Beta
×

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!

GNOME Foundation Helping OOXML?

kdawson posted more than 6 years ago | from the on-your-own-time-please dept.

GNOME 471

christian.einfeldt writes "According to long-time OpenDocument Fellowship member Russell Ossendryver, it appears that GNOME founder Miguel de Icaza's widely-publicized praise for OOXML as a 'superb standard' is being followed up with on-going support by the GNOME Foundation in 'resolving' the thousands of criticisms leveled against Microsoft's proposed standard. In an open letter in his blog, Ossendryver urges the GNOME Foundation to halt its apparent support for OOXML as a standard and to put its efforts behind enhancing adoption of the genuinely open standard, ODF, which was approved by the world standards bodies as ISO/IEC standard 26300 on 2 May 2006."

cancel ×

471 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

No surprise here... (4, Insightful)

Azuma Hazuki (955769) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149491)

Miguel de fucking Icaza has been kissing Microsoft's ass for years now. Can we please get rid of him already?!

MS ass-kissing must make fat rub off (-1, Troll)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149513)

and GNOME has become the bloated pig just like Microsoft wares, I'd get rid of him for that reason. I changed over to KDE because now it is the best of the two for my limited memory older machines.

Re:No surprise here... (1)

Alain Williams (2972) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149541)

Doesn't Miguel work for Novell ? We all know how they relate to Microsoft!

Re:No surprise here... (4, Insightful)

arivanov (12034) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149933)

He has been doing it long before that. This behaviour bares no relation to Novell.

I think somebody needs to tell explain him some basics of of human relationships.

If somebody blows you off the way Microsoft blew him off on a job interview the best way to deal with them is to reject them. They will come back sooner or later. In fact if you reject them a couple of time they will keep coming back with a better offer than you really deserve.

The worst thing to do in cases like that is to try sticking your nose up their rectum the way he is constantly trying to do. In life that achieves the opposite. The person who rejected you in the first place will treat you exactly as you should be treated when you are in a naso-rectal interface position. Like shit.

All I can say - what a daft jerk...

Re:No surprise here... (5, Interesting)

ThinkingInBinary (899485) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149555)

Miguel de fucking Icaza has been kissing Microsoft's ass for years now. Can we please get rid of him already?!

I was just about to say something closely approximating that.

What annoyed me most before this (which is simply unthinkable) was his extremely strong support of Mono. Personally, I feel that Mono, like Wine, should be treated as a compatibility layer to run software intended for other operating systems, not a viable target for open-source application developers. If everyone likes C# so much, then we should take matters into our own hands and implement a language with the features we like that is under our control! (My concern with Mono following Microsoft's language is that in the event that Microsoft changes a significant feature, like Java did when it added assert, Mono would almost certainly make the same change, leaving a bunch of open-source developers to deal with the whims of Microsoft.)

At some point, until Microsoft starts releasing truly open-source code and letting everyone hack on Windows, we have to keep at least some distance from Microsoft. There's nothing wrong with attempting to run their software, but we shouldn't be writing Windows software just because it's more convenient and we now have a way to run it on Linux.

Re:No surprise here... (1, Troll)

Shados (741919) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149589)

One cool thing about mono is that they're using MS' strategy right back at em: Embrace and Extend. In some ways, Mono has more features than .NET, and in some cases (Silverlight 1.1) is ahead of Microsoft. That should make quite a few open source lovers cackle with glee more than anything :)

Re:No surprise here... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21149775)

Sounds like cackles of delusion, considering the Mono runtime and library are inferior and incomplete.

Though it does amuse me to see people so enchanted by Mono.

Re:No surprise here... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21149825)

Which Mono version are you running? Mine is slow, older, poorer, more bloated and WAY, WAY, WAY behind M$ .NET version.
Maybe i need an update........

Re:No surprise here... (4, Insightful)

rbanffy (584143) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149865)

Right...

It will work wonders when all the five users of the two programs that actually use what Mono has that .NET hasn't start raving and evangelizing people into running Mono on free platforms.

You must have market dominance to play Embrace and Extend. Otherwise, you will follow all those neat enhanced supersets of whatever technology was mainstream at the time into oblivion.

Re:No surprise here... (4, Insightful)

segedunum (883035) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149919)

One cool thing about mono is that they're using MS' strategy right back at em: Embrace and Extend. In some ways, Mono has more features than .NET, and in some cases (Silverlight 1.1) is ahead of Microsoft.
The problem is, they're not embracing and extending anything because they're not doing so from a position of any kind of power or authority. Microsoft's version is the reference version of .Net, owing to the fact that it is what is installed on Windows machines and the installed based of Windows. If it works on Mono then it's a bonus, and if it doesn't work on Mono then it's tough luck. End of story. Being a sheep is never a good idea. Sheep get slaughtered.

That should make quite a few open source lovers cackle with glee more than anything :)
No, because you don't understand how embracing and extending works.

Re:No surprise here... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21149855)

People only care about convenience and doing more with less. They certainly don't care about stupid political statements such as the one you are making.

