Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

MS Announces Open XML Formats Developer Group

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 8 years ago | from the monkey-see-microsoft-do dept.

84

Andy Updegrove writes to tell us that Microsoft has responded to the recently formed ODF Alliance with a group of their own, the Open XML Formats Developer Group. From the article: "At launch, the new forum has either 39 or 40 members (the site is internally inconsistent on this point), the most prominent of which are Apple, Intel and Toshiba. [...] Despite the long list of founding members, it appears that the forum is purely informational in nature. A review of the site indicates that no specific initiatives are planned to be undertaken by the forum. Instead, it will provide information and provide a place for developers to pose questions, post content, and engage in discussion."

cancel ×

84 comments

fence-straddlers? (3, Interesting)

rkhalloran (136467) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967033)

How many of these 'founding members' are just hedging their bets by being in both this and the ODF Alliance group? And how do file formats matter to a company like Intel; they shouldn't care what office suite someone's using, as long as it running on their CPUs, yes?

Re:fence-straddlers? (2, Funny)

Fanboy Troy (957025) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967046)

Most importantly, will I be able to open 10 Open XML documents at the same time if I have an AMD CPU?

Re:fence-straddlers? (1)

Tatsh (893946) | more than 8 years ago | (#14968827)

Such a valid point!

Re:fence-straddlers? (1)

utlemming (654269) | more than 8 years ago | (#14969245)

Yes, but dual core Intel CPU's will be able to have 20 open at the same time.

Re:fence-straddlers? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14970121)

Intel makes more than Processors.

Re:fence-straddlers? (1)

I'm Don Giovanni (598558) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967056)

And how do file formats matter to a company like Intel; they shouldn't care what office suite someone's using, as long as it running on their CPUs, yes?

Maybe a group's having members that have no apparent vested interest (i.e. no financial stake or political agenda) adds credibility to the group.

Re:fence-straddlers? (1)

Sqwubbsy (723014) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967206)

There's also a possible tax break [slashdot.org] , of course.

I can't tell you how many folks said this was going to happen when they heard the tax credit issue raised.

Re:fence-straddlers? (1)

rehtonAesoohC (954490) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967063)

One question I have is whether or not Microsoft included code in their Office suite that would run faster on Intel processors...

That would definitely matter to those types of companies.

Re:fence-straddlers? (2, Insightful)

stoolpigeon (454276) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967065)

And how do file formats matter to a company like Intel; they shouldn't care what office suite someone's using, as long as it running on their CPUs, yes?
 
what they care more about - than someone running on their chips, is making money. and if there is a financial incentive for them to care about software, they will be involved.

Re:fence-straddlers? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14967377)

Share holders at Apple ought to hang somebody out to dry. Why should Apple Support Microsofts XML file format in any way shape or form? The other truly open format is clearly better for everyone else involved.

People hold off on buying Apples because they fear it won't suppor MS office. This is the reason my boss bought an Intel just yesterday! He's big into photography, and came close to buying Apple.

Apple must be run by idiots.

Re:fence-straddlers? (1)

generic-man (33649) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967651)

If you want to use the "other truly open format" your only choice right now is OpenOffice.org, and boy oh boy does it ever suck for the Mac. Official OpenOffice.org requires X to run and loads hundreds of megs of crap into memory even if you want to use just one program. NeoOffice/J, a popular OpenOffice.org variant, is packed up in Cocoa and Java into a monstrosity that neither feels, looks, nor acts like a Mac OS X application -- though it doesn't require X. Microsoft Office for Mac OS X works okay, but its lack of Cocoa bindings means it doesn't support all the newest and greatest tricks. Office/Mac from my experience lags behind Office/Win in terms of features and speed. Microsoft haters like to point out that Office burrows into Windows, but Office/Mac throws some extra processes into the mix and still manages to handle like a wet sponge.

Re:fence-straddlers? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14967661)

Let's see, Apple builds machines with proprietary hardware, makes software with proprietary file formats, and fantatically resists ideas to get around their software. Hate to be the bearer of the blatantly obvious, but Apple has always been against freedom far moreso than Windows (prior to Vista's Treacherous Computing component of course).

