digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

Apple Beats Microsoft at its Own Open XML Game

pcworld.com — Apple's release of iWork '08 this week is embarrassing, not for its maker, but for Apple's rival, Microsoft Corp."This was the ultimate insult to injury," Gartenberg said. "Not only has Microsoft not delivered the ability to read and write Open XML in its Mac Office, but at the end of the day, Apple was the one who delivered.

Who dugg this? Made popular Aug 12, 2007

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

219 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • duncandog, on 10/10/2007, -18/+143This article just reminds us how Microsoft today is like IBM in the early 1990s - a monopolist past its prime. Like an aging athlete who refuses to retire, Microsoft lumbers forward. It's sad, really.
  • astrosmash, on 10/10/2007, -2/+61Embarrassing for Open Office too, I guess.

    Pages and Keynote both do a better job of converting Word and Powerpoint documents, and unlike OpenOffice, which is merely an Office 98 clone, iWork is a true alternative to MS Office and offers a unique take on word processing and presentation software.
  • xl22k, on 10/10/2007, -29/+68What would Digg do without Linux, Apple, and Ron Paul to praise?
  • ChromaVita, on 10/10/2007, -3/+37Lolcats.... lots and lots of Lolcats.
  • cgomez, on 10/10/2007, -4/+38Heh heh. On a related note, Pages is replacing Word for me now that it reads just about every format and actually functions like a lean and speedy word processor. Still a slave to Excel though, Numbers isn't even close.

    Microsoft has dropped the ball on bringing a Universal Binary of Office for Mac in any timely manner.
  • harlowsmonkeys, on 10/10/2007, -2/+35I doubt Microsoft is embarrassed. The most likely feeling at Microsoft about this is to be very pleased. That's because they are facing a lot of opposition from proponents of ODF over Microsoft's OOXML. One big point Microsoft can push in their favor is that OOXML is far more complete than ODF. ODF leaves so much undefined or up to the application that if someone were to implement ODF just from the published standard, their implementation would be unlikely to be able to interoperate with other implementations. So, in real life, to implement ODF you have to look at OpenOffice to see what they did and copy that (or look at an implementation that did that).

    Since Office 2007 is closed source, and it is very unlikely that Microsoft let Apple look at it to help with iWork '08, it seems very likely that iWork '08 is a truly independent implementation of OOXML. If it interoperates well with Office 2007, and with the other independent OOXML implementations, than Microsoft can point to it as an example showing that, unlike ODF, the OOXML spec is actually sufficient to allow true open document exchange.
  • justinjstark, on 10/10/2007, -1/+27At least they wound up doing some good with their PDF format.

    I don't think this is the greatest comparison. I don't believe flash will last through the web 2.0 phase. AJAX and the like are making it less and less useful. About the only place I see flash anymore is for videos and games. And with the new html spec that includes embedded video, the only place it can really go is down.
  • ThreeDee912, on 10/10/2007, -9/+32A bit off-topic, but does anyone else think Adobe is the next Microsoft? Just look at Flash and Photoshop.
  • bluechips23, on 10/10/2007, -4/+24Well in that case, it's a lame strategy. By showing all the tardiness in not developing proper applications for Mac users, Microsoft is failing to attract a huge base of Mac users who can primarily depend on Microsoft Office. Users like things simple. Some users like me, who use both Mac and PCs, also prefer to depend on some Microsoft products like Office, MSN Messenger, etc. Microsoft's failure to match these needs for a Mac users usually makes the latter wonder why in the first place they would choose Microsoft anyways, especially when Microsoft has an "I don't care about you guys" attitude.

    With many software vendors coming out and Microsoft loosing it's base, I think, they should just stick to the basics of making the customer happy, rather than playing the 6th grade game of "I don't like you any more because you like someone else".
  • Stirk, on 10/10/2007, -2/+22I agree, but just to correct you..
    Leopard is $129, just like the other upgrades before it. I won't be blowing $300+ for the best version of a new Operating System.
  • skunkworker, on 10/10/2007, -2/+20well numbers is a very different way to look at spreadsheets, at first glance i was completely shocked but then it grew on me.
  • Ratteler, on 10/10/2007, -5/+22Kind of sucks that Apple has apparently snubbed ODF.
    THAT would have REALLY embarrassed M$.
  • Audacitor, on 10/10/2007, -2/+16Well, considering it takes them almost as long to write Vista...
  • xspinkickx, on 10/10/2007, -1/+12ok question does iWork support the ODF standard are are microsoft and apple going snub Open Office?
  • Birdoftruth, on 10/10/2007, -2/+13he meant failing in the computer aspect. Who gives an honest ***** about their console, they don't have a monopoly on the consoles so you can pick different options. People want to see the towering giant fall because better options are showing up left and right.
  • trogdoor, on 10/10/2007, -3/+13Do you mean the 5 minute load time, the complicated controls, or the completely unsearchable content?
  • DiveRSQ, on 10/10/2007, -4/+14ok your saying that if apple was building the best computers in the world your would use your superior intelligence and by an inferior product??? OK well if Microsoft started building the best in the world I would probably switch because I want great stuff and I am smart enough not to bite off my nose to spite my face.
  • Gee1004, on 10/10/2007, -4/+13Microsoft always sucked and PC fanboys scare me more
  • moofer, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9"You are stupid" - That's a judgement call on your naive behalf... not a fact.