Re:No surprise here... (1)

FooBarWidget (556006) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150435)

I don't understand your logic at all. "My main concern [is] ... Mono would almost certainly make the same change, leaving a bunch of open-source developers to deal with the whims of Microsoft."

Just how will developers have to deal with the whims of Microsoft? So Microsoft decides to add a language-level assert statement, so what? All the open source C# software will happily keep running just like they did yesterday. Microsoft can't decide to break compatibility because they have too many enterprise customers depending on .NET backwards compatibility.

Re:No surprise here... (1)

babbling (952366) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150443)

I agree with you that Mono is risky. If Microsoft ever decided to actually use their software patents, Mono would probably be one of the easier targets.

I would like to point out one good thing about people developing software that uses Mono, though. It should help the Mono developers significantly in making their compatibility layer have less defects than WINE does. WINE has always been improving, but if people had been writing software for WINE, it would probably be improving at a much greater rate.

But I do agree with you - Mono is too risky. I'll never touch it for anything I develop.

Re:No surprise here... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21149609)

Follow the money. Miguel interviewed for a job at MS. He's the kind of guy they like -- not a US citizen and willing to work cheap. But he wasn't qualified for H1B status, so they couldn't hire him to work at MS. However, they could finance him to subvert linux. Ximian was financed by Paul Allen through Vulcan (at the time he was still a MS board member and Vulcan was used to finance projects without being tied to MS). Vulcan invested a chunk of money into Novell before they purchased Ximian.

This is all documented information. I don't know why some people refuse to connect the dots.

MOD PARENT UP (1)

12357bd (686909) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150047)

Very informative AC post.

Re:MOD PARENT UP (4, Insightful)

an.echte.trilingue (1063180) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150167)

I have mod moints, and I will not mod him up. Here's why:
  1. Miguel interviewed for a job at MS
    I've heard that, but without, oh I dunno... a reference, it isn't that informative.
  2. However, they could finance him to subvert linux
    Just one piece of evidence? Possibly an insightful statement... but conspiracy theories without evidence are little more than that.
  3. This is all documented information
    WHERE???
  4. He's the kind of guy they like -- not a US citizen and willing to work cheap
    That sounds like unfounded xenophobia to me. You have to have a reference for a statement like that. How much did he want? Was it less than an American doing his job would earn?
The assertions are plausible, but without just one reference, one piece of evidence, it doesn't really advance the conversation any more than "LOL M$ suxors!!!111!"

Re:No surprise here... (1, Interesting)

LKM (227954) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150377)

There definitely are financial ties between Miguel and Microsoft. Back when I was studying, he held a Microsoft-sponsored speech about Mono, where Microsoft raffled off Xboxes to the people who attended. I didn't win one :-(

That's the beauty (1, Insightful)

El Lobo (994537) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149621)

Well, that's the beaty of Open Source. You don't like it? Don't support them, or fork the project or do whatever you want. They are in their freaking right of supporting whoever they want. And they have help a LOT the OS community. Mono is a great port of the net service and Silverlight is on its way to linuzz thanks to those guys. The DO something. What do YOU do?

Re:That's the beauty (3, Insightful)

oogoliegoogolie (635356) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149759)

What do YOU do?

I choose "Don't support them."

And they have help a LOT the OS community.

With Gnome and some other projects, maybe. OTOH, supporting a bloated, low quality, error-prone, semi-open standard that contains references to proprietary (read as 'closed') MS information is hardly helping the OS community.

Huh? (-1, Troll)

Frosty Piss (770223) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149515)

The GNOME boys didn't get their monthly manila envelope from Microsoft.

Re:Huh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21149809)

The GNOME boys didn't get their monthly manila envelope from Microsoft.


Maybe.. but until the KDE guys can come up with something that's not so goddamned ugly and annoying to use the only other game in town is XFCE. And make no mistake, KDE sucks total fucking ass. And yes, that includes the vaunted KDE 4.

There's a reason Ubuntu uses Gnome.

Re:Huh? (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149829)

IceWM, Fluxbox, Blackbox.

There are other options.

(Not that XFCE is bad, I like it)

Quit looking for body snatchers (3, Informative)

ultor (216766) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149521)

Miguel's stated that, as a standard, OOXML is alright, but also shuddered at dealing with the way Microsoft abused binary segments in the format. The reason Novell et the GNOME foundation are so involved is for simple compatibility reasons. What better way to lure Windows users away than to provide support for the formats their existing documents are probably already in?

Accommodation? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21149599)

"What better way to lure Windows users away than to provide support for the formats their existing documents are probably already in?"

Accommodation will only get you so far, sometimes it's time to fight back. This is why I use OGG and ODF when I shares books/music etc. with people, I made a conscious decision to promote these standards.

Re:Accommodation? (0)

westlake (615356) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150143)

This is why I use OGG and ODF when I shares books/music etc. with people, I made a conscious decision to promote these standards.

"Pissing into the wind" is the phrase that comes to mind here.

Winamp as a free mp3 player for Windows has been around for ten years.