Re:fence-straddlers? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14967723)

And how do file formats matter to a company like Intel; they shouldn't care what office suite someone's using, as long as it running on their CPUs, yes?

Well, actually they would prefer that it run on their newest CPU. They will have better luck selling you new CPUs if you elect to run an OS that runs like dog shit unless you have all the latest chips. So it is very much in Intel's interest to promote Microsoft.

Re:fence-straddlers? (2, Insightful)

hackus (159037) | more than 8 years ago | (#14969608)

Err, No.

Intel has a lot to gain by a particular file format.

Any company with plans to enforce "trusted computing" hardware has a great deal of interest in file formats, and how to keep them as closed as possible.

XML documents can be parsed using a so called "open" (i.e. Open to Trusted Computing Members if you pay a HUGE fee.) so that documents can become encrypted XML objects that can only run on a particular machine.

If a file format is known, a BIOS modification can be made to intercept calls that the OS on the machine will not know about.

That way, you can't get around the hardware, its burned into silicone.

What is better, if you attempt to break the keys, ala HDCP and they find out, the next time you attempt to update your BIOS they can black list your motherboard. Just like they plan on doing to consumers if they find out a product (TV, DVD player, PVR etc) can be cracked for the encryption keys.

That way, your new 5K server or 5K TV won't boot anymore.

How nice.

-gc

Re:fence-straddlers? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#14974147)

its burned into silicone.

Ouch!

The new forum has either 39 or 40 members (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14967053)

The forum actually has 40 members, but one of them was ducking a flying chair at the time you must have been looking.

Re:The new forum has either 39 or 40 members (0)

goldspider (445116) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967948)

That joke never gets old.

And by "old" I mean "funny".

I'm ambivalent (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14967074)

What to do? WHAT TO DO??

Am I supposed to hate this Developer Group because it was founded by Microsoft, or should I love this Developer Group because Apple is a member?

Must...keep...head...from...exploding

Re:I'm ambivalent (3, Insightful)

BeanThere (28381) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967235)

Or you could stop pretending and implying that the average slashdotter derives their opinions on file format standardisation issues from 'emotions' based on bias and ideology, and rather derive a stance based on a well-thought out, rational analysis on the pros and cons of truly open file formats vs proprietary patent-protected formats.

Re:I'm ambivalent (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14967407)

Does anyone else find it amusing/irritating/confusing that Microsoft felt that they needed to add the word "Open" in front of XML to describe their format?

Seriously...what's a more open markup language than XML...what does "Open XML" even mean? It's like saying "Feathery chicken"...my redundancy parser is not dealing well with it anymore. Damn you microsoft!

Re:I'm ambivalent (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14967728)

"Does anyone else find it amusing/irritating/confusing that Microsoft felt that they needed to add the word "Open" in front of XML to describe their format?"

You know, I'd love to sit in on one of Microsoft's meetings when they decide to come up with things like this. The rational, the mentality and the justifications for redefining Open.

But then again, in Redmonds eyes, giving into customer's requests that even hint in the direction of interoperability with Microsoft's products is open by their wierd standards I guess.

Re:I'm ambivalent (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14969377)

I'm still torn! Was that meant to be insightful or sarcastic?

Logical fallacy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14967276)

Am I supposed to hate this Developer Group because it was founded by Microsoft, or should I love this Developer Group because Apple is a member?

That fallacy goes by the name of false dilemma [skepdic.com] .

Re:I'm ambivalent (1)

diegocgteleline.es (653730) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967442)

You don't care. DRM is what Microsoft wants to use to keep you tied to Microsoft Office - the real format are not the XML schemes, but the DRM layer which is placed before it. "open xml" is the perfect excuse to make people think that they're not going to be locked in in a single vendor. Like Microsoft is going to share with others the 30% of their income....

Re:I'm ambivalent (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14967690)

proof?

