Important recommendations omitted

Why was important recommendations from McKinsey omitted in the report 'A professional and well driven police' to the Parliament?

From the report from McKinsey with the financial analyzes:

The section 'Use of cheaper software':

That in stead (of Microsoft Office) works with a scenario with a shift to OpenOffice.org or Star Office, as the product is called, when delivered from SUN (Oracle). By using a well know supplier such as SUN(Oracle), that now also develops and supports MySQL as well as Star Office, it will be assured that support is available with the quality the police needs. (p. 83-84)

A shift to OpenOffice.org or Star Office will according to McKinsey result in savings around 100 mio DKK untill 2017. McKinsey has also analyzed the initial costs that comes with the shift, and the estimates are between 2 and 7½ mio DKK. An investment that pays of after just a few months (p. 84).

It is further noted that shift to open source vill call for investments in education of the IT-staff and end users. These investments are estimated to be no more that 1 mio DKK., wich is a very small amount in comparison to the possible cost savings. Both in Denmark and international exists good examples of companies and organizations, that has taken advantage of the potential cost savings by shifting to OpenOffice products (p. 85).

The low investments required combined with the large cost savings is causing McKinsey to recommend:

An open source strategy that clearly recommends alternative software purchase like MySQL for especially database solutions to reduce costs (p. 86).

These recommendations is completely omitted in the official report from the Minister of Justice. The section about 'use of cheaper software' only says

The police is today using Microsoft Office 2007, wich is infact a newer version than most companies and organizations. In the current agreement with Microsoft it's planned to upgrade to a newer version within 3-4 years, but the benefits of such upgrade will be very limited. McKinsey therefor recommends that the upgrade of Microsoft Office and Windows is postponed, wich will reduce costs with a yearly amount of 13 mio. DKK (p. 85).

The list of relevant references, e.g., Swedish police, the Frensh Gendarmerie etc. are completely left out in the official report.

A police report

Last Friday the Minister of Justice revealed a report regarding the Danish police's finances. The background is that the police in Denmark has been spending much more money over the last many years, than they where allowed to in the budget.

The report is analyzing many parts of the police, e.g., a very week HR division and so on and so forth.

Of cause there is a chapter regarding software. Unqualified project management and lack of structured software purchase are two major issues. A solution to save money in the coming year are described in a chapter called 'Use of cheaper software' and the official report from the Government describes how upgrading to MS Office 2010 can be postponed for three or four years.

Thats all!

What is about to become a major scandal in the Parliament is that the same chapter in the original report from McKinsey & Company is a clear and undiscussable recommendation of open source software in general and OpenOffice.org in particular. The title of the that chapter is 'Use of cheaper software' suddenly makes sense.

The opposition parties are now asking the Minister, why there crystal clear recommendations of F/OSS and OpenOffice.org has been erased from the official version.

Are the police not willing to participate in cost reduction?

Links:
The official report (in Danish): http://www.justitsministeriet.dk/fileadmin/downloads/Pressemeddelelser2010/Et%20professionelt%20og%20veldrevet%20dansk%20politi.pdf

The original report (in Danish): http://www.justitsministeriet.dk/fileadmin/downloads/Pressemeddelelser2010/Budgetanalyse%20af%20politiet%202009-2010%20McKinsey%20&%20Company.pdf

Sanders expert report is ready

Helge Sander, Danish Minister of Science and Technology earlier this year asked an expert committee to look into the technical and legal implications of the introduction of two standards for documents in the government. The report is now ready.

The committee consists of

• Professor dr. jur. Mads Bryde Andersen, University of Copenhagen (Chairman)
• Associate Professor Jens Hørlück, Aarhus University
• IT centerchef Jorgen Kristensen, Association of Local IT managers
• Professor Kim V. Andersen, CBS
• Professor Mogens Kühn Pedersen, CBS

The report is mainly a review and summation of said words in the matter and the committee does not take their own opinion. It seems a little disappointing, because the committee members probably could find something more meaningfull to do than to quote what others have said and written.

The only new topic the report brings to light is a recommendation of the PDF format for final documents. One detail that has previously been completely overlooked in the political debate. The few conclusions in the report is so vague that it is almost comical. Among other things, the conclusion is ...

In summary, the Committee believes that interoperability between ODF and OOXML continues to represent a challenge.

It is another way of saying ...

It is not possible to achieve full interoperability between OOXML and ODF. The two formats is simply not interoperabile.