However awkward the Acrobat Reader can be, it at least preserves the look and feel of the original, with its distinctive fonts, layout, design and illustration.

Re:Quit looking for body snatchers (5, Insightful)

Dionysus (12737) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149617)

What better way to lure Windows users away than to provide support for the formats their existing documents are probably already in?
That's an argument for getting MS-doc support, not necessary MS-OOXML since it hasn't become a defacto standard yet. Supporting MS-OOXML is pretty much giving MS the power to make the standard.

Re:Quit looking for body snatchers (1)

rbanffy (584143) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149981)

Actually they already have that power.

But supporting and promoting that "superb" technology gives them even more power. The fact that Miguel does endorse it should ring alarms everywhere.

I think it's time we fight back. We should say _no_ to MS-OOXML while we may tolerate .doc and promote and improve ODF where appropriate.

Mono should have two priorities: 1) to help make Gnome software easier to develop and 2) to make it easier to make Windows software that runs unmodified on free platforms. It more or less succeeds in 1 (C# is easier than C++) and has a long way to go before 2.

A free plug-in for Visual Studio that flags source that is Windows-only (or Mono-unfriendly) would help enormously with 2.

BTW, is there one?

Re:Quit looking for body snatchers (1)

blind biker (1066130) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149987)

Wow, excellent point! Mod parent up +10 "Gets it"!!!

Re:Quit looking for body snatchers (3, Interesting)

loony (37622) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149631)

>What better way to lure Windows users away than to provide support for the formats their existing documents are probably already in?

Which is fine - if you had any chance of competing. But as you said - large sections are binary. With that in place, you're not much better of than parsing a .doc

Peter.

Re:Quit looking for body snatchers (3, Interesting)

irtza (893217) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149679)

The vast majority of Windows users do not have any documents in the OOXML format. The handful of people I know who use newer versions of office are pissed off everytime they forget to "save as" into an older format and that is because of where I work. All work computers are setup with an older version of office (can't remember the version number off the top of my head). These people usually end up switching to an older version of office and I have been able to con some of them into using openoffice.org. A handful have been happy with oo.org, but most just wanted the same version of office as they have at work.

I agree that binary compatibility should be strived for, but it is not ooxml that needs compatability. its the older binary office formats that need to be standardized against. What needs to be done about ooxml is a concerted effort to prevent adoption. This means pushing organizations to switch away from newer versions of office. This also means helping oo.org or your fav alternate office suite getting competitive (assuming u have any means to help).

at my work, people use powerpoint and recently access (my fault - i needed something that was there and people could use). oo presentation is good enough (import and export from powerpoint), but database capabilities are severely lacking.

Every new version of Office has been like this (1)

argent (18001) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150429)

The handful of people I know who use newer versions of office are pissed off everytime they forget to "save as" into an older format and that is because of where I work. All work computers are setup with an older version of office (can't remember the version number off the top of my head). These people usually end up switching to an older version of office and I have been able to con some of them into using openoffice.org.

Every time there's a new version of Office Microsoft has made it impossible to maintain a heterogenous environment. You either have to stick with the older apps, or you have to do a mass upgrade... because even if you don't use any of the newer features and even when they've used allegedly backwards compatible formats Word uses them in the saved files.

OOXML is just the latest one-way format change. They're not doing anything to standardise on an open and portable format, they're just taking advantage of the standards process to push through another forced mass upgrade for Office.

Patents are body snatchers. (4, Insightful)

Erris (531066) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149773)

The reason Novell et the GNOME foundation are so involved is for simple compatibility reasons. What better way to lure Windows users away than to provide support for the formats their existing documents are probably already in?

That sounds nice but it falls down when M$ sends in a clown car full of patent lawyers. That's one of the big reasons OOXML needs to be shot down by ISO. The others are a lack of completeness and 998 other technical problems. OOXML is not doing well in the marketplace and probably never will. If ever there was a case of wasted effort, OOXML is it. Resources are better spent making better ODF applications.

As for a better way to lure Windows users, have you seen Vista?

Re:Quit looking for body snatchers (1)

otomo_1001 (22925) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149999)

The reason Novell et the GNOME
Native French speaker I take it? Or did too many years of Latin infest your brain? :D

"one high profile team member" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21149527)

From the second link:

Having Gnome team members promoting the agenda of its main opponent, however, is not only counter-productive but also reflects negatively on the project and its credibility.
And Further down:

For example, one high profile team member can cause a lot of trouble for Gnome, especially when promoting proprietary technologies in opposition to open source and open standards. Quotes like, Time to play with C#, ASP.NET and some nifty toys (you can make almost Windows feel like Linux now) seem to be promoting themes advanced by bloggers at Gnomes (and open standards) main antagonist, Microsoft.
Now, who can that be [gnome.org] ?

What are the possibilities? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21149531)

"Miguel de Icaza's widely-publicized praise for OOXML as a 'superb standard'"

There is really only a few possibilities:
1) The community is wrong and OOXML is really an open/good standard (heh)
2) One of the heads of GNOME is so inept as not to be able to see that OOXML is far from being an open standard
3) Icaza was bought off

Or is it something else:
4) ???

