OOXML is a Bad Thing
Don't let Microsoft razzle-dazzle you. OOXML — the 'new' Microsoft Office format they are trying to push throught — is only good for Microsoft. Let me make that clear:
The only entity that is bound to win with OOXML is Microsoft. The reason is, there is already a office file format that is certified by ISO called ODF (Open Document Format). It is presently supported by OpenOffice.org, KOffice, and many other suites.
Why is ODF not supported in Microsoft Office? It's not because of technical limitation. Office supports file formats that are technically inferior to ODF like RTF and HTML.
Product and business competition is good for the customer. What would the world be like if you could not choose your car manufacturer (Ford, Honda, BMW, etc), your computer manifacturer (Dell, HP, Levono) or even your gas station? First of all, everybody would be riding the same car painted any colour as long as it's black. You could buy any computer that you want as long as it's a Dell. How little do you think Honda would charge for the Civic if it was the only compact available?
Microsoft has had an illegal monopoly in the world of operating system, office suite and web browser. In the past ten years, the changes that we have seen to their product has been minimal. However, as soon as the competition heated up, notice how much work Microsoft suddenly places in their product:
These innovations on either side were born out of free competition.
However, competing standards are bad, especially for customers.
Not good for Customers
Imagine a world where there are two CD formats. Two DVD format. Two gasoline types. How would the customer benefit from that? Well, the customer would have to make darn sure that they buy CDs that work with their CD players. Otherwise, they have spend money on a CD that cannot be used.
And what if that said customer purchased another CD player that is incompatible with the first. They can kiss their whole CD collection goodbye, since it won't play in the new player.
Sounds unlikely? It happened very recently where Sony & Microsoft (amongst many other companies) developed two standards: Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD. Some customers spend thousands of dollars equipping themselves with HD-DVD, only to watch their market collapse, and their investment dissappear. Yes, they can still watch the movies their purchased, but no new movies will be released in HD-DVD.
Do you want the same thing to happen with your documents? Microsoft have changed the Office file format numerous time, and newer versions of Microsoft Office are sometimes unable to open files created in older version.
Who benefits here? The customer, or Microsoft. Hint: Who gets the money at the end of the day?
Not good for business
It may be a good news for developers looking for a job because now there are TWO file format to support. But what about the cost of doing business? Some clients or supplier may want to work with ODF. Others with OOXML. That pretty much doubles the development cost and time.
Of course, a company could alienate customers and suppliers by requesting a single format, but again, I don't think this is a sound solution.
There exists converters for one file format to another, but none are perfect. None can be perfect. Here's a simple experiment for you: Convert an MP3 to a WMA back to an MP3. What happens to the sound quality? It degrades. The same thing happens when we are converting from one office file format to another.
Not good for developers
I hate writing the same code twice. I hate solving the same problem twice. This is exactly what we are heading for.
I was quite excited when XML can to be. Before XML, I had to write so many file parser because everybody and their dog created a custom file format that had to be manually parsed. Now, thanks to XML and the DOM API (Document Object Model Application Programming Interface) to work with XML. I haven't wrote a single line of code to manually parse an XML document. Yay!
As a developer, I don't want to go back to the 'information stone age' by having to support multiple, incompatible standards. Thank you Microsoft for making my just so much more challenging. If Microsoft truly cared for us, ODF would have been supported in Office 2007.
So why is Microsoft pushing their format thought? The answer is simple: Governments and organizations are starting to standardize on ODF because it's an open ISO standard. Microsoft refuses to support ODF because that will mean that users can now choose between Microsoft Office, OpenOffice, StarOffice, KOffice, Corel WordPerfect Office, etc. You get the point. Microsoft does not want to give you choice, they want to remove choice. God forbid you should spend your money elsewhere!
OOXML is meant to work with Microsoft Office and no other office suite on the market. It's a bloated, complex format that is laded with legacy. Working groups world wide have made 3,500 comments and raised a number of technical issues found in the 6,000+ pages of specifications provided by Microsoft. Think about it: 6,000+ pages. That's not for the weak of heart. On the other hand, ODF has 700+.
On March 29th, ISO will announce whether or not OOXML becomes a dual(ing) standard with ODF. This choice is made based on votes made by technical groups in various countries around the world. Microsoft has openly stuffed and bribed some committee to ensure that the vote goes through no matter what.
Thankfully, some countries like India and Cuba voted no. I'm hoping that many more countries (including Canada, my home and native land) will vote against the broken, half-complete standard that would exists to benefit a single organization: Microsoft.
Please visit NoOOXML.org and Gloklaw.net for more information.