    "...no one give a damn about Apple" - First of all, great English, kudos. Apple's market share is higher than 2%. Keep clinging to that figure as long as you like. Apple gets plenty of attention from users, press, and analysts. You must live in a cave. Ever hear of a Widows OS Rumors site, or people clamoring over what Microsoft is going to release next? Didn't think so.

    "barely see hardware available for the mac" - that's because of the limited hardware available in your cave. People don't need to install ethernet cards because every mac comes with ethernet built-in. They don't need to install USB cards, for the same reason. Firewire? Already there. Wireless connectivity? Yup, already there. Drives? Every mac already has optical drives, and hard drives can be swapped for larger ones, without any difficulty.

    You fail.
  • astrosmash, on 10/10/2007, -2/+11Certainly there is no Microsoft Office code in iWork, but remember that the two companies signed a 5-year technology cross-licensing agreement between each other as part of the $150 Million patent settlement in 1997. That's why there haven't been any patent disputes between the two companies since then.

    Pages has done a great job with MS Word documents from day 1. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple got their hands in the full, internal documentation of the Office file formats. Or perhaps the Office 97 file formats are just well understood by everyone at this point.
  • ut2k4king, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8I dare you, go into an Apple store and look around at how the consumers interact with the employees. A person working at an Apple store is 99% of the time more pleasant to talk to and more helpful than someone working at another computer store.

    And before I get buried for being an Apple fanboy, I'm writing this from my Ubuntu box.
  • LANjackal, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Who cares? MS is happy because someone else besides them can implement OOXML. Besides, it lends credit to their argument that it's "open".
  • colincornaby, on 10/10/2007, -6/+14No, Office 2008 was due NOW. Microsoft delayed it until next year, they originally promised it 3rd quarter 2007. Microsoft products are named for the year after they are released. Windows 98 was released in 1997. Windows Server 2003 was release in 2002. Mac Office 2004 was in 2003. Office 2008 was supposed to be released in 2007. It won't be.
  • aadnk, on 10/10/2007, -6/+13""What this really shows is Microsoft's inability to ship software on time these days," he said."
    Hello Vista!
  • KAMiKAZOW, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7OpenDocument is an ISO standard and OfficeXML is an ECMA standard.
  • Kelmon, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8I will just note that, for those demanding ODF support, that I have never received a file in this format. I know we'd all like to see some real alternatives to the high cost of MS Office and that an open document format would really help develop alternatives. It is, as I've noted in comments elsewhere on this topic, possible that iWork applications could well be updated later to add support for the document format (I presume that once you're able to import one form of XML file that adding another shouldn't be that difficult). However, on Day 1 of release the MOST IMPORTANT document formats to support for anyone hoping to take business away from Microsoft is Microsoft's own document formats since, hey, they're the ones that you receive files in, that your friends/family use, and that your customers expect. By all means add support for other formats, and I would have liked to have seen ODF support on Day 1 as well, but get your priorities right. Let's be honest, most people haven't heard of OpenOffice so stating "ODF File Support" as a feature is going to result in a "So what?" reaction. Forward thinking is great but you've got to have your head in today if you are going to survive.
  • Jorlwind, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9Ugh. I feel sorry for the Apple Developers who must have had to read the huge-ass documentation on OOXML if it was available to them.
  • fangorious, on 10/10/2007, -4/+11Actually Microsoft should thank Apple for there even being a market for office applications. Office was originally released in 89 for Mac (the first Windows release was the following year). Excel was released a few years prior to office (85), again it was release for Mac first, with a Windows version two years later in 87. The first spreadsheet software was Visicalc, and it was released for the Apple II in 78. The combination put microcomputers in offices for the first time, creating the market for office applications in general.
  • Gir9000, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8After using the Trial version of iWork... I have decided that I am going to get iWork'08 instead of Office'08... thats pretty hard for me to say but it needed to be said. I have always been fond of the Microsoft Office product.But in all reality and without telling you what I liked about it because you should try it for yourself, I found that iWork is good. its really good! and it's only $79.
  • lemonsomething, on 10/10/2007, -6/+12This is BS. Jupiter needs to get its facts straight. Quoth Gartenberg of JupiterResearch in the submission,"Not only has Microsoft not delivered the ability to read and write Open XML in its Mac Office, but at the end of the day, Apple was the one who delivered." However, inside the article it says, "IWork '08 applications can open the OpenXML formats churned out by their Office 2007 counterparts . . . but cannot save in those formats." Last I checked it was always harder to write a tool to output to a format than to render a format. Also, I wouldn't be suprised by the MS Program manager's blog praising iWork rendering the format. It seems that is what that manager works on and is interested in. I would guess they probably don't care how the format gets out there they just want it out there.
  • sleepyness, on 10/10/2007, -2/+85 years ended in 2002 kid.
  • xspinkickx, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8ok so after some googling I have found that iwork '08 does not even support ODF?! I guess when IE and Office have 75% of the market shares in there respective fields and Apple has 25% with safari and iworks the computing world will be a better place. I could of sworn in 97 Steve told every one that Apple believes in choice, yet iWork 08 still does not even support an industry standard. Its great that anyone who uses iwork 08 can open and write OOXML but Steve needs to stop sucking MS *****.

