Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

olePigeon · Apr 3, 2008, 03:22 PM

Incase anyone missed it, MS-OOXML got approved as an ISO "standard." However, there are already three countries that are complaining about corruption in the vote, probably more to come. Some of them had over 80% decision for a "No" vote, but their vote was still put down as "Yes."

After Microsoft literally bribed people to get it fast tracked, then rushed the vote, I think they shouldn't 've been allowed to even put it up for vote in the first place. Now it's obvious they bribed country representatives to get the majority vote.

I wonder if they also used Diebold machines to tally the votes?

torsoboy · Apr 3, 2008, 04:38 PM

If it is an open technology, and everyone can use it, and it provides greater flexability than its competitors, then I am all for it. I think you just don't like MS.

olePigeon · Apr 3, 2008, 04:50 PM

Originally Posted by torsoboy

If it is an open technology, and everyone can use it, and it provides greater flexability than its competitors, then I am all for it. I think you just don't like MS.

First, it's not open. The standard references Microsoft-only proprietary units and formats and completely ignores already established ISO standards. That is the exact opposite of how a standard should work.

Secondly, even if the pile of crap that Microsoft is pushing as a standard was even reasonably good, I despise how Microsoft went about to get their format approved.

MacosNerd · Apr 3, 2008, 06:25 PM

All I can say about this is meh. Who cares.

ctt1wbw · Apr 3, 2008, 06:25 PM

Sort of like how IE got to be the "de facto" web browser?

turtle777 · Apr 3, 2008, 06:29 PM

Originally Posted by torsoboy

I think you just don't like MS.

So you don't mind M$ doing monkey business to establish their "standards" again ?

Welcome to 1997 and the browser war.

-t

torsoboy · Apr 3, 2008, 08:40 PM

Originally Posted by turtle777

So you don't mind M$ doing monkey business to establish their "standards" again ?

Welcome to 1997 and the browser war.

-t

lol... still using the old "M$". Welcome to high school again. Or are you still there? If so, I can understand... all that peer pressure to not like Microsoft can get to you.

I generally like the things that Microsoft produces. And they aren't any more into making money than any other business. Bill Gates gives away a LOT of his money every year to charity. We should start calling Steve Jobs "$teve Job$"... the title fits better there than with MS.

You are just sour (for no reason) that Microsoft succeeded.

The long and short of it is that it will provide greater flexibility when people are creating documents and programs than the open office standard would have.

peeb · Apr 3, 2008, 08:47 PM

Not at all - this is about data interoperability. The issue is pressure to force public projects to store their data in 'open formats'. What ms has achieved here is to define open as 'closed'. A win for them, a loss for the rest of us.

torsoboy · Apr 4, 2008, 12:35 AM

Originally Posted by peeb

Not at all - this is about data interoperability. The issue is pressure to force public projects to store their data in 'open formats'. What ms has achieved here is to define open as 'closed'. A win for them, a loss for the rest of us.

I do not believe this. Where is your proof to back this claim up?

ctt1wbw · Apr 4, 2008, 02:55 AM

What's the standard file format on Open Office? And can Open Office read and write this new XML standard?

MacosNerd · Apr 4, 2008, 06:11 AM

Originally Posted by peeb

Not at all - this is about data interoperability. The issue is pressure to force public projects to store their data in 'open formats'. What ms has achieved here is to define open as 'closed'. A win for them, a loss for the rest of us.

So you are saying now that OOXML is an ISO standard, nobody will have any other format to store there data in

turtle777 · Apr 4, 2008, 09:03 AM

Originally Posted by torsoboy

lol... still using the old "M$". Welcome to high school again.

WTF ?

Originally Posted by torsoboy

You are just sour (for no reason) that Microsoft succeeded.

What a load of f***ing bullsh!t.

Originally Posted by torsoboy

The long and short of it is that it will provide greater flexibility when people are creating documents and programs than the open office standard would have.

Under which rock have you been the last 10 years ?

M$ does NOT promote flexibility when it comes to exchange with OTHER systems.

