If you try to keep up with average, you will never get ahead

Bob Sutor spoke on LinuxWorld conference in San Francisco yesterday.You can find the presentation on Bobs blog here: http://www.sutor.com/newsite/blog-open/?p=2446 .

One of the issues Bob spoke about, was the problem that open source development has been trying to 'keep up' with Microsoft for about a decade. 'The open source community cannot continue to copy a ten year old operating system' he said.

Of cause this is true and many people has joined the discussion and most agree with Bob on this issue (See discussion below this article: http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.version2.dk%2Fartikel%2F8082&hl=da&ie=UTF8&sl=da&tl=en ). As long as we try to keep up with someone else, we will never get ahead.

But I also must add that this is not the whole truth. If it was that easy it would be a matter of months before we could beat Microsoft and kick Windows out.

Why ?

People in open source communities are not average people. Most people in these communities are working in IT related positions and so we have technical skills and we are willing to do experiments. How dangerous can it be ? We are able to fix any problems our selves.

Because Mr. and Mrs. Average don't like changes.

One of the most difficult issues when a company changes to OpenOffice.org is the people and feelings. When average people see a new computersystem they will feel unsecure and threatened.

Therefore we need to get ahead without scaring the users.

How can we do that ?

We must admit that Micrososft did something well. They must have done. Microsoft created a computersystem that Mr. and Mrs Average actually learned how to use. We must identify what is good about Windows and MS Office.

Linux also has many advantages. On specific details Microsoft is actually years behind. Just think about perfomance, security and so on and so forth.

My issue is: Nothing is black and white. Nor is this discussion. We must find a balance between the known and the future. And we must do better than Microsoft. We have one very big advantage: The communities are the customers. Microsoft obviously has some problems knowing what their customers are asking for. Just think about the fact that Microsoft for several years claimed that customers didn't ask for ODF-support and how Microsoft has to push and push to get Vista over the counter.

First, I didn't believe this: ODF support in MS Office

First my heart took two extra jumps. Then I had to get my breath back. Computerworld in Denmark claims that Microsoft will announce support for ODF in 2009. This should be a part of Office service pack 2. The announcement should be public tomorrow morning.

http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.computerworld.dk%2Fart%2F45934&hl=da&ie=UTF8&sl=da&tl=en

http://www.sdtimes.com/content/article.aspx?ArticleID=32228

Disgusting is what it is

Microsoft wanted that approval at any cost.

We didn't cheat. It wasn't fraud. It was clean and honest.

All' right then. Then we dont use the same definition of those words. We don't share the same moral.

Take a look at these 37 letters that was received at Standard Norway just before the vote:
http://people.opera.com/howcome/2007/ooxml/37-brev.pdf . 37 letters with exactly the same words. Some of the senders didn't even care to remove the 'Type company name here' text.

Simular letters has been circulating in Denmark as an e-mail from the Danish MD Jørgen Bardenfleth to customers and business partners.

I call it fraud, cheating and disgusting. If I wasn't anti-Microsoft before, I am now. Disgusting !

http://www.version2.dk/artikel/6965

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.

Guess what, there will be another round !

ISO confirms approval of OOXML, gives two months to appeal

Microsoft must wait for appeal process to run its course

By Peter Sayer

http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9074358&intsrc=hm_list

If you can't beat them, talk badly about them

You can see this in the kinder garden and in the school yard.

When small children are fighting over something, they often tend to speak in a bad language and talk about each other behind the back.

Now Microsoft is showing us a very adult and much more mature version of this behavior.

In New Zealand Matthew Holloway has been working as an adviser for the National Standard Body in the matter of voting for or against the approval of OOXML at the ISO BRM last month. As far as we know, he has done a great job.

But Microsoft apparently doesn't share this feeling and so much that they had to write an e-mails to members of another national body in another country, about how badly Matthew did his job in New Zealand.

How low can you go ?

The Standard National Body in New Zealand found this so serious that they found it necessary to send out a message trying to rescue the honor and integrity of an employee.

This is another example of how Microsoft employees are willing to use any method to reach their goal.

http://nzoss.org.nz/news/2008/old-dog-same-old-tricks

It didn't make it !

The BRM meeting in Geneva is over. The plan was, from the Microsoft point of view, that OOXML should now be an ISO standard. It didn't make it.

OOXML was proposed an ISO standard by the industrial organization ECMA in a fast track route. The basic philosophy behind this is, that a standard that has already been prepared by one organization can be submitted to a fast track route in ISO. This requires that the submitting organization does all the work and make the proposal ready to be confirmed before submission. In this case ECMA didn't do their homework properly.