Re:I'm ambivalent (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14970365)

Ohh, I don't know. Their behavour in the previous two and a half decades of their corporate existence?

Re:I'm ambivalent (1)

utlemming (654269) | more than 8 years ago | (#14969281)

With Microsoft in the group, why on earth should anybody trust the standard? They have been trying to torpedo ODF for a such a long time now they make an open group? Forgive me for asking, but if memory serves me correctly, Microsoft broke XML document standards with Office 2003 so that it wasn't compatiable with other readers. And Microsoft has a really bad habit of taking a standard, after all the works been done and building on it so that it Microsoft products can interoperate with others, but others can't with them. I would be really skeptical of anything Microsoft does, because history has proven time and time again that they like to create the standard and have everyone else follow, only to break the following. Does Internet Explorer and HTML sound farmiliar? That is an open standard, and Microsoft has yet to abide by it. It has resulted in millions of web pages that won't render correctly because Microsoft can't play nice and use the standards that that are published.

Soo, it will not be informational (1)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967104)

Now, that the OSS world has critized it, there will be all sorts of discussions about nothing. IOW, it will still be informational, but with a lot of spin.

Nice one, Bill. (4, Funny)

Rob T Firefly (844560) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967127)

Gates noted that the new group, to be known as the Open XML Formats Developer Group, brings together three of his favorite words--"open," "XML," and "developer." "No organization is good unless you put 'open' " in there, Gates said.

So when exactly can we expect MicroOpenSoft to release OpenWindows?

Re:Nice one, Bill. (1)

mopslik (688435) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967180)

I think his exact quote was, "if any developer here uses non-Microsoft XML, Ballmer can throw him out an open window."

Re:Nice one, Bill. (1)

Paleomacus (666999) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967409)

This new device will be called the MS DefenestrationStation.

Re:Nice one, Bill. (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14967234)

The name was intended to be "Open XML Formats Misappropriation Group," but when someone at the Microsoft meeting pointed out that "misappropriation" is equivalent to "development," and, after all, developers, developers, developers!, it was reluctantly modified.

Re:Nice one, Bill. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14967313)

MicroOpenWindows already exists, the numerous Open parts are just very Micro.

Re:Nice one, Bill. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14967590)

Well now, it's not like they tried to call it "Free XML"...

Although, FreeWindows might gain some ground, followed by NetWindows...

Re:Nice one, Bill. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14968283)

So when exactly can we expect MicroOpenSoft to release OpenWindows?

After they acquire Sun, perhaps?

You know what they say (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14967135)

If you standardize the standards, only standards will be standardized.

Re:You know what they say (1)

hunterx11 (778171) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967225)

Wait, so now the Department of Defense is a member of the group? Or was Rumsfeld commenting on it for other reasons?

That's MS Open (TM), I take it? (5, Funny)

NickFortune (613926) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967137)

You have to adminer Microsoft's determination to redefine "open" as meaning "closed".

I bet people in Redmond spend a lot of time walking into doors these days

Re:That's MS Open (TM), I take it? (1, Funny)

gardyloo (512791) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967240)

You have to adminer Microsoft's determination to redefine "open" as meaning "closed".

I bet people in Redmond spend a lot of time walking into doors these days


    Which statement begs the question: Are these doors open or closed?

Re:That's MS Open (TM), I take it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14968156)

Well DUH! They're both open AND closed until someone walks into-through them!

Re:That's MS Open (TM), I take it? (1)

killjoe (766577) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967746)

I remember reading someplace about those weird questions MS asks prosective employees. One of them was something like "how would you move mount fuji". I remember thinking the answer at Microsoft should be.

Spend 500 million in advertising telling people that you have moved mount fuji and they will believe it.

This is the most important fight for MS right now. Take away proprietary file formats and you have taken out two of the legs of the office monopoly stool. If they lose this fight their office monopoply will erode like hell.

Re:That's MS Open (TM), I take it? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14968145)

Take away proprietary file formats and you have taken out two of the legs of the office monopoly stool.

