Save up to $300/year on phone bills
- Related Stories
-
Mass. officials criticize OpenDocument decision
November 1, 2005 -
Google throws bodies at OpenOffice
October 31, 2005 -
Massachusetts moves ahead sans Microsoft
September 23, 2005
(continued from previous page)
Even vendors that do not sell Office-style productivity applications have an interest in OpenDocument, RedMonk's O'Grady said.
An e-mail company, for example, could bake support for the format into its software and allow a user to embed a fully formatted document within a message without having to launch a separate application, he said. Another possibility is for a wiki server to use XML to programmatically extract data from OpenDocument-formatted documents.
Government interest
Because OpenDocument-based products are not widely used, the financial incentive for corporate or governmental customers is still not thoroughly tested, analysts and industry executives said.
NASCIO's Gallt said that state governments are looking at whether Massachusetts can make the case that adopting OpenDocument will provide a compelling return on investment.
Massachusetts state officials argued the move will save millions of dollars and that an "open" format developed through a multiparty standards organization ensures the state
That policy, however, is being
Gallt said that the other states' agencies exploring OpenDocument are doing so in a far more scaled-down and less visible way than Massachusetts.
"It's still, in a lot of ways, behind-the-scenes discussions and evaluations at this point, because it is such an emotional and volatile topic, as Massachusetts has found," he said.
Some foreign governments are looking seriously at OpenDocument, IBM's Sutor said. "Particularly in Europe, to a lot of folks, it seems like a fairly obvious direction," he said.
The French state tax agency said Wednesday it intends to
Those moves toward adoption suggest that the time is right for Microsoft's rivals to take on the software giant and its dominance in desktop products. The ODF Summit's technical and marketing initiatives could make OpenDocument-based products more viable replacements.
"We seem to have reached some important point where people feel this is a must-win battle," said Sutor. "I think this is critically important."
Ingrid Marson of
See more CNET content tagged:
OpenDocument Format,
Stephen O'Grady,
Office 12,
Microsoft Office,
vendor
Imagine buying a house where the contractor used custom screws that he or she patented, and if you wanted to removed any of them, you had to buy a special screwdriver that only he/she sold, for an exhorbitant amount of money. Would you want that contractor building your house?
How Big Blue Blew It, Though Redmond Helped: http://www.linuxandmain.com/features/os2retro.html
when we were all looking forward "To Boldly Go . . . into a VisualAge for Java with our Warp cylinders firing on all engines. Perhaps it is pay back time. Are you getting scared of the Chi.... Dragons at nights or what, poor LOU, he was perhaps not the "techie" he should have been to understand what Redmond was up to at the time; anyway, MS$ looks like a good investment in the aeronautical and space industries as the "Western Hemispheric Golden Eagles" will be there to protect "you" and WARP you out of danger since you are apparently beginning to have nightmares about the "Dragons" which now have a significant amount of control over IBM's ThinkPad brands. LOL!
I don't find validity in the argument that we should all just learn to live with Microsoft Office because of it's 90% market saturation. I don't like Microsoft Office and I never have. I don't much care for OpenOffice either. I use WordPerfect Office and I like it over any of those others. That is a personal preference. Now WordPerfect uses it's own proprietary format (based on SGML and DocBook I believe), but at least it hasn't changed since version 6.x.
Another thing to keep in mind is that other 10% of the market that doesn't use Microsoft Office may well be 1,000,000+ people. I don't believe any company should be force to use the OpenDoc format, but I do think that every company that makes an office suite should be apart of the OASIS group (of course by choice).
My thinking here is you have a chance to create a format that is open and free and would allow for one document standard that's backwards compatable and forward thinking. It's not perfect, but nothing is. It is one step closer to a Utopia for all computer users. Besides shouldn't a program be defined by it's productivity and robustness and not by it's document format.
I just think we have a chance to create a truly usable format for the interchange of documents that would allow seamless (albeit not perfect) interchange. I think it also allows people to use the software that suites them best and not make buying decisions base on a format.
I personally use microsoft office everyday at work and at home, but I know that if I want to keep a document around for a long time or if I know I need to share it with a diverse group of people, I chage things to a text file or a csv. ANYONE can read these formats which makes them fantastic for sharing information. What openDocument provides is the next evolution in these formats, by providing advanced funcationality to a format that again, ANYONE can read and use.
But I think putting the two thoughts so close together, and putting open source so close to the top, does a disservice by feeding into people's misconceptions that adopting OpenDocument might mean being forced to adopt open source.
As the article went on to say, Corel Corp. was represented. They intend to support OpenDocument in a completely closed-source product, WordPerfect.
Discussing open formats for what they are may not be as attention-grabbing as discussing it in the context of other trends. But it would certainly be more informative.
It would be a difference similar to the Internet vs proprietry Bulletin Boards.
Remember the old AOL, Compuserve, Prodigy, or MSN networks. Well they eventually abandoned their proprietry protocols for the TCPIP protocols that we call the Internet. When you look at the measure of innovation that these old BBS networks had compared to an open platform like the Web, and then one may understand how an open document standard can transform document innovation. It's really simple to understand. An open standard or platform leads to much greater innovation due to the variety and sheer amount of people working with it.
How can you argue with that. It's simple mathematics.
We need evolvable standards for email messages, instant messages, blog entries, etc. Then the Internet experience will really get interesting.
In addition the OpenDocument format was largely developed by Sun or if you like OpenOffice.org. The chair and secretary of the OASIS organisation which developed OpenDoc work for Sun and are also members of OpenOffice.org
It will open the door to a document sharing while not having to worry about the readability at the recipients side.
This can not have anything to do with a move against MicroSoft, but have you noticed the response of MicroSoft?! It is exactly that sort of attitude that is the problem. Let there be an open standard for sure!
And then; have you noticed how nice and compact an OpenDocument is? Take a MsWord Document, convert it to OpenDocument and see the difference!
Anyway, the converiance of having a shared standard, a document that you are sure to be able to open on all applications should be welcomed by all and is long overdue.
going bust in 5 years - mark my words
http://www.analogstereo.com/cassette_deck_nakamichi_1000.htm
Abiword and KOffice also support OpenDocument
- ODF, etc.
-
by corredorlobo
January 6, 2006 6:16 PM PST
- While I agree that Microsoft has somewhat of a monopoly on alot of things and costs are somewhat high, I also TRY to look at the fact that if were not for the agressiveness of Bill Gates we would not, in all likelyhood sitting her being able to write these words as IBM and Aplle were really tryoing to maintain corporate and weathy clients. Remember that Microsoft brought PC to the mainstream. And why should Microsoft share codes with everyone else, but those peole do not need to share codecs with Microsoft????????
-
Reply to this comment
-
See all 36 Comments >>