    Apple could of beaten OO.org and Office by supporting both 'standards'.
  • arizonagroove, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8"Embarrassing for Open Office too, I guess. "

    Given that OpenOffice is given away for free, maybe they won't be all that embarrassed. Also Novell already provide an Office Open XML plugin for the Novell edition of OpenOffice that's included in SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop and OpenOffice already have an import filter for ooxml that appears to be ready for inclusion in 2.3 http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=79123
  • geoken, on 10/10/2007, -4/+10There are always going to be people who want interesting, attractive, immersive sites. I don't think AJAX will be doing anything like this ( http://www.c-class.co.uk/home.php ) for a while.
  • lfernandez91, on 10/10/2007, -4/+9And that is because?
  • NGliam, on 10/10/2007, -3/+8It would be similar to how it is now, only made up of nothing but hate towards Microsoft. Most people who don't care (I may be one of them) about the whole "Microsoft is evil" topic would probably not even bother 'fighting'.
  • Breepee, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Actually, isn't every console built around IBM PowerPC tech? Playstations Cell, Xbox' triple core Power and Nintendo's low-power Power chip... AFAIK they even fabricate all chips themselves.

    I think IBM is winning big time where consoles are concerned. They've got ALL THREE popular consoles.
  • stimpack, on 10/10/2007, -4/+9Oh Apple are just, if not more, evil than Microsoft. They just make sexier hardware. I'm afraid it is upto the Linux guys again to push ODF
  • arjie, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7Wait, linespacinglikeWord95 is implementable without problems? Please.
  • betterth, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Uhh that looks like a Photoshop rip off with shinier graphics. Literally, the toolset and placement of the tools looks identical to photoshop, they're just using bigger, shinier icons. Every single box on that screen with options in it was developed by Adobe at least a decade ago. Way to innovate guys.
  • turpenine, on 10/10/2007, -4/+93 months has nothing on 3 years.
  • arjie, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5I don't quite understand. What is this then:
    http://www.iso.org/iso/en/CatalogueDetailPage.CatalogueDetail?CSNUMBER=43485
  • murdoc, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4It is somewhat pointless to reply to the comments of an anti-fanboy, but I probably like to hear myself talk more then you do so I will reply anyway. Just because MS grosses a ton doesn't mean that they offer anything meaningful to the industry. I'll spare the history lecture, instead I'll ask the simple question: when was the last time MS released a computer product (hardware or software) that was anything better the average?
    MS is a reactive company, not a proactive company. Virtually every product they've released has been in response to someone else's products.
    What the comment you were replying to was trying to say was that MS is player that you know is going to perform. They are never going to do bad, but they are not very exciting and will never sell out stadiums.
  • Flarup, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5... you really are out of you ***** mind!
  • FKnight, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4It matters because it proves that everyone who has been claiming that Office Open XML is too closed and proprietary for anyone but Microsoft to implement is a LIAR.
  • Kelmon, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Incorrect. Pages '08 can open the XML files generated by Word 2007 but it can only export in the old .doc format. The same is true of PowerPoint and Excel. However, since I don't see the XML file format taking hold anytime soon (too many people still using Office 2003 and older, particularly in my organisation) this isn't really a handicap. For example, I never save my files generated in Office 2007 in the XML format since I know that I'll only get complaints from people who don't yet have Office 2007, which is pretty much everyone.
  • tomi, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4I'm honestly worried about the kind of dildos you use. No, don't even bother telling me, please.
  • saftaplan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Makes me wonder how they implemented the 'bullets as in word 97' option from the OOXML spec (not that it's the only unimplementable option for anybody except MS in OOXML).
  • tomi, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5And that is because?

    Excuse the echo, but seriously...
  • stmiller, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4"A bit off-topic, but does anyone else think Adobe is the next Microsoft?"

    Yes, unfortunately. The larger the company, the more problems it has being productive. MS is the prime example of a textbook bureaucracy, and Adobe is showing similar traits. Just like in the Aye Rand books.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 212 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...

© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.