You bet their sh!t is working halfway decently in Windows, but forget exchange of data.
When it's up to them, they ALWAYS try to promote a pseudo-open non-standard. They've done it with IE (bending all HTML rules and conventions), tried it with their Flash and PDF alterntive, effing MBOX format for email etc...

-t

torsoboy · Apr 4, 2008, 09:57 AM

Originally Posted by turtle777

WTF ?

What a load of f***ing bullsh!t.

Under which rock have you been the last 10 years ?
-t

lol.. I guess that answers the high school question.

- - e r i k - - · Apr 4, 2008, 10:04 AM

Abbreviating Microsoft M$ is the Godwin's law of IT. Use it and you lose.

Again...are you 11 years old?

peeb · Apr 4, 2008, 10:06 AM

Originally Posted by MacosNerd

So you are saying now that OOXML is an ISO standard, nobody will have any other format to store there data in

Not at all - I am saying that MS will be able to push OOXML as an 'open format' which will meet legal requirements while not actually providing the benefits of being truly open.

peeb · Apr 4, 2008, 10:19 AM

Originally Posted by torsoboy

I do not believe this. Where is your proof to back this claim up?

You want proof that OOXML includes proprietary elements, or you want proof that laws are in the offing mandating publicly funded projects store information in open formats?

turtle777 · Apr 4, 2008, 10:37 AM

Originally Posted by torsoboy

lol.. I guess that answers the high school question.

Why ?

You outed yourself as a M$ fanboi, and gave no arguments against mine.

I gave plenty of examples of nice "M$ standards" that screwed up interoperability and exchangeability.

Do you have something concrete to say, or are you just bla-bla-ing away ?

-t

turtle777 · Apr 4, 2008, 10:38 AM

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - -

Abbreviating Microsoft M$ is the Godwin's law of IT. Use it and you lose.

Again...are you 11 years old?

Oh, sorry, didn't get that memo.

And no, I'm 5. But still ahead of you.

-t

el chupacabra · Apr 4, 2008, 12:26 PM

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - -

Abbreviating Microsoft M$ is the Godwin's law of IT. Use it and you lose.

Again...are you 11 years old?

and belittling someone by calling them 10-12 is Godwin's law of macnn...

torsoboy · Apr 4, 2008, 04:27 PM

Originally Posted by turtle777

Why ?

You outed yourself as a M$ fanboi, and gave no arguments against mine.

I gave plenty of examples of nice "M$ standards" that screwed up interoperability and exchangeability.
-t

I'm not sure what your deffinition of "fanboi" is, but I do use Microsoft products as much as any other products I suppose. I also use many other companies' products and think they work just fine also. My home computers are running Windows, and my servers have freeBSD (i have more servers than home computers, does that make me a freeBSD fanboi?).

I agree that they tried to expand the possibilities with web browsers... I think back to Netscape and shudder. Competition is good. Extending current "standards" is good also I think.

Other than that, I think they work well with others just as much as the next guy. I worked scrubbing data for a few years moving it from one system to another, and the data we received from Microsoft applications was just as easy to work with as data coming from other systems.

I haven't seen any links in this thread, so I don't think anyone can be claiming to have provided any concrete examples at all either way.

Anyway, OOXML was put in as the standard. Life goes on. Even for the Microsoft haters out there.

Originally Posted by el chupacabra

and belittling someone by calling them 10-12 is Godwin's law of macnn...

How do you know he is not 10-12? I would have guess 15-17 by his responses, but maybe 10-12 is closer.

peeb · Apr 4, 2008, 04:30 PM

Originally Posted by torsoboy

I worked scrubbing data for a few years moving it from one system to another, and the data we received from Microsoft applications was just as easy to work with as data coming from other systems.

Even where the data formats were secret and proprietary? I'm afraid that is not the experience of many of us who have had to deal with undocumented file formats.

turtle777 · Apr 4, 2008, 05:49 PM

Originally Posted by torsoboy

How do you know he is not 10-12? I would have guess 15-17 by his responses, but maybe 10-12 is closer.

Doesn't matter what you think, since your logical capacity doesn't seem to be too highly developed.