Re:What are the possibilities? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21149833)

4) GNOME folks have already written a substantial amount of code to import and export Microsoft Office file formats, and it is far easier for them to modify this code to work with OOXML.

And, in fact, they've already said this. They've said explicitly that OOXML is easier for them to work with then OpenOffice's format. Period. It basically comes down to laziness, one of the primary virtues in hackerdom. So, lay off 'em, unless you're already in your editor writing code.

Izt's Teh Allz About Choice!!!!! (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21150189)

Dat wut I luv teh Lunix about: it'z teh allz about teh choice. But don't be chooze teh MiKKKr0$l0th... cuz dey iz teh EVILZ!!!!

So be teh choice, buts can't choose teh MiKKKrosloth. Cuz it's about teh choice!

Re:What are the possibilities? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21150415)

1) The community is wrong and OOXML is really an open/good standard (heh)
2) One of the heads of GNOME is so inept as not to be able to see that OOXML is far from being an open standard
3) Icaza was bought off ...
4) ???

You forgot the last step:

5) Profit!

This guy is not an MS hater when he sees good (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21149535)

...dev tools that he feels he can deliver in his open mono implementations.

The MS haters feel dealing with MS is dealing with the devil.

Miguel has delivered useful open stuff.

The haters have delivered hot air.

Who are you kidding? Or are you just trolling? (3, Insightful)

walterbyrd (182728) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149641)

This is slashdot. Everybody here knows that OOXML is just another msft attempt to control the standard. OOXML is not open, and everybody here knows it.

I happen to think that mono and evolution suck. I'll bet a lot of other people think so also.

Why doesn't Miguel just go work for msft? If Miguel is so happy sucking up to msft, and working with msft to ruin F/OSS; then I think that F/OSS community would be just as happy to see Miguel take his suckie dev tools elsewhere.

Does anybody even use mono?

Re:Who are you kidding? Or are you just trolling? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21149693)

He already tried to join once. Looks like he never got over the rejection

Re:Who are you kidding? Or are you just trolling? (1)

DAldredge (2353) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149751)

What is so bad about Mono?

Re:Who are you kidding? Or are you just trolling? (5, Insightful)

rbanffy (584143) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150023)

There may be more problems, but the one I like the most is "because it cedes control over how people develop software (C# and the .NET API) for a free platform (Mono) to Microsoft". With such control in hand, Microsoft can make the development as awkward or costly as they want. And in the unlikely hypothesis developers succeed, Microsoft may call in all their patents and make half of Gnome illegal in the US.

Bingo! (1)

KwKSilver (857599) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150115)

If I had mod points, I'd mod you up.

Re:Who are you kidding? Or are you just trolling? (1)

Goaway (82658) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149815)

Wow, that started off reading like sarcasm, but it turns out you were serious?

Re:Who are you kidding? Or are you just trolling? (1)

LLKrisJ (1021777) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150425)

What worries me most is that you get modded +2 for a comment like this.

Re:Who are you kidding? Or are you just trolling? (4, Insightful)

TheUnFounded (731123) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149911)

I've been developing in C# for sometime now. I've also done extensive development in Java, PHP, and Perl. I can tell you that the .Net framework and Visual Studio is by FAR the most productive environment for developing desktop applications, and (in some instances) web apps.

And you're complaining that someone is working to bring all the applications developed on the .Net framework, and the .Net development environment itself, to Linux?

WTF is your problem? Are you really that stupid to think that interoperability with MS tools/frameworks is a BAD thing? How many people do you think would use Linux at ALL if Samba didn't allow communication to Windows boxes? Or what if there was no way to read/write an NTFS partition? Interoperability is key, and the task Miguel has undertaken is a good one. Quit complaining that someone's working to make Linux a more competitive OS.

Re:Who are you kidding? Or are you just trolling? (1)

antiMStroll (664213) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149983)

"Or what if there was no way to read/write an NTFS partition?

Masterful, but you worked the bait just a little too hard at that point.

Re:Who are you kidding? Or are you just trolling? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21150121)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ntfs-3g

"Unlike the NTFS driver included in the Linux kernel, [NTFS-3G]'s support for writing files has few limitations: files of any size can be created, modified, renamed, moved, or deleted on NTFS partitions, with the exception of compressed and encrypted files."

Re:Who are you kidding? Or are you just trolling? (1)

antiMStroll (664213) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150207)

Hey thanks for that. However the same page shows it's part of the still rare FUSE framework and wasn't released until last Feb in stable form, so in the context being part of Linux's acceptance it was still an irrelevent troll. Very interesting development though, thx again.

Re:Who are you kidding? Or are you just trolling? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21150359)

"rare FUSE framework"? It's in the kernel. Lots of people use it.

Re:Who are you kidding? Or are you just trolling? (1)

segedunum (883035) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150041)

And you're complaining that someone is working to bring all the applications developed on the .Net framework, and the .Net development environment itself, to Linux? WTF is your problem?
Because it's not possible to do that, and it's a fool's errand. All it's doing is following Microsoft's latest programming fad.

