Slashdot Log In
ISO Says No To Microsoft's OOXML Standard
Posted by
samzenpus
on Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:12 AM
from the try-again-later dept.
from the try-again-later dept.
qcomp writes "The votes are in and Microsoft has lost for now, reports the FFII's campaign website OOXML. The 2/3 majority needed to proceed with the fast-track standardization has not been achieved. Now the standard will head to the ballot resolution meeting to address the hundreds of technical comments submitted along with the votes." Here is yesterday's speculation as to how the vote would turn out.
Related Stories
[+]
If This Was a Month Ago, OOXML Would Be Over 230 comments
Andy Updegrove writes "Public announcements of how Participating members of ISO have voted on OOXML are now rolling in one at a time, and the trend thus far is meaningfully weighted towards 'No with comments.' By my count, there are now four announced Yes votes, with comments, two abstentions, and seven public No with comments votes for OOXML in ISO/IEC JT1. Korea has reportedly voted no as well, and I expect at least Canada, Japan and the United Kingdom to announce 'No with comments' today or tomorrow. There will be more no votes on the roster when the final results are announced in a day or two. But even if the 11 votes I know of now were the only votes, the vote would now have failed — but for the 11 countries that upgraded their status from Observer to Participating member status in the last few weeks. Without those extra 11 'P' countries, it would only require 10 votes to block OOXML from immediate approval. If most or all of those additional 'P' members vote 'yes' as expected, it will confirm suspicions that Microsoft has promoted extra votes in favor of OOXML not only within National Bodies, but within ISO itself."
[+]
Developers: Open Letter to ISO Calls For Standardization of Process 108 comments
In a recent open letter to the ISO FreeCode CEO Geir Isene calls for standardization in the processes used by the ISO to help prevent future OOXML blunders. "It seems ISO is not prepared for a politicized process where a big and influential commercial enterprise will use any means possible to push its own standard through to certification. Committees are flooded by the vendor in support of the standard. Votes are bought and results are hijacked. Several national bodies have flawed and skewed procedures open for corruption."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
ISO Says No To Microsoft's OOXML Standard
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 315 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
It ain't over yet... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:It ain't over yet... (Score:5, Informative)
You could have said that and people would have believed you, so why lie?
Re:It ain't over yet... (Score:5, Informative)
(Last Journal: Thursday December 07 2006, @07:57PM)
The article goes on to explain that this one member isoc.nl (who is the longest sitting member of that NEN committee and voted no) finds that it would be appropriate for the submitter of a standard to refrain from voting this actively, especially because Microsoft had already given out a press release that the result would become "abstain" before the vote was actually being held. In other words, they knew they were going to sabotage(*) the dutch "no with comments" vote and told the press in advance.
Please correct any inaccuracies in my post; I really do not want to misrepresent this article, which speaks volumes for itself IMHO.
(*) original meaning of sabotage: to throw a wooden shoe into a machine to prevent it from working properly.
Re:It ain't over yet... (Score:5, Interesting)
(Last Journal: Tuesday December 02 2003, @06:03AM)
Have you seen the actual break down of which way countries voted? Scroll down a little way in the FTA comments and it's laid out in a table. It's amazing in that with the exception of the US, the voting is almost consistently "No" from rich, developed countries, and "Yes" from poorer Eastern European and African countries that are stereotypically more corrupt. The jokes people are making about Microsoft buying the votes of Banana Republics are not without a basis. Worth looking through the list.
familiar scenario (Score:5, Informative)
Re:It ain't over yet... (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.ajwm.net/amayer/)
I hope folks at NIST are suitably embarrassed about approving such a shoddy spec as a standard, regardless of who it came from.
Re:It ain't over yet... (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.dina.kvl.dk/~abraham/religion/)
After reading your comment I initially though "well, we were part of the almost, an exception to the rule", but to be blunt the truth is that *this is* a Bananas' Republic: only in one would the above happen.