It is, I believe so uncritical that it becoms self-contradictory in some areas. Among others the report includes Ramboll Management TCO reports quite indiscriminate, despite the fact that these reports are made on a critisized base and criticized by many. The reports from Ramboll are by many regarded as worthless. One of the TCO report's assumptions were that every document needed ten minutes to convert. A prerequisite as Ramboll Management itself points out is a very sensitive parameter: Changing this parameter just a little bit, will change the conclusion in the report.

Expert Committee's report emphasizes that the imposition of the PDF format for final documents will end up with only a small part of the existing documents should be converted. It disappoints me very much that the report does not identify that this observation makes TCO report by Ramboll Management inappropriate in context.

In addition, the ISO approval of OOXML is concidered as the final conclusion that the OOXML is an open and appropriate standard. This despite the fact that even Dansih Standards recognizes that the approval process was perhaps not completely clean and OOXML might not be quite as qualified as it seems.

The experts completely ignores the world around us. I believe that we in Denmark can't take such decisions without first looking around us. The countries which we usually compare ourselves with, may have been through similar problems. But the report is also completely ignoring this.

Repport from IT-og Teleagency : http://budurl.com/ekspert
Computerworld.dk: http://www.computerworld.dk/art/49464

Unfortunately there isn't an English translation, but you can try with Google Translate here: http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fbudurl.com%2Fekspert&sl=da&tl=en&history_state0=

MS answers to Master Thesis

Microsoft is commenting on the master thesis I wrote about a few days ago (http://lodahl.blogspot.com/2008/04/master-thesis-openofficeorg-vs.html) on the website Comon (http://www.comon.dk/index.php/news/show/id=35500) .
Among other things, Jasper Bojsen from Microsoft in Denmark says that...

It is not possible to say, that the same calculations are valid for all public institutions, because there are big differences between the medical systems etc. used and in the way they are integrated.

I say: True enough. There are big differences between the public institutions and the medical systems etc. That is already taken into consideration by the author. Further more has Microsoft promised us full interoperability in Office 2007 and OOXML, so the integration shouldn't be any problem, or should it ?

Microsoft also claims that there should be taken into consideration, the productivity-advantages in Microsoft Office. This is precisely what shouldn't be, because that subject is covered in another chapter in the master thesis, and the conslusion is, that there is very limitted advantage in Microsoft Office compared to OpenOffice.org.

On open source communities

A small piece on open source communities in general and OpenOffice.org specific

Each time you enter a shop to buy something, this can be grosseries or a computer program, you have an expectation that it is ok and that everything works as described. You have the right to demand certain quality because you payed for what you have bought. If the new DVD player doesn't work, you can have it repaired, exchanged with another one or in the end, get your money back.

This is not the case when you use open source software from the simple reason that you didn't pay anything. Of cause you can uninstall the software. If you need a piece of software in conjunction with a guaranty, you can buy a commercial application like StarOffice from SUN Microsystems. StarOffice is a commercial version of OpenOffice.org and you can buy StarOffice with both garanties and support.

• How does the open source environment actually work ?
• How can anyone make a business when the software is free ?

From time to time I get a question from people that would like me to confirm that it actually *is* free of charge to use OpenOffice.org. "Can we use it in the company too ?" is the question.

Yes. OpenOffice.org is free of charge. Also in a company - without any limitations.

This can be true because several IT companies has found a possibility to make money on selling consulting and education. These companies doesn't make any money if the application doesn't exist, so the company is indirectly making money on supporting and helping the application development. Furthermore, several companies, organizations and governments that supports the development because they are using OpenOffice.org. By supporting the development, they make sure that the application is developed in a way that ensures OpenOffice.org to be developed in the right direction. You could call it a kind of self decided license fee. In most cases two or several companies or organization stick together and solves a specific problem in common. That way they can achieve something without each of them is getting involved directly.

In Denmark there is a lot of companies, organizations and authorities that is using OpenOffice.org, but as far as I know, only very few of them is actually giving a contribution back to the community. All members of the community are private contributers.

In the last two years of discussion on open standards and use of open source software like OpenOffice.org I have often heard that OpenOffice.org is not good enough and other programs are much better. But I have never heard from anyone that Denmark could participate and contribute to solve some of these problems. In Denmark we raise demands and criticisme, but we don't contribute.

I think this is caused by the lack of understanding for the way open source software works. And how development works.