Yes, I'm t10, and I registered at MacNN when I was 3, and have been posting ever since. Beat that.

-t

Hugi · Apr 5, 2008, 07:54 PM

This is rather sad. I work for the government, and part of government policy is that public documents should be shared and stored in "open formats" (meaning REAL open formats like text, pdf, csv etc. etc.)

But this approval of OOXML basically means that we're stuck with Word and Excel documents forever. Because now they're "open standards". Huzzah.

voodoo · Apr 6, 2008, 02:53 AM

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - -

Abbreviating Microsoft M$ is the Godwin's law of IT. Use it and you lose.

Again...are you 11 years old?

Your posts are the Godwin's law of threads. Use it and lose

M$ will always be M$ because no one confuses it with anything else. 'MS' could be many things depending on the situation, M$ is only Microsoft.

analogika · Apr 6, 2008, 07:41 AM

Originally Posted by MacosNerd

So you are saying now that OOXML is an ISO standard, nobody will have any other format to store there data in

Roll your eyes all you want - I'm afraid this means that customers will still HAVE to buy Microsoft Office despite really, really not wanting to (and I get this a lot) for decades to come if interoperability is vital to them.

analogika · Apr 6, 2008, 07:42 AM

Originally Posted by voodoo

Your posts are the Godwin's law of threads. Use it and lose

M$ will always be M$ because no one confuses it with anything else. 'MS' could be many things depending on the situation, M$ is only Microsoft.

Tell us what you think "MS" could have meant in this particular thread, depending on this particular situation?

OwlBoy · Apr 6, 2008, 11:11 AM

This does suck, despite all the comments to the contrary. The only reason MS would push their own format so hard in the ISO is to have control. And if the format is truly totally open, it would be hard to control, right?

-Owl

turtle777 · Apr 6, 2008, 11:33 AM

Come on, you guys.

Does ANYONE here seriously believe that M$ suddenly changed their mind, become all cooperative and open, bring a high-quality open standard to the market out of THE GOODNESS OF THEIR HEARTS ?

Of course this has to do with control, and you bet that M$ will tighten control down the road. There will be conflicts with the development of this pseudo standard, and there will be most likely lawsuits going on because M$ is not going to keep it as open as they promised.

Show me ONE (just one) piece of evidence that M$ has fundamentally changed in their approach to business and cornering the market.

-t

voodoo · Apr 6, 2008, 12:13 PM

Originally Posted by analogika

Tell us what you think "MS" could have meant in this particular thread, depending on this particular situation?

Ah I now understand the first part of your name.

analogika · Apr 6, 2008, 01:05 PM

"analog"?

It's really funny:
Every time I point out that people are being idiots on this forum, the wonderfully cunning comeback is a brainy anal-ysis of my username. *)

You all so smaht.

I'm not surprised that puerile bullshit like "M$" strikes you as apt and witty.

*) The last time it happened was when I pointed out to RAILhead that posting images of underage girls in bikinis with a sexual comment might be a little...off. First he lied and claimed that they weren't underage. When I showed that he was lying, he called me "anal". If those kids were mine, I'd be showing him "anal", alright, the stupid ****.

paul w · Apr 6, 2008, 02:47 PM

voodoo's insulting internet tough guy tone has been wearing on me for some time now.

I think there's a point to be made that if you want to be taken seriously, you don't result to petty namecalling.

- - e r i k - - · Apr 6, 2008, 05:42 PM

You might also appreciate this then:

turtle777 · Apr 6, 2008, 05:51 PM

Ok, so the whole M$ vs. MS debate aside, I still haven't gotten any good arguments why we suddenly could / should trust Microsoft.

Their past motive in establishing their own "standards" was all about control and shutting out competition.

WHAT has changed since then ? I just don't see it...

-t

analogika · Apr 6, 2008, 05:55 PM

I'm not sure about shutting competition out in this case, but the apparent failure of Vista is making them seem uncharacteristically vulnerable of late. They want to make DAMN SURE that their main cash cow - the Office suite - will not lapse into irrelevance for a LONG time. As long as they define the standard, their product remains relevant and the obvious choice.