Re:It ain't over yet... (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.agol.dk/elgaard)
"Please vote for our standard. BTW we make the only software can use it properly and we wont sell it to you".
http://www.microsoft.com/exporting/faq.htm [microsoft.com]
Re:It ain't over yet... (Score:5, Interesting)
1) You have to be a dues paying member prior to the submission for consideration in order to vote on that submission. That stops countries from being induced to jump in simply to influence the voting on that one issue.
2) You have to participate in a majority of the discussions (say 75 percent) in order to vote (no last minute O->P upgrades of NBs which had not been involved in any of the discussions).
3) Representatives of the organization requesting the submission are disqualified from voting in any National Body (ECMA in this case).
4) Representatives of any company or organization involved in creating the specification of the proposed standard are disqualified from voting in any National Body (ECMA and Microsoft in this case).
5) Any National Body which is found to have irregularities in their process would be disqualified from participation in all votes for a period of time (say 1 year for the first offense, 5 years for the second). There are two many instances to list.
Re:It ain't over yet... (Score:5, Funny)
(Last Journal: Monday August 22 2005, @11:02AM)
Interesting you should say that:
http://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/artic
OOXML is not to everyone's liking, with Sun Microsystems being denied a seat, and Microsoft holding the chair (President)
Re:Pursuit (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It ain't over yet... (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://radiantmatrix.org/ | Last Journal: Friday January 19 2007, @12:10PM)
By your logic, bribing a Senator is no worse than giving money to the AARP.
The Delivery (Score:5, Funny)
[A]bort, [R]etry, [F]ail?
Re:The Delivery (Score:5, Funny)
(Last Journal: Monday August 22 2005, @11:02AM)
[A]bort, [R]etry, [F]ail?
That is the DOS error message.. these are Vista days.
It appears Microsoft is polluting the ISO and offering gold to their 'Gold' partners...
Cancel / Allow ?
Re:The Delivery (Score:5, Funny)
1. Bribe a bunch of guys to vote yes for you?
2. Provide a specification thats so incomprehensible the only Word will be able to fully implement it?
3. Make dubious FUD statements about OpenDocument?
You forgot (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The Delivery (Score:5, Funny)
Don't you mean "Yes / Yes, with comments"?
Can a committee stop the rotation of the Earth? (Score:4, Insightful)
But now... (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://altgrendel.exit0.us/)
Re:But now... (Score:5, Funny)
(Last Journal: Thursday September 27, @12:04AM)
Re:Can a committee stop the rotation of the Earth? (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Tuesday March 13 2007, @02:39PM)
Dr. Claw.... (Score:5, Funny)
(http://petercruickshank.ca/)
Good for... (Score:2, Funny)
Hurrah! (Score:5, Insightful)
Not likely (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Friday December 01 2006, @10:51AM)
System continues to work (Score:2)
(http://www.mercurialmusings.com/)
Of course, Microsoft will address the changes and probably buy a few more votes. Their timetable is probably still not in jeopardy.
Like Jason at Halloween, they will just keep coming.
Re:System continues to work (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://www.sigsegv.cx/)
Re:System continues to work (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Tuesday March 13 2007, @02:39PM)
If Microsoft addressed all the concerns, then they would likely have an open standard. Microsoft won't do that, because within a few months of them having an open standard, OpenOffice and KOffice will have OOXML support.
I wonder? (Score:3, Interesting)
(Last Journal: Friday December 01 2006, @10:51AM)
Re:I wonder? (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://code.google.com/p/nmod/)
I rather suspect that OOXML is in fact dead, even if they eventually manage to get an ISO certification. Its too late now. After all ODF is already an ISO, easier to implement then OOXML, patent free, with no issues of any type whatsoever. People will choose it simply because its the better format. OOXML will be what people use if they must interact with Microsoft office.
Re:I wonder? (Score:5, Insightful)
In other words, OOXML will be what everyone uses?
Great.
How bad is this? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:How bad is this? (Score:4, Informative)
(http://www.friendwich.com/ | Last Journal: Thursday November 09 2006, @12:05PM)
It wouldn't cripple a market but their monopoly status continues to destroy wealth, eliminate efficiency through interoperability, and chill innovation. Your story clearly highlights the lack of interoperability and inefficiency achieved through forcing upgrades.