In Denmark there is a lot of schools that is using OpenOffice.org in education. There must be some of the schools that has made some kind of education material like a syllabus or maybe even a teaching book. It would be much more effective if the schools could get together and develop this material in high quality once and release it under one of the free licenses.

The community behind OpenOffice.org in Denmark would very much like to contribute to get people together. Public schools can even get supported with fundings from the National IT- and Tele Agency.

In 2007 we started a new project in the international level of OpenOffice.org with the purpose to develop some kind of certification of users. A common goal of knowledge. The project is unfortunately partly closed for the moment, because we cant find participants.

Conclusion

Next time you wonder why something hasn't been developed yet or why you can't find a course to join or why you can't open .docx-files in OpenOffice.org or why you can't play multimedia files in presentations properly, change the question to: "How can I help to make it work ?".

You don't have to be a programmer to contribute to development. We can use anybody who can spend a few hours among friends in a wonderful community. Can you write a short how-to description or help us with graphical work or perhaps help us writing press releases. Do you know a lot of politicians or just a lot of people, you can help us promote the cause. There is always a job for everyone. And remember, its always YOU that sets the limits, so you can always say no thanks and back out for a while.

If your company uses OpenOffice.org, please remember to join the reference list on http://da.openoffice.org or http://www.openoffice.org. This is also considered a contribution.

Official message from Norway

This is the official (in English) message from the Norwegian government:
http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/fad/pressesenter/pressemeldinger/2007/Open-document-standards-to-be-obligatory.html?id=494810

The Government's decision is as follows:

HTML will be the primary format for publishing public information on the Internet.
PDF (PDF 1.4 and later or PDF/A ISO 19005-1) is obligatory when there is a wish to keep a document's original appearance.
ODF (ISO/IEC 26300) is to be used to publish documents to which the user should be able to make changes after downloading, e.g. public forms to be filled out by the user. This format is also made obligatory.

Answer to Jesper Lund Stocholm

Thank you to Jesper Lund Stocholm for his comment on this post http://lodahl.blogspot.com/2007/12/inquirer-has-coment-on-this.html

And thank you Jesper for correcting me when I misunderstand the information from the National IT- and Tele Agency. The thing is that I didn't participate in either of the two conferences. As a unpaid volunteer, I can't join all the meetings and conferences that takes place during daytime. I have a job to take care of. This is also the reason for not being so active on the blog over the last few months. I'm sorry if this is disappointing you Jesper, but that is how it is. Unfortunately this now ends up in you criticizing me for who I am and what I don't do.

These are some of the basic rules in open source communities:

• Don't put criticism to what people don't do, only to what they do
• Only put criticism to the actual work, not to th persons who did it
• respect other people even if you don't share your own opinion

I kindly ask you use another tone in the debate in the future, thanks.

The reason for the two posts on my blog http://lodahl.blogspot.com/2007/12/groklaw-denmark-pretends-msooxml-is.html and http://lodahl.blogspot.com/2007/12/inquirer-has-coment-on-this.html is that I have seen these international reflections to the situation in Denmark. The international press probably don't read Danish, so I try to keep them up to date with the situation. And yes, this is the situation as it looks from my point of view. I'm sure that someone else will talk about the same issue from other points of views.

Groklaw: Denmark Pretends MSOOXML is an "Open Standard"

According to Grocklaw the Danish government is pretending that EOOXML is an open standard approved by ISO. http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20071211153924324

It's true that the public authorities is about to implement open standards in the public sector and that EOOXML is one of the accepted standards.

It must be emphasized that the ISO approval (or rejection) has never been a part of the discussion in the Danish Parliament. The ISO approval is not the final and true prove weather a document format is an open standard. ISO doesn't have the final word, but the the decision will of cause have effects in Denmark as well.

The Danish decision is this:

• ODF is an open standard (accepted)
• EOOXML is for now accepted as an open standard, but Microsoft must prove true openness in the process before end of 2008. The Danish Competition Authority has been asked to look after this.

I have talked to a few MP's about this both last summer when the discussion was open in the Parliament but also this late autumn where there was an election for Parliament. The politicians is very much aware of this problem and Microsoft will not get a final accept if the process isn't getting more open.

Clean ODF implementation IS realistic

Jesper Lund Stockholm has posted this comment to my blogpost about the implementation manual: http://lodahl.blogspot.com/2007/12/now-its-getting-operational.html#c8036683144354266846

- Thank you for that Jesper.