Heh heh. You said stool.

huh? (1)

clevershark (130296) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967146)

"Microsoft" and "open"... damn, I must be having a stroke.

Redd Foxx (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14970212)

In the words of the late and great actor, "Oh, I'm coming to join you Elizabeth!"

Real purpose (5, Insightful)

bobdehnhardt (18286) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967160)

A review of the site indicates that no specific initiatives are planned to be undertaken by the forum. Instead, it will provide information and provide a place for developers to pose questions, post content, and engage in discussion.
In other words, the purpose of the Open XML Formats Developer Group is to provide FUD to undermine the ODF Alliance's real work and progress, delaying adoption of ODF until such time as Microsoft can release a competing, purportedly open XML format, which they will then poison with proprietary "extensions" that guarantee their continued stranglehold on office applications. Anyone not see this coming? Anyone?

Re:Real purpose (2, Informative)

ClamIAm (926466) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967228)

They don't even need "extensions" anymore, now that we have software patents. All they need is to have part of the schema patented, and they can strangle the format for 20 years.

Re:Real purpose (1)

penguin-collective (932038) | more than 8 years ago | (#14970258)

The have patented not just part of the schema, but the whole thing.

Re:Real purpose (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14967269)

You could be right, which is why ODF needs to be pushed as much as possible right now. Every OSS word processor should be working to add it to their next release, and it should also be added to as many closed-source apps as possible. If you get everyone but MS on board, they'll be under some amount of pressure to do so as well.

Maybe even develop a certification that a program complies with ODF standards and put the seal on the splash screen.

Hey, Corel! (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967316)

and it should also be added to as many closed-source apps as possible.

Hey, Corel! This means you! No, really. Get it to it!

Re:Hey, Corel! (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967615)

That's a good candidate. Then along with Lotus (IBM). They have a word processor right? If these guys, and everyone else, ever want to really be able to compete with MSOffice, then they should all standardize on one format. That way they can compete on actual features and ease of use, rather than who can lock the users in the best.

Re:Real purpose (1)

m50d (797211) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967627)

KOffice has it already. Abiword doesn't, because the spec is too ambiguous - something the koffice devs complained about. Not sure about Hancom Office. But it looks like the spec needs work at least as much as the word processors do.

Re:Real purpose (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14967322)

In Soviet Redmond, I, for one, was seen coming towards all your base by this!

Stunned by the admixture of inane /. cliches, I watched as my wallet was drained of content by something I had thought open, but which had certain Words of Power buried in a small font in paragraph #411, so as to escape all reasonable notice.

Yet another Redmond interaction. When will I cease to listen to BeelzeBill?

No... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14967562)

A review of the site indicates that no specific initiatives are planned to be undertaken by the forum. Instead, it will provide information and provide a place for developers to pose questions, post content, and engage in discussion.

So basically, they plan to set up a domain and install phpBB?

I'm afraid the marketing people have had their filthy little mitts all over this, removing every last shred of information. Presumably a consortium of multiple multinational corporations is going to do something, but it sounds as if even they don't know what they are going to do.

Re:No... (1)

TheSpoom (715771) | more than 8 years ago | (#14968248)

So basically, they plan to set up a domain and install phpBB?

You think Microsoft would run something on PHP? :^P

Re:Real purpose (1)

jacksonj04 (800021) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967725)

On the subject of extensions to a standard, tell me again what the X in XML stands for?

Re:Real purpose (1)

OohAhh (745216) | more than 8 years ago | (#14968058)

To most people it means "eXtensible". To some it mean "Patentable eXtensions", where the P can be kept invisible for as long as possible.

Re:Real purpose (1)

penguin-collective (932038) | more than 8 years ago | (#14970265)

I guess you also believe that because it's called a "luxury accomodation", it's actually luxurious, or because it's called "a fuel efficient SUV" it's actually fuel efficient.

What XML is called doesn't matter; what matters is what the effect of Microsoft adding proprietary extensions to Office XML would be, and the effect wouldn't be good.

Re:Real purpose (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14968089)

Anyone?

Bueller?