How many people do you think would use Linux at ALL if Samba didn't allow communication to Windows boxes? Or what if there was no way to read/write an NTFS partition?
Samba certainly isn't ideal, and neither is Wine. The problem is, there is a massive installed base where it can be used. No so with .Net and Mono at the moment.

Interoperability is key, and the task Miguel has undertaken is a good one. Quit complaining that someone's working to make Linux a more competitive OS.
Interoperability is done on Microsoft's terms. In order to make Linux a 'competitive OS', it has to be offering something unique itself. Following other people is not a good idea.

Re:Who are you kidding? Or are you just trolling? (1)

init100 (915886) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150205)

Are you really that stupid to think that interoperability with MS tools/frameworks is a BAD thing?

Interoperability is one thing, writing Gnome components in .NET is quite another. The former is good while the latter is really bad.

Stop fucking replying (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21150339)

in the subject box!

Bitter zealouts (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21149567)

This site is so bitter and angry... what a bunch of whiney babies

Re:Bitter zealouts (1)

rdoger6424 (879843) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150197)

*holds up a mirror*

Linus Prefers KDE (0, Offtopic)

bazald (886779) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149611)

The fact is, at the moment, Gnome is ideologically flawed. Even in terms of presenting a nice clean UI, xfce-4 does a considerably better job using their own libraries. If only distributions like Ubuntu would stop promoting the idea that Gnome is the de-facto UI of choice for Linux, maybe Gnome would seriously consider their problems and improve.

Re:Linus Prefers KDE (2, Funny)

random0xff (1062770) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150081)

Maybe you should submit a story about that so your comments can be relevant to the actual article...

"Linus Prefers KDE" - That's why I use Gnome. (0, Offtopic)

PaulGaskin (913658) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150095)

Linus is not serious about freedom. He has other priorities.

Re:Linus Prefers KDE (1)

nine-times (778537) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150255)

The fact is, at the moment, Gnome is ideologically flawed.

Can you say more about what the ideology of Gnome is, and what the flaw in the ideology is?

Because you assert that as a "fact", but then only go on to say that you don't like Gnome and don't like that people seem to use it and like it. I'd be interested in hearing some detailed criticisms.

What the FUCK? (5, Interesting)

bjourne (1034822) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149647)

The article author is either stupid beyond belief or deliberately trying to cause spite and malice. Neither GNOME the project, nor The GNOME Foundation is in any way or form backing OOXML! Miguel de Icaza is, but most other foundation members are staunchly against it. Not that it matters, there is a big fucking difference between individuals opinions and the stance of an organization. If the author has some beef with de Icaza, then he should say so, but don't try to paint the GNOME Foundation with the same brush. Fucking moron troll.

Re:What the FUCK? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21149869)


      "We have the opportunity of joining ECMA as a non-profit
      member. Jody has expressed an interest in being a representative
      for GNOME, and suggested it would also be good to get someone
      there from Abiword.

      ACTION: Behdad to contact Jody about the ECMA membership application
                      and find a good candidate from Abiword to attend. Behdad to
                      work on getting a press release for our membership".

Source: http://www.mail-archive.com/foundation-list%40gnome.org/msg01874.html [mail-archive.com]

Did you read TFA?

Re:What the FUCK? (1)

12357bd (686909) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149929)

Neither GNOME the project, nor The GNOME Foundation is in any way or form backing OOXML!

From TFA : It appears that the Gnome Foundation is participating in ECMA TC 451 regarding resolving comments and contradictions for DIS 29500.

Being the DIS 29500 about the OOXML specification, what's true? is the Gnome trying to 'resolve contradictions' on the OOXML spec or not?. Please clarify Gnome position, are those facts (Gnome participation at the TC 451) incorrect?.

I really wish Gnome is not being used by MS, but allowing de Icaza at the board is already bad enough.

Re:What the FUCK? (2, Interesting)

bigpicture (939772) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150297)

Don't you know about the concept of guilt by association, if you stand too close you get spattered. Teflon suits are only for the movies.

If you don't want to be associated, then distance yourself, verbally, I have not seen any protests from inside the Gnome organization. So would that maybe look like "consent by silence" which I think it is, because of the direction of your defense/attack. If you want to defend yourself then call out Icaza, and make the distancing clear to all.

Why not boycott Gnome? Who needs it? (1, Informative)

walterbyrd (182728) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149667)

I think KDE is pulling away from gnome anywhere. Personally, I use IceWM. If you don't have hardware resources to burn, you may be happier with lighter DE.

Re:Why not boycott Gnome? Who needs it? (1)

macshit (157376) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149791)

I think miguel's MS worship is embarassing too (and mono just plain sucks -- just put the damn thing out of our misery already!), but gnome's a pretty nice environment all things considered; it's certainly not slower than KDE (just the opposite in my experience).

And no, KDE's not "pulling away" from gnome. Indeed, from what I've seen, gnome is more popular.