Jesper claims that according to a technical report, it's clearly not realistic to do a clean ODF implementation in the public sector.

I must say that I'm disappointed with the project in the Danish IT- and Tele Agency. From the Parliament came a clear message: use open standards for exchanging office documents. But the Agency has managed to shave the decision down to "Use open standards or Microsoft for text documents- if you find it appropriate".

To Jesper I will say: the technical report you are referring to is taken out of its context. You know that this report is written based on a decision of dual standards. A situation where we know that to kinds of documents formats will live side by side. In this scenario there will be a lot of document conversion every day - from now and forever. If the decision had been one standard only, there would only be initial conversion of a lot of documents. Later on, conversion of documents would happen only rarely.

How come it's not realistic in Denmark when it already happens in France, Norway, Brazil and many other countries ? What is it that makes it different in Denmark ?

Now it's getting operational :-)

First it was strategical decision in Folketinget (the Danish parliament) in summer 2006. This summer 2007 the agreement between government and the Danish municipals was a fact. And now we are getting close to the operational level. It all should start on January 1th. 2008, where all Danish authorities must be able to receive both ODF and OOXML documents.

A few days ago the Danish IT- and Tele agency published a 'manual' for the authorities. I think the manual as it is leaves the spirit of B103 behind and leaves the authorities with a choice of 'make he easy choice' with no respect for the original purpose and spirit of the resolution.

The manual (in Danish) can be found here: http://dokumentformater.oio.dk/billedmappe-til-dokumentformat-hjemmesiden/leverancer/62451-v4j-vejledning_-_rapport_tdh.pdf

There is a two week hearing period for this paper, and I will try to put rejections and comments.

Thanks to Jesper Lund Stocholm to direct my attention to this.

Translation (press release)

Wide agreement about open standards
(Unofficial translation of the press release)

03.10.2007

The government KL (Danish Municipals ) and Danish Regions has made an agreement about the application from obligatory, open standards for software there public sector.

Before the summer the Minister of Science and technology and the Parliament (Folketinget) agreed on a schedule plan for adopting the open standards. The schedule and the adoption of the first part of obligatory , open standards is validated by a government decision and is actually validated by an agreement between the government, KL and Danish Regions.

The agreement implies , that public authorities from January 1th. 2008 shall apply seven sets of open standards in connection with new it - systems, unless that results in extra expenses. All authorities shall contemporary be able to receive text documents as two open standards (EOOXML and ODF).

Obligatory , open defaults shall :
- support contest and options on the software markedet
- give rise to the assumption by context between it - systems, solutions and organisations
- secure bigger effectiveness and better problem solving.

later that year there will be a conference about the adoption af open standards in the public sector.

The government KL and Danish regions has agree to continuously take standardization into account and adopt open standards. It will secure against connections across the public sectors and ensure competition, innovation and a multiple software market to the best for development of the digital governance.

Minister of Science and technology Helge Sander:
”This agreement means, that vi actually seriously has set of to adopt open standards. Denmark is already leading at this field and therefore every new steps we take, give echo abroad. I expects , that the citizen and the businesses will experience, that there will be further options , and that they digital solutions proves better connectivity and is more user friendly.”

Chairman of KL Erik Fabrin:
”For the municipals the agreement is an importantly step in the right direction. I am persuaded, that the use of open it standards is the access to a better working public sector, where we can be give citizen better consecutive services and better accessibility. I also expects, that an enhanced adoption of open standards will make it less expensive to exchange data between authorities and make it easier for new businesses to come in at the public it market with new solutions. However the agreement itself is not doing that. We must make an effort in all parts of public sector and use resources push that development."

Charman of Danish regions Bent Hansen:
”The regions are pleased to have been a part of this agenda in relationship to the adoption of open standards. The demands on accessibility will as an example help that all inhabitants , also persons with disabilities, can benefit of the digitalization of the public sector. The agreement shows that the public sector in cooperation can handle improvement of an important task and take commitment to the future digital development."

Progress in Denmark

The last few days shown a few interesting news.

The Danish Government has made an agreement with Danish Municipals ( http://www.kl.dk ) and Danish Regions ( http://www.regioner.dk ) about how open standards should be implemented in the public sector. This press release is in Danish:
http://videnskabsministeriet.dk/site/forside/nyheder/pressemeddelelser/2007/bred-aftale-om-aabne-standarder
My own unofficial translation here.
A lot of details about the implementation has been published here: http://videnskabsministeriet.dk/site/forside/nyheder/Aktuelle-temaer/aabne-standarder/bilag e.g. these manuals for the offices: http://www.oio.dk/aabnestandarderforsoftware .