At this BRM meeting there should be no outstandings and the process should have been a core formality. It wasn't. Still there are several open issues and the meeting couldn't even get through all the issues. The head of the U.S. delegation at the meeting, Frank Farance says:

At this week's ballot resolution meeting (BRM) in Geneva, the sponsor of the draft standard, industry consortium ECMA International, presented 1,100 recommendations for changes to the draft.

However, delegates only had time to discuss and modify around 20 percent of those, said Farance, an industry consultant with expertise in standards issues.

http://www.cio.com/article/190752/Changes_to_OOXML_Draft_Standard_Waved_Through

http://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/article.php?story=20080229055319727

Open ? - Yah right !

Microsoft has announced that they are open.
http://www.version2.dk/artikel/6341 (Danish) about Steve Balmers announcment from yesterday

Yah, and I believe in Santa.

Of cause I see any approach from Microsoft towards openness and interoperability as positive. But my experience with that company is, that they say one thing and continues as nothing has happened.

http://www.version2.dk/artikel/6346 (Danish) about the European Commission in doubt about Microsoft being honest.

From my own point of view, this is just Microsoft trying to catch a few votes in the BRM meeting in Geneva next week. Many of the outstanding objections to ISO approval of OOXML is about referencing binary and proprietary file formats. Some participants might change their vote to a yes if Microsoft can convince them, that these file formats are open in some way.

The big problem is, that none o the participants have time to find out whats behind all this.
http://www.version2.dk/artikel/6340 (Danish) about warning: It's happening too fast.
They can only read the headlines, not the complete articles. Microsoft hopes that they can change votes from the headlines only.

Minutes

NEW: Danish version here: http://www.oooforum.dk/viewtopic.php?p=7975

I just went to a meeting with Microsoft. I was invited as representative of the Danish OpenOffice.org Community. I thought a lot about whether to accept the invitation or not, but I decided to go there. If I don't accept an invitation like this, I can't claim that Microsoft isn't open enough.

Why is Microsoft inviting to this kind of a meeting ?
Well of cause they want our (my) sympathy and then they want to claim that they are 'open'. These meetings will probably be used as arguments for openness in the future. But inviting to a meeting is not at all enough to claim to be open.

At the meeting was five representatives from Microsoft. Chris Capossela and a guy called David Scult or something from head quarters. From Denmark, the Country general Manager in Denmark, Jørgen Bardenfleth and 'Office evangelist, Bo Drejer with some other people. - Chris was doing most of the talking.

I and one other invited guest from the FOSS community was the only non-Microsoft present.

The meeting was not at all formal and the discussions was held in a friendly and honest tone. We never claimed to be best friends and I started (while presenting my self) to say that I was there as a Microsoft opponent.

I will not refer word by word from the meeting.

Chris was asked about when Microsoft decided to go with 'open standards'. Chris explained that this decision was made about when Office 2003 was developed. Through the discussion it turned up, that the word 'open' again became the problem. Because what Chris was actually talking about was the use of XML. In his mind XML itself makes the file format open.

Chris Capossela was eager to explain that they would very much like the processes in both ECMA and ISO to be more open, that the fact is. I responded that it was a Microsoft choice to go that way. Chris could nothing but agree.

We discussed the openness and Chris explained that the reason for choosing the name Office Open XML was to signal a new era by using the word 'open'. We discussed and agreed that we interpret the word open in different ways. Chris agreed that OOXML 'is not open in all means'. It's only open in the fact that the format is not binary, the spec is available and (because of the OSP (Open Specification Promise), free of charge. We didn't discuss why the OSP isn't enough but Chris did a lot of work criticizing Andy Updegrove for his articles against Microsoft. Well, in another audience that might work.

I criticized Microsoft of taking the fast track route when it was later discovered that the specification was not at all qualified for that route. A document is not ready for a fast track, when so many faults and errors can be found. ECMA didn't do their job. Chris some kind of agreed (!) with me and said that the route was chosen after recommendation from ECMA.

Chris explained that the customers asked for a file format that could 'ensure backward compatibility'. And to 'ensure competition' Microsoft is trying to make it a standard. I told him, that backward compatibility should be handled in the application, not the format. The rules in ISO should prevent dual standards but Chris still think that two standards (not two applications) is ensuring competition. Hmmm. I gave up. I don't think his mind was open for that today.

Chris asked me what I thought he (Microsoft) should do. I told him that what the customers need is buildt-in support for the 'other' file format. Microsoft Office should have a 'save as odf' button and OpenOffice.org should have a similar 'save as OOXML'.

I don't think that the meeting moved anything, really. On the other hand, I don't think that Microsoft thought they could move me or anybody else. We exchanged opinions and business cards, and thats that. Microsoft is not more or less open after this meeting. Even that they tried to explain that.

I am beginning to understand why Microsoft is still claiming to be open. Basically it's a matter of how we interpret the one word open. Microsoft think that XML alone makes the standard open. I use another definition. The process has to be open and transparent and the organization must be protected from being hijacked by a singe vendor. I don't think he agreed or even commented on that.

