On CNET: Tech gifts for every budget
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 19 of 46:
Next »
« Previous
Standards More Important than MS' Need to "Improve Software"
Or do you expect that Microsoft will be required to await outside approval before improving the software?

I absolutely expect that MS be required to wait, not for outside "approval" but for the standards bodies to approve proposed changes to international standards. If MS has such mega-brilliant ideas then they can submit those ideas to ISO/IEC for approval. (MS has proven that they can hijack/manipulate the ISO adoption process; no need to worry that MS will somehow fail to manipulate the maintenance process.)

Anton, the whole point of having standards is that everyone gets on the same page. If MS wants to play nice with the world computing community, including the 95%+ office suite market share that they have, then doing the DIS29500 ramrod and subsequently abandoning that standard in the name of "improving the software" would just be plain silly. The best way to handle the situation where there's a big need to improve the software (and thus improve/change the standard) would be to submit proposed standard changes to SC34. If OOXML is so great then it should be extensible in ways ODF is not and should be "improveable" for lack of a better term. Improving software and improving standards should in no way be mutually exclusive processes. One may occur at a different pace than the other, but that certainly won't justify abandoning a standard in the name if improved software, IMHO. After saying all that, there is this question: will MS even come up with realistic software improvements to MS Office that require it to abandon 29500 (or make proprietary sub-sections thereof)? If so then that would prove what most OSSers believe: MS is dishonest and does not have its users' needs at heart.

Standards are designed to prevent vendor lock-in. MS can prove by its behavior that it believes MS Office has earned its market share by being the best available office suite, not because of shenanigans or monopolism that promote vendor lock-in.

Bottom line: you don't need to abandon good standards in order to improve software. If MS abandons IS29500 then that tells you all you need to know about the quality of OOXML as an international standard.

-MC
Posted by: Mercutio_Viz   Posted on: 04/21/08 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use
Reply to Story Reply to Message

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

Change the format and not the software...  Anton Philidor | 04/21/08
Which was...  zkiwi | 04/21/08
Make the ISO standard conform to Microsoft's code base you mean?  fr0thy2 | 04/21/08
Informative  Anton Philidor | 04/21/08
So...  zkiwi | 04/21/08
More likely...  bportlock | 04/21/08
Well...  zkiwi | 04/21/08
Observing the forms.  Anton Philidor | 04/21/08
Michael? Don't you mean...  zkiwi | 04/21/08
I like the way you imply that ...  fr0thy2 | 04/21/08
If you mean Vista...  Anton Philidor | 04/21/08
"Having found what the public wants"  fr0thy2 | 04/21/08
Congruent interests  Anton Philidor | 04/21/08
You forgot to mention...  zkiwi | 04/21/08
LOL! Classic cart before the horse:  OButterball | 04/21/08
Setting rules  Anton Philidor | 04/21/08
What?!?  OButterball | 04/21/08
When to obtain designation as a standard.  Anton Philidor | 04/21/08
Standards More Important than MS' Need to "Improve Software"  Mercutio_Viz | 04/21/08
Speculation  Anton Philidor | 04/21/08
I'll have to hand it to you  Ole Man | 04/21/08
Didn't we know that already?  Michael Kelly | 04/21/08
Yes Microsoft said this months ago  Johnny Vegas | 04/21/08
Spot on.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 04/21/08
Especially as their code base is as poor as their "standards"  fr0thy2 | 04/21/08
Show us your proof  No_Ax_to_Grind | 04/21/08
Well...  zkiwi | 04/21/08
I'll answer your question....  bportlock | 04/21/08
Whoa, hang on...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 04/21/08
Well, where is your reply?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 04/21/08
Some of us work for a living, Axhead.  OButterball | 04/21/08
NWOR (nt)  No_Ax_to_Grind | 04/21/08
Apparently some people have lives outside of ZDNet forums.  B.O.F.H. | 04/21/08
Apparently not you.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 04/21/08
Right. So when the ISO says "make this change"  GuidingLight | 04/21/08
One thing...  zkiwi | 04/21/08
ISO doesn't tell anyone to do anything  Ole Man | 04/21/08
software vs. format  shis-ka-bob | 04/21/08
So, where's the reference implementation?  zkiwi | 04/21/08
as the bugs haven't been fixed in the specification  stevey_d | 04/21/08
*ssshhh*  zkiwi | 04/21/08
Your last sentence says it all  Ole Man | 04/21/08
If no one uses MS-OOXML, does it exist?  zaine_ridling | 04/22/08
OOXML is real get used to it.  kyron.gustafson@... | 04/22/08
Except...  zkiwi | 04/23/08
One small forgotten thing...  Mitch 74 | 04/22/08

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads