| 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 |
 |
Red Hat Summit panel: Who 'won' OOXML battle? | |
|
||
| Time: 08:00 EST/13:00 GMT | News Source: InfoWorld | Posted By: Kenneth van Surksum | ||
|
ODF (Open Document Format) has benefited from the two-year battle over the ratification of Microsoft's rival OOXML (Open Office XML) standard, which is native to its Office 2007 suite, Microsoft's national technology officer said Thursday during a panel discussion at the Red Hat Summit in Boston. "ODF has clearly won," said Stuart McKee, referring to Microsoft's recent announcement that it would begin natively supporting ODF in Office next year and join the technical committee overseeing the next version of the format. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 154 Last | Next |
The time now is
9:03:06 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 6/23/2008 2:08:43 PM |
|
As much as I'd like to revel in this (where's your messiah now, parkkker?), I don't believe it for a second. MS, despite all its empty words about interoperability, does NOT want a level playing field and will work to maintain the status quo: vendor lockin. MS saying something like "ODF wins" means there is something going on behind the scenes that we need to be distracted from noticing. Could this be phase 1 of Embrace, Extend, Extinguish? They will support ODF in Office 2007 SP2. They have joined the committee that will guide ODF's ongoing development. Perhaps in a year or two, MS will introduce a patent-encumbered proprietary extension to their Office ODF implementation that will be required by anyone that wants to read Office-generated ODF documents. On that day, MSODF will be born.
Time will tell. |
| #2 By 23275 (68.186.182.236) at 6/23/2008 5:56:04 PM |
|
For Software as a Service to work Integrated Storage has to work. For IS to work as part of a SaaS strategy it has to support "ALL" open standards well.
Supporting ODF is nothing more than that and sync'ing indexes isn't nearly enough of a step - it's a good first step, or two, but not where things need to be. Microsoft will emerge as the largest host of services the world has ever seen - where both data and calculations will be stored and executed where they make sense for people and businesses. Great developers are already building software for the channel that will be able to leverage this - and not view Microsoft as a competitor. In the future, devs will move data and calculations into and out of many different places and relevant "finalized, or finished" information products will follow users from place to place and device to device. One cannot think small when reading this. One cannot think market - one has to be thinkng about what that market is doing and how it will do it and how it will produce and consume information products. In very simple terms, Microsoft wants all people in their cloud. |
| #3 By 28801 (65.90.202.10) at 6/24/2008 8:09:57 AM |
|
#1: " Embrace, Extend, Extinguish"
What? Open source goons always use this as a rallying cry. When has this ever worked? Why are you so worried about it? |
| #4 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 6/24/2008 9:49:03 AM |
|
#3: I hate to break the news to you, but MS basically came up with it themselves...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish |
| #5 By 28801 (65.90.202.10) at 6/24/2008 10:55:45 AM |
|
#4: I hate to break the news to you but the origin of the statement has nothing to do with my post. My point is, it has seldom if ever worked as a way to snuff out competition, yet the goons continue to rally around it.
Failed tactics usually don't rally people to a cause. What if the Alamo wasn't overrun by Santa Ana? This post was edited by rxcall on Tuesday, June 24, 2008 at 11:03. |
| #6 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 6/24/2008 11:59:32 AM |
| #5: It worked against Netscape, and it worked for their Kerberos implementation. There must be something to it or they would be idiots to keep doing it. Feel free to argue either side. |
| #7 By 28801 (65.90.202.10) at 6/24/2008 12:45:19 PM |
|
Netscape? How did the triple e methodology apply to Netscape? Now if you were to say that Netscape was killed by Microsoft's desktop dominance and the fact the IE was free... that I would buy into.
So basically, for the last decade. you've given me 1 esoteric example. |
| #8 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 6/24/2008 1:50:55 PM |
|
#7: They killed Netscape with a combination of bundling and ActiveX. ActiveX was the Extend part, where MS extended HTML using proprietary code. As soon as MS could convince developers to write their websites using ActiveX controls, it was game over for Netscape. And here we are a decade later still suffering from the ramifications of a proprietary web MS tried to create.
The fact that MS hasn't been very successful with EEE doesn't mean for even a second that you can disregard the strategy. MS has nothing to lose by employing it, and it does sometimes work. |
| #9 By 28801 (65.90.202.10) at 6/24/2008 2:19:31 PM |
|
I'm not suffering one bit, and I doubt seriously if most of the open source goons are either.
This quote from 1997 "Eckart Walther, senior product manager at Netscape says that support for ActiveX is a priority for Netscape. "We will do right by our customers," Netscape was still a major player in the browser market at this time, if not THE major player. http://windowsitpro.com/article/articleid/16816/activex-to-be-supported-by-unix-macintosh-and-netscape.html I maintain that activex had very little to do with the Netscape demise, it was more bundling with windows and cost than anything else. |
| #10 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 6/24/2008 2:58:51 PM |
| #9: Funny you should mention it, but just today I was referred to a site that gave me the old "IE Only Thanks" message. I didn't go any further as I don't need to deal with any site that forces me to use IE. |
| #11 By 28801 (65.90.202.10) at 6/24/2008 3:14:25 PM |
| how old was the site? probably written before the turn of the century. |
| #12 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 6/24/2008 3:49:15 PM |
| www.beautifulpeople.net (don't ask). You can still enter the site with a big scary warning about how it may not work. |
| #13 By 92283 (70.66.69.111) at 6/24/2008 10:21:42 PM |
|
Netscape was the creator of propriatary code.
From the Embrace/Extend Wikipedia article. "During the browser wars, other companies besides Microsoft introduced proprietary, non-standards-compliant extensions. For example, in 1995, Netscape implemented the "font" tag, among other HTML extensions, without seeking review from a standards body." Netscape the creator of free web browsers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netscape_Navigator "Netscape announced in its first press release (October 13, 1994) that it would make Navigator freely available to all non-commercial users" Netscape created the rules. Microsoft beat hem at their own game. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 154 Last | Next |
The time now is
9:03:06 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
