| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Strong Global Support for Open XML as It Enters Final Phase of ISO Standards Process | |
|
||
| Time: 06:50 EST/11:50 GMT | News Source: Microsoft Press Release | Posted By: Jonathan Tigner | ||
|
Today the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) released the results of the preliminary ballot to participating National Body members for the ISO/IEC DIS 29500 (Ecma 376 Office Open XML file formats) ratification process. The results show that 51 ISO members, representing 74 percent of all qualified votes, stated their support for ratification of Open XML. Along with their votes, the National Bodies also provided invaluable technical comments designed to improve the specification. Many of the remaining ISO members stated that they will support Open XML after their comments are addressed during the final phase of the process, which is expected to close in March 2008. With at least 87 countries taking part in some way, the Open XML review represents an unprecedented level of participation in the standardization of a document format. Fifty-one ISO members voicing support at this preliminary stage of the process compares favorably with the 32 ISO members supporting Open Document Format (ODF) 1.0 at the end of its process and the 15 ISO members supporting PDF/A-1 at the end of its process. This widespread participation and support is consistent with the rapid adoption of the Ecma Office Open XML file formats across multiple platforms and products from a wide range of IT vendors (including Apple, Novell, Corel, Sun, Microsoft, Java developers and Linux distributors), creating real value for IT users around the globe. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 319 Last | Next |
The time now is
1:45:29 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 12071 (124.170.56.66) at 9/4/2007 9:38:25 AM |
|
Ahh yes, yet another wonderful day with Microsoft buying up votes... If only they put all that energy into their standard then perhaps, just maybe, it wouldn't be the joke that it is.
http://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/article.php?story=20070903110826712 |
| #2 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 9/4/2007 12:50:03 PM |
|
Groklaw has a pretty good take on it:
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070904082606181 |
| #3 By 13030 (198.22.121.110) at 9/4/2007 2:18:13 PM |
|
Here's a technical examination showing some of OOXML's deficiencies and intentional design defects. It's a long read, but well worth it.
"Microsoft Office XML formats? Defective by design" http://www.codeproject.com/useritems/ooxml_is_defective.asp I'd be curious to read how the Microsoft zealots would spin this. |
| #4 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 9/4/2007 2:44:22 PM |
| #3: The sound of crickets is deafening. However, this is far from over. MS will likely throw even more bribe money around to the O countries that will hold the meeting in March on progress of the complaints. There is no way that MS can properly address the 10,000+ comments in such a short time, and several of them are total deal-breakers like hooks to proprietary technology not covered by the patent covenant and XML representations without any documentation. I still can't believe it went this far. ISO needs to change its rules to account for those applicants who don't play fair and try to subvert the process. |
| #5 By 13030 (198.22.121.110) at 9/4/2007 3:05:09 PM |
| #4, It's these kind of actions by Microsoft that really frustrate me. I don't doubt that the zealots will steer well clear of this as any reasonable, unbiased developer would. |
| #6 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 9/4/2007 3:45:48 PM |
| #5: What is the world coming to when you can't even count on Parkkker to blame the "No" vote on penguin-loving, cancerous Communists? Another interesting point is how, with the exception of the US (of course) almost every developed nation voted no, and the majority of Yes votes came from struggling Eastern European countries and banana republics. |
| #7 By 3653 (65.80.181.153) at 9/4/2007 3:54:47 PM |
| if this mattered any less to me, i'd be asleep right now |
| #8 By 13030 (198.22.121.110) at 9/4/2007 4:14:40 PM |
| #7, That's certainly understandable, since this is a technical issue. |
| #9 By 15406 (99.224.103.81) at 9/4/2007 6:43:43 PM |
|
#8: LOL! I almost fell off my chair with that one.
#7: SNAP! |
| #10 By 37047 (74.101.157.125) at 9/4/2007 9:20:10 PM |
| #8: That has to be the best comeback of the entire day! |
| #11 By 37047 (74.101.157.125) at 9/4/2007 9:31:09 PM |
|
#6: I can understand why folks like mooresa56 and NotParker, and lketchum too, have little to no understanding or interest in this issue. They are on the system integration and system administration side of things. As ch pointed out, this is a technical issue, so they would not have the technical background required to even care about the issue, never mind caring about the implications of it, or what it means for the long term storage and retrieval of information.
On the other hand, I couldn't care less what security policies AD allows or doesn't allow, or how easy it is to set up an AD domain in a large enterprise, since I am a programmer, and not a system administrator, so I have no need to care about such mundane details, since I do not write anything that has to interact with an AD domain controller directly. Different sides of the IT industry have different priorities, and we here at ActiveWin sometimes forget that not everyone shares out own perspective on various issues. This is also why sometimes I don't really care why the NotParkers of the forum disagree with me, or even that they do. They are on the diametrically opposite side of the IT spectrum to me, so they have a priority list that is meaningless to me, for the most part, just as my priority list is meaningless to them. That is all I have to say for the moment about that. I now return you to your regularly scheduled name calling and finger pointing. |
| #12 By 23275 (24.179.4.158) at 9/4/2007 11:02:39 PM |
|
#11, Easy to understand...
