, with a focus on accessibility.
We still wonder if we should make and actively maintain a shame list (developer/employer) for the people who contaminate Linux the most with slop plagiarism
They've managed to trick some mainstream media into thinking they're "Tech" experts or "Social [Control] Media" gurus; nothing could be further from the truth
There are many Arch derivatives that do not rely on "viral" marketing in MElon's child porn-pushing social control media and are instead relying on real development, not slop
We approach the parts where we explain that the Application to the Court with Garrett's name on it was instead complaining about fair criticism of the combative law firm (irrelevant to any injunctions) as if it was impermissible to explain what it had done - and still does - to my wife and I