Re:Real purpose (1)

Doctor Memory (6336) | more than 8 years ago | (#14969191)

provide a place for developers to ... post content

And if said content is a schema for some undocumented bit of a MS file format, hello DMCA!

Re:Real purpose (1)

4of12 (97621) | more than 7 years ago | (#14974076)

...until such time as Microsoft can release a competing, purportedly open XML format, which they will then poison with proprietary "extensions" that guarantee their continued stranglehold on office applications.

Just having the possibility of a competing "Open XML" format backed by the largest software vendor in the world will delay adoption of any competing ODF.

Not only will the Open version of XML be laden with proprietary extensions, but it will have gaping holes in its interface, its description, the kinds of documents that can be represented unambiguously.

Alliance? (1)

master_p (608214) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967201)

Then Linus should form the Federation! he is the good guy after all! (mod: -1, offtopic).

They're going to do what? (2, Insightful)

SheeEttin (899897) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967294)

A review of the site indicates that no specific initiatives are planned to be undertaken by the forum. Instead, it will provide information and provide a place for developers to pose questions, post content, and engage in discussion.

So, essentially, they're going to sit around and chat, but not actually do anything.
Now you know why Microsoft products are the way they are.

And as long as I'm here, I might as well tell a joke. So Gates comes back from his honeymoon, and his wife says, "Now I know why you named it Microsoft."
PS: Mod Insightful, not Funny, please.

Disclaimer (1)

akaina (472254) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967349)

Post in bin mode only, please. Posts that contain any raw XML will confuse the XML DOM interpreter that runs the forum. All use of interpolated greater than or less than signs is strictly prohibited.

This is just hot air (1)

moochfish (822730) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967436)

First a new alliance around ODF pops up. Then Microsoft creates a counter announcement to make it look like they're encouraging "collaboration." You can tell they did this as a knee-jerk reaction based on how little this new consotrium offers.

There are no technical articles that have been published

no specific initiatives are planned to be undertaken by the forum

we're making it up as we go

So in other words, a bunch of groups were hoping the worlds' documents don't go proprietary and decided to join so they'd have some say on the matter. Then Microsoft capitalizes on the fact that they joined. Clever.

Hmm, Open eh... (1)

coastin (780654) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967468)

Open like a child safety cap on a prescription bottle or open like as in open to all? I hesitate to think about this too much fearing that my head may explode and make quite a mess of my monitor.

From the web site (2, Insightful)

thetoastman (747937) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967529)

The Open XML Formats are currently going through the Ecma standards process, and the complete schemas are not yet available. There are no technical articles that have been published yet (other than blog posts, some of which are great), and there are no books out on Open XML Formats development yet.

So, we have no complete schemas (even draft), no technical articles, and no stated direction. We do have blog posts that are great (from a Microsoft technical evangelist).

And yet, we have the following.

Our goal will be to help developers work with the formats right now, through sharing of code samples, white papers, workspace projects, and links to other resources.

Of course, none of this is published on their web site. How do you set up code samples for an XML formate without a working and validating schema?

This entire web site sounds like it serves four purposes:

  1. Evangelize Microsoft technology - but then that's the moderator's job
  2. Spread FUD about other document standards and document standards processes
  3. Get some unwitting help from the Internet community for coding and debugging their standard
  4. Get people hooked on the latest Microsoft (eventually) proprietary environment

In short, nothing of note to see here. Move along. This is not the open document standard you're looking for.

sooo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14967549)

so it's basicly better than the ODF Alliance in every way? cool.

I thanK you fo8 your time (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14967585)

MS + Open anything = Oxymoron (1)

thunderpaws (199100) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967607)

FTA "... and there are no books out on Open XML Formats development yet". then from the ad at the bottom of the page:"(and remember to Buy Your Books at Biff's)"

Kinda sums up the article.

Apple? (3, Insightful)

mpcooke3 (306161) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967766)

Why has Apple signed up to this - to ensure microsoft continues MS Office for mac support?

I can't say i'm too worried about Intel and Toshiba supporting the format.