The "Save as..." options in Office include essentially three types: 1) Office 97-2003 2) Office 2007/XPS and 3) .PDF. All three are available for Office 2007 users and all may be controlled via policy. So as a matter of integration and administration, what one uses depends largely on what the customers trading partners, customers and vendors use - and that is by and large Office 97-2003, which is what most companies set as defaults; however, internally they are using XPS and are coming to prefer it. Because Office is so widely used and, because Office 2007 is so flexible [saving to any format that is popular], the issue in reality is as irrelevant as Mooresa56 opines. Office, especially Office 2007 are so popular, because they are easy to use [easier than ever], very powerful, familiar, used by nearly all businesses people trade with and as importantly, they integrate so well with the rest of the platform and Windows ecosystem. For our customers that means deep integration with SharePoint technologies, the Vista desktop, Exchange, SQL Server Reporting Services [custom controls and web parts], and custom .NET apps that are themselves well integrated to line of business applications, like CRM, ERP's, project management and so much else [hopefully you all are getting the idea that it is a lot more about how Office is used than just Office on its own]. Even the new site we're building - there is a "Copy from Word and Excel" option - a click delivers the formatted contents to the new posting - a preview/save later and the admin is done and has delivered a very nice looking page. Make no mistake... an open, extensible file type from Microsoft will be adopted and it will interface with other suites and cloud based productivity tools/suites from other vendors. Be equally certain that it will still be better, more complete and integrate better than the others - with the entire line of MS software and servers. Until one really leverages the entire MS platform what I am saying is harder to see; however, those that have are clearly more agile and more profitable - they get more done in less time with fewer people and what they produce is more powerful and looks better. So, speaking for some, we do have an interest, but it is balanced by a lot more feet on the street reality and therefore I expect that the emphasis we have is all about just getting work done, rather than a game of intellectual ping-pong with abstract ideas [sorry if I have spoken for anyone out of turn]. Finally, as I said, it is all irrelevant as the format is inevitable. |
| #13 By 8556 (12.210.39.82) at 9/5/2007 12:30:36 AM |
| Lloyd: I would agree except that saving in an oder format in Office 2007, specifically Excel, too often changes the look of the document, expecially macro laden highly formated documents, like the invoice form I've used for ten years. Even OpenOffice keeps the format correct and the form fully functional. Office 2007 changes font sizes and locks text boxes so they are no longer true text boxes. Saving in Office 2003 should save in Office 2003 format, not a bizarro world version of it. |
| #14 By 23275 (24.179.4.158) at 9/5/2007 3:13:00 AM |
|
#13, There is a known incompatibility, but it does depend upon how and when the document was originated. This happens when a document was originated in Office 2002/XP and in some cases, 2003 and then opened and saved in 2007's native format and then re-opened in 2007 and saved back as 97-2003 format. The transition hides the text boxes in this case.
It can be avoided if policies are used to set O2K7's defaults to 97-2003 format from the outset - which underscores frankly, the need for OOXML if for no other reason than to unify the very large installed base of Office versions 97 to present. Doing the reverse makes much less sense - ODF, for example, which while it exists as an ISO - one does have to ask, that despite that status, what does it really mean? How many businesses actually use it? How many individuals as a comparison to those who use Office? I do suspect that OOXML will become an ISO and O2K7's present format will emerge as the standard for all Office versions. It will of course create something of a mess - part of the argument and changes requested - where OOXML must solve the types of challenges you note - before it can be embraced. I assess these are solvable challenges. And we all must recall, and ask, was MS Office always so dominant? No. It became so, because people used it so much more than others. MS Office became a standard unto itself, because people bought it and they bought it over other suites for a great many reasons beyond its native feature set. |
| #15 By 13030 (198.22.121.110) at 9/5/2007 10:33:15 AM |
|
#12: So, speaking for some, we do have an interest, but it is balanced by a lot more feet on the street reality and therefore I expect that the emphasis we have is all about just getting work done, rather than a game of intellectual ping-pong with abstract ideas [sorry if I have spoken for anyone out of turn].
This is one way of saying "we glue blocks together; we don't build the blocks". This is hardly "intellectual ping-pong with abstract ideas". The interest shown by the feds, several states, the European Union, other companies, and the members of the standards committees seems to indicate that a a truly open XML document standard is desired. Microsoft has proposed a solution that basically requires the use of their APIs to successfully manipulate the XML documents without mangling or corrupting them. I see the con Microsoft is attempting to pull off and there is no technical justification for their design other than to co-opt the market and maintain the Office dependency. Office is a superb product and there is no reason for these types of shenanigans. Finally, as I said, it is all irrelevant as the format is inevitable. Just because something may be inevitable does not make it superior. Regardless, I would expect this proposal to evolve quite a bit before it is finally adopted and, by then, it will be much more palatable for all--not just Microsoft. And we all must recall, and ask, was MS Office always so dominant? No. It became so, because people used it so much more than others. MS Office became a standard unto itself, because people bought it and they bought it over other suites for a great many reasons beyond its native feature set. I would say Office became dominant due to Windows just as much as it's features and usability. Back in the DOS days, Word Perfect, Lotus 123, and dBASE were the reigning products. Microsoft was able to leverage, very smartly too, the office applications and Windows together. |
| #16 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 9/5/2007 10:59:52 AM |
|
#14: I do suspect that OOXML will become an ISO and O2K7's present format will emerge as the standard for all Office versions. It will of course create something of a mess - part of the argument and changes requested - where OOXML must solve the types of challenges you note - before it can be embraced. I assess these are solvable challenges.
Wow, overnight you've gone from knowing nothing of the situation to assessing that MS can fix the myriad negative comments regarding OOXML. Of course, MS will NOT do what is required as that would defeat the entire purpose -- to maintain the Office monopoly. They will not remove the proprietary hooks, and they will not document the undocumented representations. As it stands now, even Office 2007 is not compliant with OOXML. Yesterday an MS product mgr (IIRC) said that they would not guarantee that they would remain in compliance with ECMA's spec for MSXML, essentially saying that they reserve the right to embrace & extend their own supposed "standard" if it suited them to do so. This, along with the vote stuffing, shows that MS has no respect or regard for international standards or the process itself. It is really quite shameless and disgusting. There is too much at stake here for MS to have control over open document formats. They can't even read their own older formats properly. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 319 Last | Next |
The time now is
1:45:29 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