Re:Why not boycott Gnome? Who needs it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21149931)

Well I'd just like to ask you to stop FUDing KDE unless you have conducted repeatable benchmarks to determine which is slower than which. Otherwise, use a KDE-optimized distro, stick with GNOME, or just shut up.

Re:Why not boycott Gnome? Who needs it? (2, Interesting)

Brandybuck (704397) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150311)

And no, KDE's not "pulling away" from gnome. Indeed, from what I've seen, gnome is more popular.

I used to think it was only Redhat/Fedora that deliberately crippled KDE in their distros. Every time I run across someone in real life (not Slashdot) who thinks KDE is slow and crippled compared to GNOME, I ask what distro they use. Invariably it's Redhat or Fedora.

I'm a FreeBSD user myself, but will use Slackware if I need proprietary drivers for a laptop. But I recently put Kubuntu on my work laptop. After last week's Kubuntu 7.10, I started to realize that "KDE-friendly" distros will also bloat their KDE. If you want to know what KDE is really like, build a plain vanilla KDE from sources.

p.s. Of course, running a stand-alone window manager will always be faster than any flavor of desktop. If all you want are frames around your windows and an application launcher, stick with Blackbox.

Re:Why not boycott Gnome? Who needs it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21149863)

There is no need to boycott Gnome, this episode is just one man, who happens to be part of the Gnome team, supporting a closed standard, if it had been KDE would you be saying boycott KDE or if it was Xfce, Fluxbox, or IceWM? I personally prefer Gnome to KDE but the nice thing about Open Source is that you can have differing programs that can run the same programs, enjoy the choice if you prefer IceWM that's fine, if I prefer Gnome that's fine, if some guy prefers KDE or Fluxbox that's fine. That is what truly is great about open source and why its taking over MS.

Re:Why not boycott Gnome? Who needs it? (1)

m2943 (1140797) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149953)

I think KDE is pulling away from gnome anywhere.

You mean, both are jumping over a cliff and KDE is falling a bit faster?

With Gnome and Microsoft, the relationship is that Miguel has a bit too much appreciation for Microsoft's crap. With KDE and Troll Tech, parts of KDE are owned by Troll Tech. Thanks, even in terms of software freedom, I'll stick with Gnome until something better comes along.

Re:Why not boycott Gnome? Who needs it? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21150093)

WTF are you talking about? What parts of KDE (the base libraries, the desktop environment or the applications) are "owned" by Trolltech? KDE uses Trolltech's Qt [trolltech.com] toolkit that is LICENSED UNDER THE GPL [trolltech.com] and (in version 4) ON ALL SUPPORTED PLATFORMS (unless you're interested in a proprietary license, you can buy one from them too) So learn the facts before you troll or shut the fuck up.

Re:Why not boycott Gnome? Who needs it? (2, Informative)

shywolf9982 (887636) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150183)

Trolltech releases their code under GPL. Last time I checked, Microsoft didn't. Trolltech is by far one of the most open-source friendly corporations. Hence, your point is invalid, as both the Gnome and KDE codebase are equally free.

We might discuss on technical terms now, but that would be offtopic.

Re:Why not boycott Gnome? Who needs it? (2, Insightful)

ShieldW0lf (601553) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150409)

Trolltech engages in dual-licensing shenanigans and co-opts ownership of other peoples code to place in closed source devices in the same letter-not-the-law tradition as MySQL and ProjectMayo.

They can go to hell.

Re:Why not boycott Gnome? Who needs it? (2, Insightful)

init100 (915886) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150239)

the relationship is that Miguel has a bit too much appreciation for Microsoft's crap.

In other words, Miguel is a Microsoft fanboy.

Re:Why not boycott Gnome? Who needs it? (1)

random0xff (1062770) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150139)

This article might contain the word 'GNOME', but that doesn't mean it needs comments on GNOME vs KDE vs Whatever your religion is.

It should be abundantly clear by now (1)

RelliK (4466) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149697)

Does anyone still doubt that Miguel de Icaza is a microsoft shill? I think it's time for him to join microsoft and work on their "open source" strategy. Hey, it worked out for Bill Hilf...

De Icaza has already lost all his credibility (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21149711)

Miguel De Icaza has already lost all his credibility since the mono days, where he pushed the transition of Linux developers to a Microsoft technology for no reason.
Now he works for Novell, a company with links and agreements with Microsoft, and instead of teaching his fellow developers how to write a damn working file chooser, he spends more time pushing for more Microsoft stuff.
He is a Microsoft developer now; What should people expect to get/hear from him other than more Microsoft bull?

Re:De Icaza has already lost all his credibility (1)

GringoCroco (889095) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149835)

Miguel De Icaza has already lost all his credibility since the mono days, where he pushed the transition of Linux developers to a Microsoft technology for no reason.
Apart from the reason that some would like to be able to write in C# for Linux and other platforms?
The .NET platform is now controlled by Microsoft, but, as I understand it, it's more free than Java used to be a while back:
I don't see Microsoft forcing other people into not implementing a compiler/vm for a .NET language, but I do know that Sun forced Microsoft to stop distributing their own Java platform.