That is unless intel or toshiba make "Open-DRM" hardware chips to stop "secure" MS Office files from being read by non-trusted programs like OpenOffice.

Sorry, but this thread is still short on anti-microsoft conspiracy stories!

Re:Apple? (1)

superrcat (815508) | more than 8 years ago | (#14968690)

Why has Apple signed up to this - to ensure microsoft continues MS Office for mac support?

No, Microsoft already has an agreement to produce new versions of Microsoft Office for Mac until at least 2011. Apple is involved because of applications like Pages and Keynote that use an XML-based format and provide interoperability with many other 3rd party formats, including Microsoft Word.

Re:Apple? (1)

should_be_linear (779431) | more than 8 years ago | (#14970178)

Apple is involved because of applications like Pages and Keynote that use an XML-based format and provide interoperability with many other 3rd party formats, including Microsoft Word.

There are organizations, like OOo, that provide interoperability with MS Offices formats, without kissing MS asses in "Open" group.

Re:Apple? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#14970671)

Apple and Microosft have been in bed kissing each others asses since the 1970s.

Maybe if OOO ever provides a Macintosh port, Apple would join their Unpopular File Format association.

Valid XHTML? (1)

mtpruitt (561752) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967792)

XML advocacy site + third party organization to validate well-formedness = the obvious [w3.org]

Re:Valid XHTML? (1)

EarthlingN (660382) | more than 8 years ago | (#14968486)

"Result: Failed validation, 50 errors"
...
"51. Error Line 405 column 16: end tag for element "CS:MPRegion" which is not open."

Re:Valid XHTML? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14969647)

The page document type is "XHTML 1.0 Frameset". Now, I may have missed something, but aren't framesets supposed to be small documents containing definitions for .. frame sets?

ODF isn't Open (1)

DigitlDud (443365) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967994)

ODF isn't even an open format, it actually contains several proprietary parts that are patented by Sun.

Re:ODF isn't Open (1)

Schraegstrichpunkt (931443) | more than 8 years ago | (#14968102)

Score: -1, Troll

As open as... (1)

segedunum (883035) | more than 8 years ago | (#14967997)

...a door slammed in someone's face. Seriously: "...it will provide information and provide a place for developers to pose questions, post content, and engage in discussion."? I think I speak for most when I say, whatever.

Mission Statements, Best Practices & White Pap (1)

superrcat (815508) | more than 8 years ago | (#14968654)

A review of the site indicates that no specific initiatives are planned to be undertaken by the forum.
Sound like a bureaucratic micromanagement session...a group of too many people involved with little or no objectives.

Sun, Microsoft strategy: redefine terms (2, Insightful)

penguin-collective (932038) | more than 8 years ago | (#14968765)

Both Sun and Microsoft have been busy trying to compete with open source by attempting to redefine the meanings of terms like "open" and "free". The Microsoft Office XML formats are not open, because in order to use them, you need a license from Microsoft. The same is true for crucial pieces of the Sun Java language and libraries.

It's important not to let these companies get away with such sleazy tactics and to make sure that both customers and users understand that if they agree to terms of companies like Sun and Microsoft, they accept similar risks to when they buy proprietary, closed source software.

Re:Sun, Microsoft strategy: redefine terms (1)

NutscrapeSucks (446616) | more than 7 years ago | (#14970706)

Actually, I think it's your ilk that is trying to redefine the longstanding industry term "Open".

For example, it was common to say "UNIX is an Open System" -- even though it cost millions of dollars to license UNIX and the license fell miles short of any sort of free software-ish standards. Microsoft's and Sun's use of the term are very much in line with the historical usage, and the "Open Source" peoples' are not.

Plus, it seems that the latest conclusion is that Microsoft's "OpenXML" licence really is "open" enough that it will be widely implemented in open source programs.

wiki? (1)

dan the person (93490) | more than 7 years ago | (#14970782)

Instead, it will provide information and provide a place for developers to pose questions, post content, and engage in discussion.

MS have put up a wiki?
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...