- It is not good for customers
- It is not good for business
- It is not good for developers
The only entity that is bound to win with OOXML is Microsoft. The reason is, there is already a office file format that is certified by ISO called ODF (Open Document Format). It is presently supported by OpenOffice.org, KOffice, and many other suites.
Why is ODF not supported in Microsoft Office? It's not because of technical limitation. Office supports file formats that are technically inferior to ODF like RTF and HTML.
Product and business competition is good for the customer. What would the world be like if you could not choose your car manufacturer (Ford, Honda, BMW, etc), your computer manifacturer (Dell, HP, Levono) or even your gas station? First of all, everybody would be riding the same car painted any colour as long as it's black. You could buy any computer that you want as long as it's a Dell. How little do you think Honda would charge for the Civic if it was the only compact available?
Microsoft has had an illegal monopoly in the world of operating system, office suite and web browser. In the past ten years, the changes that we have seen to their product has been minimal. However, as soon as the competition heated up, notice how much work Microsoft suddenly places in their product:
- Windows XP -> Windows Vista thanks to Mac OS X
- Microsoft Office 200X -> Microsoft Office 2007 thanks to OpenOffice.org
- Internet Explorer 6 -> Internet Explorer 7 thanks to Firefox
These innovations on either side were born out of free competition.
However, competing standards are bad, especially for customers.
Not good for Customers
Imagine a world where there are two CD formats. Two DVD format. Two gasoline types. How would the customer benefit from that? Well, the customer would have to make darn sure that they buy CDs that work with their CD players. Otherwise, they have spend money on a CD that cannot be used.
And what if that said customer purchased another CD player that is incompatible with the first. They can kiss their whole CD collection goodbye, since it won't play in the new player.
Sounds unlikely? It happened very recently where Sony & Microsoft (amongst many other companies) developed two standards: Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD. Some customers spend thousands of dollars equipping themselves with HD-DVD, only to watch their market collapse, and their investment dissappear. Yes, they can still watch the movies their purchased, but no new movies will be released in HD-DVD.
Do you want the same thing to happen with your documents? Microsoft have changed the Office file format numerous time, and newer versions of Microsoft Office are sometimes unable to open files created in older version.
Who benefits here? The customer, or Microsoft. Hint: Who gets the money at the end of the day?
Not good for business
It may be a good news for developers looking for a job because now there are TWO file format to support. But what about the cost of doing business? Some clients or supplier may want to work with ODF. Others with OOXML. That pretty much doubles the development cost and time.
Of course, a company could alienate customers and suppliers by requesting a single format, but again, I don't think this is a sound solution.
There exists converters for one file format to another, but none are perfect. None can be perfect. Here's a simple experiment for you: Convert an MP3 to a WMA back to an MP3. What happens to the sound quality? It degrades. The same thing happens when we are converting from one office file format to another.
Not good for developers
I hate writing the same code twice. I hate solving the same problem twice. This is exactly what we are heading for.
I was quite excited when XML can to be. Before XML, I had to write so many file parser because everybody and their dog created a custom file format that had to be manually parsed. Now, thanks to XML and the DOM API (Document Object Model Application Programming Interface) to work with XML. I haven't wrote a single line of code to manually parse an XML document. Yay!
As a developer, I don't want to go back to the 'information stone age' by having to support multiple, incompatible standards. Thank you Microsoft for making my just so much more challenging. If Microsoft truly cared for us, ODF would have been supported in Office 2007.
So why is Microsoft pushing their format thought? The answer is simple: Governments and organizations are starting to standardize on ODF because it's an open ISO standard. Microsoft refuses to support ODF because that will mean that users can now choose between Microsoft Office, OpenOffice, StarOffice, KOffice, Corel WordPerfect Office, etc. You get the point. Microsoft does not want to give you choice, they want to remove choice. God forbid you should spend your money elsewhere!
OOXML is meant to work with Microsoft Office and no other office suite on the market. It's a bloated, complex format that is laded with legacy. Working groups world wide have made 3,500 comments and raised a number of technical issues found in the 6,000+ pages of specifications provided by Microsoft. Think about it: 6,000+ pages. That's not for the weak of heart. On the other hand, ODF has 700+.
On March 29th, ISO will announce whether or not OOXML becomes a dual(ing) standard with ODF. This choice is made based on votes made by technical groups in various countries around the world. Microsoft has openly stuffed and bribed some committee to ensure that the vote goes through no matter what.
Thankfully, some countries like India and Cuba voted no. I'm hoping that many more countries (including Canada, my home and native land) will vote against the broken, half-complete standard that would exists to benefit a single organization: Microsoft.
Please visit NoOOXML.org and Gloklaw.net for more information.
Labels: iso, microsoft, odf, ooxml, openoffice
posted by Jean-François Bilodeau at
12:05 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home