What if anything is wrong in having support for .NET languages as free software? Is it wrong that there is a mod_aspnet for Apache? Is it wrong that Oo has support for the totally undocumented .doc format Microsoft uses? By all means, all these make the gaps between Microsoft and other free operating systems less visible and the life of FOSS users more comfortable.

Re:De Icaza has already lost all his credibility (1)

Eric Smith (4379) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149955)

but I do know that Sun forced Microsoft to stop distributing their own Java platform.
Factually incorrect. Sun forced Microsoft to stop calling their incompatible implementation "Java". The most glaring incompatibilities were the lack of support for Java RMI and Java JNI, which Microsoft instead replaced with proprietary alternatives.

Microsoft could have fixed these deliberately introduced incompatibilities, or called it something other than Java (which they did for a while: "J++"), but ultimately chose to drop it. If Microsoft can't control something, they would rather develop their own competing "solution".

Re:De Icaza has already lost all his credibility (1)

drgonzo59 (747139) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150055)

but I do know that Sun forced Microsoft to stop distributing their own Java platform.

Yeah, because it was not up to standard. And Sun is the one who defined the Java Standard. If anything was to be called Java, it had to have the same API. I don't have a problem with it. I still see Java as Sun's language and they can do whatever they want with it.

Microsoft might not restrict changes to Mono's API, but if they one day change the interface spec for .NET, what choice would the Mono developers have but follow along on Microsoft's leash? The alternative would be pointless :

- Oh, well we have our 'own' .NET version.
- So can I compile/run my Microsoft .NET program on it.?
- Well not really, it's not exactly compatible
- So it's not exactly .NET ?
- ...[silence]...Yeah ... we have Mono
- Ok, have fun with your Mono, but I want a Microsoft compatible .NET API

so what? (0)

m2943 (1140797) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150107)

where he pushed the transition of Linux developers to a Microsoft technology for no reason.

There are excellent reasons to push Mono; in the long term, Linux needs something better than C/C++.

he spends more time pushing for more Microsoft stuff

And for the last two decades, people were pushing AT&T stuff, some of it patented. Free software has always skirted around patent mine fields of big corporations; it has to, there is no other way of writing useful free software. So far, there is no indication that there is any more risk to Mono from Microsoft than there was to Linux from AT&T.

what. the. fuck. (2, Insightful)

apodyopsis (1048476) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149733)

I don't know about you, but my first reaction was..

what. the. fuck.

OOXML is a awful standard, filled with numerous little features that seem purposely designed to make it difficult for anybody but MS to implement. Icaza is NOT an idiot, so he must know that this response will be flamed to a crisp across the community - so why is he doing it?

What does he stand to gain from backing this? What have I missed?

Re:what. the. fuck. (2, Interesting)

drgonzo59 (747139) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149935)

What have I missed?


The profit part. You are focused on 1) and 2) but what's important is 3) "Profit!"
1) Support OOXML
2) ?
3) Profit! (i.e. get $$$ from M$)

Re:what. the. fuck. (2, Insightful)

rbanffy (584143) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150057)

"What does he stand to gain from backing this? What have I missed?"

A nice paying job at Microsoft or one of its puppets?

Re:what. the. fuck. (1)

init100 (915886) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150335)

Icaza is NOT an idiot ... - so why is he doing it?

Because he is a raging Microsoft fanboy. His greatest wish is to actually work at Microsoft and destroy F/OSS. Since he didn't get an H1B visa, he couldn't physically work there, so instead he is trying to subvert the community from within, by pushing for Microsoft's proprietary technologies. When everybody has migrated to .NET, OOXML, etc, Microsoft can just extend the protocols, APIs, etc, and say "Hey, if you want your applications to work as intended, use genuine Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office instead of that weed-smoking hippie cancer stuff."

No proof (4, Interesting)

pembo13 (770295) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149743)

But I wouldn't be surprised. Mr. Miguel de Icaza has been very clear about his love for Microsoft and "their" technologies. I never actually hear him choosing community technologies to boast, but maybe that is just due to bias reporting. Either way, it will be interesting to see his reaction if think ever really go bad. I'd also be interested in hearing his opinion on the recent law suit against RedHat.

Honest question (1)

MeditationSensation (1121241) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149783)

I'm not trolling here, I really am curious: is Miguel de Icaza basically a Microsoft stooge? I mean, didn't he put hard for .NET compatibility stuff for Linux?

passive aggressive (1, Interesting)

malevolentjelly (1057140) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149957)

Gnome has made linux a viable alternative for common users by embracing technologies and techniques that embrace popular convenience over sensationalist activism. I hope some random passive aggressive blog attack doesn't do anything to defer them from this path- lest we go back to the dark ages of linux as a curiosity, aka the KDE days.

We're close to something big, and gnome's practicality is the driving force behind it, linux be damned- he is not linux.

You don't have to clone Windows... (4, Insightful)

argent (18001) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150379)

You don't have to clone Windows to produce a viable alternative platform... and in fact if you do end up cloning Windows you'll have eliminated everything that makes the result "alternative".