This is a very fast writing. Sorry about misspellings ;-)

Btw: Thanks to all who gave me good and valuable advise before the meeting. Thank.

Interesting meeting this afternoon

A have been asked to meet Chris Capossela, Vice president at Microsoft Office.

It seems that he is 'on tour' in Europe at the moment.

The invitation says "Lets meet to have an open dialog regarding open document standards". Let's see what shows up today. I'll refer from the meeting later. Stay tuned.

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.

3522 comments on ECMA OOXML

...thats a lot.

662 proposed dispositions of comments posted ( http://www.ecma-international.org/news/TC45_current_work/First%20group%20of%20662%20proposed%20dispositions%20of%20comments%20posted.htm ) on the ECMA portal. Unfortunately we are not able to see neither comments or how ECMA is acting on them. According to Brian Jones ( http://blogs.msdn.com/brian_jones/archive/2007/11/19/update-on-open-xml-s-iso-progress.aspx ) from Microsoft and member of the TC45, the ISO regulations forbids the members to reveille anything from the process. It would be nice if we could follow the work in an open forum.

Charles-H. Schulz comments on this lack of transparency on his blog here: http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2007/11/22/where-did-you-go-publicity-what-have-you-become-transparency/

The answer might be a complete new and more modern way of handling development of standards. Please take a few minutes to read the feature article from the newsletter Standards Today distribuated by ConsordiumInfo.org (Gesmer & Updegrove):
http://www.consortiuminfo.org/bulletins/#feature

Microsoft is taking over your life

Visit www.noooxml.org

Schools warned off Microsoft deal

Have a look at this article on BBC http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/7063716.stm

Schools warned off Microsoft deal
The UK computer agency Becta is advising schools not to sign licensing agreements with Microsoft because of alleged anti-competitive practices.

About time we see some concrete advise on this issue. Here is the original press release from Becta.

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.

Money talks - bullshit walks

So it is. The ISO approval process has been degraded to a useless rubber stamp, just like ECMA has always been. I'm thinking about the case in Sweden, where twenty new members (this is not a spelling mistake!) suddenly showed up. All of them, ready to put a YES vote. http://ffii.se/pr/2007-08-27-se-ooxml-vote-en.html . How can the ISO organization accept this ? How can they sit on their fat bottoms and see to, that the ISO organization is loosing their authority ?

Is ISO corrupted ?

(The cartoon is from www.oooxml.org). Stop this comedy before it becomes a tragedy of enormously dimensions. The authority of ISO is at stake at the moment. Stop the fast track process now !

Its disgusting, outrages and out of the range of my mind.

I don't know, but I think that some of the many cases we have seen around the World (see these examples http://www.robweir.com/blog/2007/08/disenfranchisement.html by Robert Weir) shows, that Microsoft is not stepping back from any legal or illegal act to gain what they want. I remind you of my earlier post about the spoiled child (http://lodahl.blogspot.com/2007/08/what-did-microsoft-achieve.html).

The Netherlands proposes revised procedures at ISO

Finally.

The Netherlands will abstain from voting. Not because they are happy about it, but because the procedures demands an abstention. It has appeared that it is actually impossible to vote no because Microsoft continuously obstructs the work.

On this site: ISOC.nl regrets absence of Netherlands decision on OOXML
Michiel Leenaars writes:

ISOC.nl recommends that the ISO procedures - and more specific the Fast Track procedure - be adapted significantly to better deal with controversial standards like DIS 29500/Office Open XML in order for ISO to maintain relevant. This includes demanding two interoperable and independent full implementations prior to accepting a submission for a Fast Track procedure.

Michiel is member of the Dutch committee.

Let's hear from other countries about this issue.

What did Microsoft achieve

And the rich kid cried: "I want to be ISO approved too !". He cried and cried until his parents gave up and said: "Okay then, we will buy you an ISO approval for Christmas. Now please stop crying and eat you dinner.". The rich boy stopped crying and then ate his dinner. Again he got exactly what he wanted. His father couldn't stand to hear his boy cry.

When OpenOffice.org released their second version of the open source office suite, they also submitted the file format (ODF) as as open standard to OASIS. The goal was to get official recognition and participation from other open source communities. Very soon Kword and other F/OSS projects joined the work, and also a few commercial providers like IBM and Google showed interest in this new approach.

The file format was processed in OASIS and later on submitted for ISO approval, and thus there was no competitive formats in the marked, the file format was approved. Along the way, the format was improved by new participants that added new functionality to the file format. About one hundred changes was made to the file format during the process in OASIS. The result was a very comprehensive and well formed description of a document format. Submission to ISO was just a natural 'next step'.