The Minister of finance has been asked to reveal how much the Danish state is paying Microsoft each year ( http://www.computerworld.dk/art/41817 ). The Minister (Thor Pedersen) claims that these numbers is impossible to collect. This is rubbish, because the sate has a centralized purchase of software licenses.

Several Members of the Danish Parliament wants to liberate the scholar system from Microsoft monopoly. Microsoft is offering a 70% discount to schools and universities but despite that, the bill is too high. And the MP know that monopoly in schools will keep the Microsoft monopoly in the rest of the country, both public and private sector. http://www.computerworld.dk/art/41789
The reason for this discussion is an article ( http://www.computerworld.dk/art/41785 ) that covers the fact that using Linux in the schools is more expensive than Windows. But the actual cause for that fact is, that Linux support is very expensive today. Why ? Because not many customers are using it. If the schools could gather together and collaborate about a common solution and establish a support center, it would be much cheaper.

What is nearly grotesque is that the agreement between the government and the Danish Municipals specifically mentions schools, hospitals and public libraries as not covered by the agreement. So what is it worth, when my children don't get the opportunity to learn about OpenOffice.org and open standards at school. They will end up as Microsoft users just like the previous generation. When they get on the job market, they will ask for Microsoft applications.

Sorry that all my references are in Danish. I'll try to find some time to translate to English one of these days.

Will B 103 end up with the opposite result ?

The Danish Parliament agreed on a pragmatic solution when the implementation plan was arranged just before the summer holidays this year. The only way to close the case at that time, was by choosing a solution with dual standards. Probably because the MP's couldn't reach consensus on a more categoric solution.

Even after the rejection of OOXML from ISO, the Danish Government still wants Microsoft at the table. Even after we have seen ridiculous attempts of couping National Boards in Sweden, Norway, Malaysia and even Denmark. Still, the Danish government wants to kiss with Microsoft.

Now it shows, that the reaction from the local IT-managers might be in contradiction with the 'soul' of the resolution. According to this article https://www.sam-data.dk/artikler/artikel.asp?id=82 (in Danish, sorry) from one of the largest and most respected trade unions HK, the result is, that IT managers is beginning to hoard solutions based on OOXML.

The reason is, that the Parliament agreed on a one year trial period, where Microsoft should prove the openness of OOXML. But now that ISO has rejected OOXML as an international standard for office documents, people are beginning to get scarred. Will OOXML eventually be accepted ? Projects that might not even be mature, is started, just to get a Microsoft solution.

Dear Folketing (that the Danish Parliament):
Stop this now. Close the case and send Microsoft home until they can come up with a good explanation. ...And a useful and reasonable document format for our files.

Future adoption of ODF ?

Bob Sutor talks about the future here and he expects to see more adoptions of OASIS ODF in the public sector. Well I hope Bob is right. But I also fear that Microsoft will continue the FUD and lobbying as usual.

According to the Danish minister of Science and IT, the ISO rejection of OOXML will not have any impact on the process in Denmark. The Danish decision to use two standards was not depending on you-know-who to be approved by ISO.

The Danish decision is requiring that OOXML can prove its openness. And the Parliament is watching the situation closely. What we hope is, that the extreme aggressive lobbying and the in many ways dirty tricks used, will be the drop.

For instance you can take a look at this analyzing of the votes in conjunction with the official corruption index. Guess what: The most corrupted countries voted yes.

The Microsoft coup

The Microsoft coup in Sweden has had some consequences in Denmark. Sweden and Denmark are very close, and we speak almost the same language, so we read each others papers and so on.

• A representative from Microsoft in Sweden admits that they have send a mail to 'some' business partners telling them to join the TC and vote yes. 'But that wasn't what we mend to do', Microsoft says (http://www.computerworld.dk/art/41083?cid=1&a=cid&i=1&pos=11).

• A representative from The municipal of Århus, Jens Kjellerup, says that the meetings in Denmark was alright and fair (http://www.computerworld.dk/art/41082?a=rss&i=0).

• Microsoft in Denmark claims that they didn't put any similar pressure on Danish business partners (http://www.version2.dk/artikel/3744).