Why should I care about a Linux-based system where your applications are written in .NET and your formats and user interface and APIs are driven by compatibility with Windows? If I want to run an OS that's compatible with Windows, I've already got that option.

What makes Linux an alternative is that it's an Open Systems environment that happens to be Open Source as well. That applications written for it aren't locked in to Linux, they'll run on any Open Systems platform. If the interfaces and protocols it uses are Microsoft's, then why should anyone care whether it's got a Linux or an NT kernel under the hood?

Another reason to use KDE (5, Insightful)

asm2750 (1124425) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149985)

" ... This "users are idiots, and are confused by functionality" mentality of Gnome is a disease ... Please, just tell people to use KDE." -- Linus Torvalds

An issue of ethics not value (1)

3seas (184403) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150063)

I slightly recall an episode of Star Trek NG or deep space nine, where some doctor had performed bad things to get to a
cure of some deadly disease. The one cured by it was opposed because of all those that had been tortured and killed by
this doctor. The doctor had been brought to life in the holodeck where the cure was figured out. Afterward there was
the ethical concern as to what to do with the doctors holodeck program and the found cure.

The cure had come from bad things done by this doctor.

I don't recall what was decided in datails but I believe they deleted him and the cure.

So do we adopt ooxml if it really is a stronger thing?
And if we do so does that also promote ends justifies the means?

Re:An issue of ethics not value (1)

ERuijters (986540) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150191)

If OOXML really was stronger, I'm sure we'd use it, or at least copy the good elements into ODF. It just isn't a good standard or a particularly good format. The only reason M$ is trying to push it down our throats is that noone but them can really make it work, so it would reinforce their monopoly.

So, this isn't a doctor who made a cure by doing evil, this is a doctor who made an inferior version of an existing cure by doing evil. I'm sure we can agree in that case the end does not justify the means.

Re:An issue of ethics not value (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21150401)

By the way, you're thinking of the Voyager episode "Nothing Human [memory-alpha.org] ". In it, a Cardassian doctor, who performed horrific experiments on Bajorans during the occupation, is recreated in the holodeck to act as a brainstorming advisor for the Holographic Doctor.

A moral dilemma ensues, as to whether or not it is ethically permissible to use scientific results to save a person's life, when those results were obtained in an unethical way.

Re:An issue of ethics not value (1)

cnettel (836611) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150405)

It is a Voyager episode, the doctor is cardassian and it's B'Elanna being treated. Not all Voyager episodes were bad...

I agree (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21150113)

I looked at the gnumeric developpement version and nothing is done to support ODF but everything is done to support Microsoft OpenXML. It's a shame this software was a great one!

What did you expect? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21150147)

A fucking spic supporting the white man's enterprise? Who would of thunk it? Fucking whites are always getting a hand out from the wetback.

Miguel is wrong, but not without reason (4, Interesting)

m2943 (1140797) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150151)

Miguel has stated why he likes OOXML: it's easy to take an existing Microsoft Word reader/writer and turn it into an OOXML reader/writer, because the file structures are so similar. That makes transitioning existing Microsoft-compatible software to OOXML much easier than transitioning to ODF.

That's a reasonable position. I still think it's wrong.

The purpose of an XML document format is to enable other people to do interesting things with the format, not to make life easy for the few people porting existing Microsoft Word compatible software. Furthermore, open source projects need to support ODF anyway because ODF is here and it's here to stay.

Holding their feet to the fire (5, Informative)

jdub! (24149) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150155)

G'day,

The background is really simple: While Jody Goldberg (Gnumeric maintainer extraordinaire) was at Novell, he had been doing rocking work on the ECMA committee to make sure OOXML didn't just slip through, under-specified and uninvestigated. Jody put them through the wringer!

So, when Jody left Novell, the GNOME Foundation supported his participation on the ECMA working group, so he could continue to "keep the bastards honest". :-)

The GNOME Foundation does not support ISO standardisation of OOXML. But whether or not that happens, we're still going to have to support Microsoft document formats, just like everyone else. Should we let Microsoft shove OOXML through ECMA without challenge? Hell no. That's why we have one of our best hackers in there, holding their feet to the fire.

Thanks,

- Jeff Waugh, GNOME Foundation Board

(Given how often it comes up, I suppose it's also important to note that Miguel does not speak for the GNOME Foundation or the GNOME project in general.)

Not just the Gnome Foundation (1)

fritsd (924429) | more than 6 years ago | (#21150199)

On that "further reading" link [ecma-international.org] , amongst the other members of ECMA TC45 are:

The following organizations have participated in the work of Ecma TC45 and their contributions are gratefully acknowledged: Apple, Barclays Capital, BP, The British Library, Essilor, The Gnome Foundation, Intel, The Library of Congress, Microsoft, NextPage, Novell, Statoil, and Toshiba.

I can't imagine why the British Library and the Library of Congress support such a crappy standard, while there already is one which they could improve if they'd like (If you work at either and are reading this, please consider joining the OASIS office TC [oasis-open.org] as well, home of the ISO ODF standard ;-) ).

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>