This issue is critical and I don't count Microsoft out for the count. It will not surprise me when they play more parliamentary tricks. It remains to be seen how much money it takes to buy an ISO standard.
Re:How bad is this? (Score:4, Insightful)
Even if every company that you ever have to deal with in the history of your company's existance uses MS Office, you will still have a multitude of problems sharing documents between people that use Office 2007, Office 2003, Office XP, Office 2000, and god forbid, even earlier versions. Don't believe me? Get a random sampling of Office 2007 documents and open them up on the equivalent tools in an Office 2003 or Office XP suite.
All it takes is for one customer to modify a sales order that you sent them in Word 2003 format, and save it in Word 2007 format before sending it back to you to cause you a load of grief. If you haven't experienced this with the MS formats, perhaps you have been in a position where you are only sharing documents with other folks internal to your company that are on the same version? Or perhaps the documents you use are simple enough thta the differences in formatting between versions was not evident?
The problem is real, as this is how MS has designed the formats - to produce false incentives to 'upgrade' to the latest version of Office.
Re:How bad is this? (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://slashdot.org/ | Last Journal: Friday December 23 2005, @06:30PM)
Anecdote time.
About a year ago, a client of mine gave me a PDF and some source files and said "We can't edit this. Please fix the problem." The document itself was in Word 2.0. The graphics were WMFs. This thing had been originally created in Windows 3.1 and updated (with the WMFs) in Windows 95. The client couldn't open up any of it.
The Word file was basically a non-starter. I just ignored it and stripped the text out of the PDF instead. The graphics, though...The PDF refused to be opened properly in Illustrator, so I couldn't recover them that way. I also could not open the WMFs directly -- it was something about how they were tied to the original platform. What I ended up doing was digging up an ancient copy of Windows and and ancient copy of Illustrator, building a custom machine just for this operation, and recovering the files that way. The client paid about $3,000 for the privilege of being able to update one of their own files. Just one file, mind, and it had yet to be actually updated -- this was simply establishing the ability to update. All because they were couldn't see what a bad idea it was to invest their data in lock-in formats.
When I explained to the client how they had gotten into this mess, and how they could avoid it in the future, they stared blankly back. We use up-to-date versions of Word now, they said.
Oh, well, I thought, here comes another few grand in my pocket. But then again, in another few years, maybe nobody has these old copies of Windows and old copies of Illustrator anymore, and then they are SOL.
Still not official (Score:1, Insightful)
(http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/index.html | Last Journal: Wednesday July 28 2004, @03:31PM)
I no longer presume "sources" to have any credibility.
Re:Still not official (Score:4, Informative)
Like here? [iso.org]
Sesostris III
Good (Score:3, Interesting)
(Last Journal: Thursday October 18, @12:52PM)
Remember folks, for a company of several hundred thousand, unfortunately not all are going to be good guys - theres plenty more that are however.
Flame away.
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.ev4.org/)
Backwards compatibility should be handled by the converter, and shouldn't pollute the format itself.
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.nine-times.org/)
As a disgruntled Microsoft customer, I'd like to ask "WTF?!"
Seriously, I don't believe the devs working within the company are bad, but you guys need to stage an uprising or something. The people running your company seem to be total dicks.
WTF? This is insightful? (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, I don't believe the devs working within the company are bad, but you guys need to stage an uprising or something.
FFS! Take some responsibility for your actions people.
Re:WTF? This is insightful? (Score:5, Insightful)
This "vote with your feet" bs needs to stop, seriously. It takes an overly simplistic look at the way a market actually functions in the real world -- which is not the same as the way it functions in this libertarian day dream. The fundamental problem with libertarianism is that it treats all markets as if they were perfectly competitive markets with low barriers to entry, when in reality, the vast majority of them are not.