• One (anonymous) Danish business partner says that he was under pressure. Repeating questions about if he had submitted his yes-comments. The comments was actually given to him by Microsoft (http://www.version2.dk/artikel/3759).

• The Danish Parliament is now asking the Danish Minister of IT- and Telecom, Helge Sander about his role (http://www.version2.dk/artikel/3757). The Parliament is asking for an investigation (http://comon.dk/index.php/news/show/id=32455).

There has been a lot of focus on this in the Danish media. I don't know if there is any connection, but there has been more interest in open source in general ? These 3 newsmedias are delivering IT-news to almost all newspapers in Denmark.

The Members of parliament is also interested in the matter, because the discussion about implementing two parallel standards, was very much connected to the expectation, that OOXML would get approved by ISO. This case might end up, that Microsoft will get kicked out because of bad behavior.

I'll keep you up to date later.

Interoperability or compatibility ?

The governments are expecting compatibility. But what can they expect to find in the plug-in technology ? Not compatibility, but interoperability and I think they will get disappointed.

Two words that flows around these days are interoperability and compatibility. As a non-native English, I often mixes the two words around and find myself (and others) confused in the discussion. Both words is used to way to describe the situation with two document standards. We need the two standards to be able to work together or somehow get the computer applications to accept both formats.

Is this a question of interoperability or compatibility ?

hmmmm.

I decided to try and find out. Any comments are welcome from native English speaking readers. I really would like to know. By the way: Is these words commonly used in your every day life ?

I started to have a look at wikipedia to see if I could get a clue.

The definition of interoperability:

the ability of two or more systems or components to exchange information and to use the information that has been exchanged.

This dictionary says: ability of a system (as a weapons system) to work with or use the parts or equipment of another system.

With respect to software, the term interoperability is used to describe the capability of different programs to exchange data via a common set of business procedures, and to read and write the same file formats and use the same protocols.

Okay. Interoperability is when two different things are working together in respect for each other. This sounds like a plug-in to me.

In technology, especially computing (irrespective of platform), a product is said to be backward compatible (or downward compatible) when it is able to take the place of an older product, by interoperating with other products that were designed for the older product.

Forward compatibility (sometimes confused with extensibility) is the ability of a system to accept input intended for later versions of itself. According to the dictionary it means designed to work with another device or system without modification; especially : being a computer designed to operate in the same manner and use the same software as another computer.

Okay, compatibility is when one can replace the other without any problems. This could be a filter plug-in too.

Please tell me if I'm wrong here.

Interoperability is usable in a situation, where you are expecting to convert a number of documents once, and never again. Compatibility is what you need if two standards is 'living together in harmony'.

But how is the actual situation out there ?

From my discussions with Danish politicians this summer and later on some IT guys from several municipals I will claim that the customers is expecting fully compatibility between the two standards. But what is actually happening is a few project trying to get interoperability. Non of the existing projects are expecting MS Word to use ODF format as native format and neither is the plug-in from Novell meant to use OOXML as native file format in OpenOffice.org.

When one vendor overrules an existing document standard and creates a new one for them selves, it shows us that they actually don't want compatibility. And why ? Because if we actually get there one day, the customers can actually make their own choice. By keeping the two formats away from each other, MS is keeping customers locked in with MS Office. Why is MS supporting one of the projects ? Because that way they can control the development process and either directly or indirectly make sure that development is in a slow hurry.

Compatibility will not happen as long as MS don't want it to happen. And the customers that is expecting compatibility will be disappointed, because what they might get is interoperability. Dual standards will not work.

Compatibility can only be reached with one single standard !

By the way, you should read this article by Bob Sutor about Interoperability

One year evaluation

For one year, beginning on January 1st. 2008, we will see both ODF and EOOXML as format for document exchange in the public sector. All software purchased must support at least one of the formats. Furthermore, all public offices must be capable of opening or reading documents of both formats.

There is no doubt that ODF is here to stay, but Microsoft must prove openness and willingness to other platforms and applications. The Members of the Parliament are very well aware, that Microsoft has an advantage, because of a existing marked share around 98%. If Microsoft can't prove that EOOXML can be implemented by other vendors and on other platforms, they will be dismissed.

The Danish Competition Authority has been asked to follow the competitive situation closely in the evaluation period.

They couldn't make up their minds :-(

I have been reporting from the struggle about open standards in the Danish Parliament for some time now. And it seems that I will be doing this for some time in the future too.

Today the Parliament agreed to ....not to agree !