Nobody actually took notice of this, before a few politicians found that it would be a good idea to implement an ISO approved open standard in the public sector. Well, I'm quite sure that they didn't come up with the idea them selves. Of cause they got the interest because they where contacted by 'lobbyists' from the F/OSS communities. Anyway, they had courage enough to pick up the idea, and to make it a part of their public policy.

This was exactly what was needed to make Microsoft wake up from the Cinderella sleep. For several years they had been so sure about them selves and about their marked position, that they didn't think they would be threatened by any of their competitors. Of cause Microsoft is watching all potential competitors very closely, but this time .... suddenly there was, not one, but a whole bunch of competitors. And these competitors had accomplished something Microsoft didn't: The approval from ISO.

And the rich kid cried: "I want to be ISO approved too !". He cried and cried until his parents gave up and said: "Okay then, we will buy you an ISO approval for Christmas. Now please stop crying and eat you dinner.". The rich boy stopped crying and then ate his dinner. Again he got exactly what he wanted. His father couldn't stand to hear his boy cry.

Microsoft might or might not get the approval from ISO on September 2nd. We don't know that at the present time. But no matter if they do, it will be one of the most expensive Christmas presents ever. What Microsoft has accomplished is, that the file format in Office 2007 has been shown to the whole World as if it was the dirty laundry. It's been proved, that it's poor quality. The ISO organization might approve it, even if it's poor. The rich boys parents promised to get it for Christmas, remember, even if they has to buy the whole gift shop.

Don't you think that Microsoft would have been better of, without it ?

Somehow I think, that even if Microsoft gets the approval, we (in the communities behind ODF) will stand as the winners anyway. The price has been many wounds to the Microsoft brand and all the neighbors will always know, that the rich boy got it because he is a spoiled kid - and not because he deserves it.

Can Microsoft survive ?

Some of you might think: 'What a stupid question', but I actually doubt that Microsoft will be able to keep up with competition in the future. Well, I'm not thinking 3 or 7 years ahead, but more like ten or twenty years.

Microsoft is a very large and strong company and they will be able to survive for several years, but eventually Microsoft will disappear or at least return to be a company like any other company. The success in the past is the problem in the future: Microsoft is too big to change !

The reason is, that Microsoft is able to change their basic business model.

The traditional way to do business in IT is to develop a piece of software and sell it to as many consumers as possible. The more copies you can sell, the better your business can grow. This is the way that Microsoft has done for more than twenty years and thats the way they will try to continue for another twenty years. If the World was standing still, they would probably be able to continue without any problems, but the World is changing. The customers is asking for new software models, such as web based applications and open standards.

Microsoft is trying to keep up with these changes on applications and marketing, but the business is still the same: 'Vendor lock-in'. Do you think Microsoft asked for ISO approval of their document formats because they want to ? Do you think Microsoft is calling the same formats 'open' because they think they should be open ? Do you think Microsoft is working with open source because they think its a good idea ? No. They are doing these things (and several other things) because competitive applications and vendors is getting a little bit too close. Microsoft is loosing control. More and more customers is asking for 'openness'.

And we must give, that Microsoft is trying to make an 'open' document standard. They are actually working with open source and they might be able to develop some web based applications in the near future. The problem is, that the business model will be the same !

Microsoft is a very large company with a weird history. Originally Microsoft was established by a few guys that was lucky to be at the right place at the right time (with the right skills). First we could find MS-DOS and some years later Windows in the shops. And I agree with those who claim that these programs was very good. Yes the programming was the best seen on the marked. Bill Gates was the man, who made it possible to get Microsoft Windows pre-installed on every single computer in the whole World. The future belonged to Microsoft. Today we see a company with several hundred thousand employees all over the World. Bill Gates is out of office and there is actually nobody left in the management with imagination enough to see a new business model. Or maybe they can see it, but don't have the guts and the power to do it. And it will require both guts and power to change the behavior of so many people. To implement a completely new business model could seem as if they are saying, that the original model isn't good enough.

The customers is asking for open source and open standards. Microsoft can postpone the change for a few years, but they can't change the World. I have heard Microsoft claim, that no customers had asked for support for ODF in Microsoft Office. More and more customers will give up and find other providers.

To get back to the question: I don't think that Microsoft will exist for another ten or twenty years.

Is Microsoft taking over ISO ?

The Danish technical standard committee (DS) that is to vote on EOOXML is to become an international ISO standard is taken over by Microsoft partners. 17 out of 31 members are Microsoft partners or in other way associated with Microsoft.

Is the ISO organization totally gone to sleep ?

This is undermining the authority of the organization and we can no longer trust, that an ISO standard is a good quality standard. ISO is becoming a a blue rubber stamp where rich companies can get 'approval' of anything, as long as you pay the puppets.

Read the Danish article here: http://epn.dk/erhverv_samfund/article1022249.ece