If you seriously believe that substituting away from Windows, or from Word, is something that the vast majority of people here can actually do, then you're absolutely wrong. Listen, I don't own a Windows system -- I use Debian GNU/Linux exclusively. But Word and Windows are the defacto standard and living outside of that standard is impossible. Let's look at the facts:
Whether you want to admit it or not, there is massive inertia in the industry. Everyone runs Windows, and that keeps everyone else running Windows. "Just don't buy MS" is the most ridiculous statement in the world. Sure, if everyone stopped, then that would hurt their bottom-line. But even if every Slashdotter ever stopped buying Windows, MS would still be making billions. Every time a court slaps a fine of a hundred million dollars on MS, everyone on Slashdot whines about how it's a slap on the wrist and nothing more, because the company makes so much money it's sick. The exact same logic applies here.
What you're suggesting would only work if a large percentage of MS's clients all defected. It's like saying, "Big Oil acting badly? Just don't buy oil! That'll teach 'em!"
Come on, this isn't a perfectly competitive market. It's a monopoly. There's a reason economists think that those are bad.
Re:WTF? This is insightful? (Score:4, Informative)
(http://www.ajwm.net/amayer/)
We're talking office document formats, and Open Office (among others) works just fine on Windows. A lock-in to Windows != a lock-in to MS Office.
This is insightful?
Re:Good? I think it's rotten! (Score:4, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Monday August 22 2005, @11:02AM)
There's a saying where I live that goes... "You just need to sample a single grain of rice to judge an entire pot..." Microsoft's dubious and nefarious tactics wrt OOXML have shown them to be ruthless cowards; and enemies of technical merit; as software developers like you must know.
Other than rewriting the same code every 3 years when MS decides to rebrand an technology and stop supporting old versions... what are these 'benefits' you see in MS technology? Spreading disinformation amongst the developer community is a very grave sin, in my book... much worse than 'Get the Facts' aimed at consumers.
Re:Good (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://slashdot.org/ | Last Journal: Thursday May 12 2005, @09:37AM)
So let's put it this way, Is Microsoft AFRAID of a level playing field?
If they were serious about the whole standards thing, they could just add real ODF support. Then they could simply put out MS Office that worked with ODF, and most people and businesses would STILL buy it, even with alternatives available. Beyond that, since they do have appear to have a head start in usability and function with MS Office, they could simply have the have the BEST office suite that happens to work with ODF file formats. Beyond that, if ODF is not sufficiently robust, MS could "play well with others" and work to add what is needed. Aren't they confident that they could still have the BEST implementation, along with "history effect"?
Does Microsoft really believe that they can't compete in an open market, without customer lock-in, or without cheating?
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Thursday December 07 2006, @07:57PM)
"single disgruntled employee who singlehandedly and without authorization from his/her manager bribed the national bureaux of Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte-d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba (Cuba? they're not even allowed to buy Microsoft products!), Cyprus, Egypt, Fiji, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Lebanon, Morocco, Kuwait, Nigeria, Pakistan, Panama, Qatar, Romania, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, Sri Lanka, Syria, Tanzania, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan,
(take deep breath)
Austria, Bulgaria, Colombia, Germany (shame on you, DIN), Ghana, Greece, Kenya, Malta, Poland (only half of the committee(s)), Portugal, Singapore, Switzerland, Tunisia, Turkey, Uruguay, USA, Venezuela (wait 'till someone tells Chávez [vit.com.ve] this),
(remember to breathe)
and thwarted into abstinence the votes of a.o. Malaysia, the Netherlands and Sweden",
yet? (verb at beginning of sentence)
Let's all thank the 1 country above quotum that voted no, otherwise this would have destroyed the credibility of ISO, IMHO.
Thank you VERY much, Brazil, Canada, China, Denmark, Czech Republic, Ecuador, France, India, Iran, Ireland, Japan, Korea, New Zealand, Norway, Philippines, South Africa, Thailand, United Kingdom. I don't have money but you have my respect.
Lessons learned - the job isn't over (Score:5, Insightful)
I submit though, that the job isn't over, but incomplete. The ISO seriously needs to look at fixing how Microsoft attempted to hijack the process to suit their own gain, and ignore the real purpose of International Standards.
Until this fixed, we'll see more of the same, on a greater scale. And not just by Microsoft. The end result would be the weakening of the usefulness of real standards, if the current system is left as it is.
Good luck to the ISO.