Well, actually the agreed on implementing both ODF and EOOXML as open standards in the public sector from January 1th. 2008. Excacly what the Minister of Science and Technology proposed.

BUT.

There will be a two year review periode for Microsoft to prove that EOOXML is open enough. This is exactly what we have been arguing about for the last several months. Openness. Or the lack of it. Microsoft MUST prove that

1. other vendors can and will use EOOXML
2. EOOXML can be used on other platforms that Microsoft Windows.

This is not what I expected. I thought that the politicians could make up their minds, but this will give Microsoft an enormous advantage. There is no guaranty, that the politicians will take us serious in two years from now. If they will, why didn't they now ?

I'll come up with further information later.

I was thinking ...

For a long time, I have wondered why the Minister of Science and Technology and the National IT- and Tele Agency is so happy about Microsoft. Now the Minister of Finance has joined the list of Microsoft supporters.

Do they have a secret shareholder account or something ? I don't think so. I don't hope so.

What about other 'public' people. How can it be ? What is the secret connection between the Danish Government and Microsoft ?

Rumors says that there is a secret agreement between the Government and Microsoft about the Danish Microsoft development department in Vedbaek. This is the largest development department outside America. More than 1.400 jobs and they are expanding every year. Can this has something to do with it ?

Perhaps. But Microsoft must know, that a 'unwritten' agreement will not hold longer than the Government. If and when we get a shift (witch is expected at the next election), the connection or agreement will no longer be valid. OK then, Microsoft might be passed the troubles for now, but what about next time they are in trouble? A new government will probably be with Socialdemokratiet (Labour) in charge and one or two additional minor parties along. A government like this will not be so friendly to Microsoft in the future.

Do we have to wait for a new government ?

Yes, I'm afraid so. The current leaders are locked up with some very oldfashioned ways of thinking or some old agreements.

What is the background for this situation ?

I don't know. But I do have a suggestion. I would very much like comments on this:

Many years ago the local governments in Denmark created something called 'Kommunedata'. We are back in the very early days of computing. Later on, this data central was considered illegal, because private enterprise should have a chance to compete. Today it's illigal for local governments and other public agencies to create anything like an enterprise. Obviously because public tax money could help supporting low prices and thereby create unfair competition. It was decided that 'Kommunedata' should be sold away from the local governments in 2012 at the latest. To prepare this, the company was called KMD and was changed into a private limited company, owned by the local governments through an organization. KMD is now being prepared to become a real company. They have to present the account report every year and as we all know: A better result will give a better price on sale eventually. So KMD was asked to make a revenue.

Now comes the best part...

KMD has always been very kind to Microsoft. Four years ago KMD was announced Advanced Business Partner. I remember the press announcement from then, but today you can't find anything about this on KMD website, but if you ask Microsoft, you can find KMD on the list of partners.

When KMD has send so called 'IT-advisers' or 'experts' to the local governments, they are probably considered as friends. "They are payed by us" the local IT-managers must think. But did they know, that the advisers actually had a Microsoft budget ? That they have been partly payed by Microsoft ?

The agreement made just a few days ago by the Minister of Finance has nine possible 'resellers'. KMD is one of the nine.

Here is my point:
If OpenOffice.org becomes too popular because of B 103, KMD will lose the marketplace. KMD is very friendly to Microsoft and did NOT try to keep up with time, and investigate FOSS at all. Not even OpenOffice.org, when customers asked for it two years ago. So if OpenOffice.org and ODF is getting popular, KMD will lose value. Estimated price now is 20 billion Danish kroner but it could easily be halved if things work out wrong. This is money that the local governments would like to get their fingers on. And if they lose half of it, they might be a little disappointed. Don't you think ?

References
KMD http://www.kmd.dk

Minister of Finance signs agreement with Microsoft

The Minister of Finance has signed a three year Enterprise Agreement (EA) contract with Microsoft, that covers all 'of the shelf products' from Microsoft. It's very unusual that the Ministry signs this kind of contract directly because Denmark has a special office for that purpose, called National Procurement Ltd. - Denmark ski .

The agreement is considered a direct attack from the Government against the ongoing process in the Parliament on implementing B 103. Remember that the Danish Government is actually not that happy about the original resolution.

With this agreement, the Ministry of Finance is actually becoming a Microsoft reseller.

Sorry, this was a very quick post, but I'm in a hurry for a meeting. I'll keep you up to date with information later tonight or tomorrow.