What is Digg?81 Comments
- notmiya, on 10/10/2007, -10/+36***** MS.
- thepolkapunk, on 10/10/2007, -4/+24Thank you for linking to this wonderful ***** of a blog. The ad ridden, four sentence summarization of an already short news article is just what I'm looking for to get my daily news. I especially enjoy how you changed the articles point of view, and didn't use quotation marks. Well done, sir! Your crapfest really enlightened my mind this evening.
- lawton992, on 10/10/2007, -3/+20Text Mirror:
There is no doubt that the stakes in the Open Document Format (ODF) vs. Open XML standardization process are high. Microsoft and IBM have each invested huge sums of money in their version of what the standard should be. Unlike Microsoft, which is pushing its own proprietary vision of what the standard should be, IBM has been in the corner of ODF. How committed has IBM been to this? So committed that the latest release of Lotus Notes includes desktop productivity tools. These tools are free and are designed to give organizations an alternative to the Microsoft view of the world. These tools are based on ODF. However, the battle is getting ugly as the time for a vote appears, and Microsoft has really pushed the rules of the process to the limit. And even though they are playing within the rules, their actions are so transparent that anyone can read the marked cards. They are very simply using their deep cash reserves to buy the votes needed to get their way.
The adoption of a standard is supposed to be an open, transparent process. Any companies interested in participating in the standard setting process in any significant way have to pay a fee to get a seat at the table. Many companies played by the rules and participated in the process. And it was becoming clear that Microsoft was not getting there way. In the recent vote in Sweden, it looked like Microsoft was going to lose. So what does Microsoft do? They pull the cards out of their sleeve and in a way that competing interests have no time to react. . Out of nowhere, Microsoft Business Partners are ponying up the $US2,444 to get a vote just in time for the vote. The final vote was in favor of Microsoft: 25 Yes, 6 No and 3 Abstentions. And what newly paid up companies, as posted on OS/2 World, made the difference?:
Camako Data AB (Microsoft Gold Certified Partner)
Connecta AB (Microsoft Gold Certified Partner)
Cornerstone Sweden AB (Microsoft Gold Certified Partner)
Cybernetics (Microsoft Gold Certified Partner)
Emric AB
Exor AB (Microsoft Certified Partner)
Fishbone Systems AB (Microsoft Gold Certified Partner)
Formpipe Software (Microsoft Gold Certified Partner)
FS System AB
Google
HP (Microsoft Gold Certified Partner)
IBizkit AB (Microsoft Certified Partner)
IDE Nätverkskonsulterna (Microsoft Gold Certified Partner)
IT-Vision AB
Know IT (Microsoft Gold Certified Partner)
Modul1 (Microsoft Gold Certified Partner)
Nordic Station AB (Microsoft Certified Partner)
ReadSoft AB (Microsoft Certified Partner)
Sogeti (Microsoft Gold Certified Partner)
Solid Park AB (Microsoft Gold Certified Partner)
SourceTech AB
Strand Interconnect AB (Microsoft Gold Certified Partner)
TietoEnator (Microsoft Gold Certified Partner)
Eighteen (18) of these companies are Microsoft Gold Certified Partners that turn up out of the blue. They had never participated in the standards formulation process, yet they were allowed to vote. Without them, it is unlikely that Microsoft would have prevailed. It is clear that something is rotten here and the standard setting process is flawed. It would be nice if each of these Microsoft Partners would sign an affidavit in a court of law stating that they did not receive the sign-up money from Microsoft or that there was no quid pro quo for their participation.
I want to make it clear that I do not have a vested interest in either standard and that I have for or with IBM since 1999 as an employee or business partner. My interest is that everyone play fairly in the process. Once again, Microsoft never lets me down...they played unfairly . Sure it may have been within the rules. But as I often say: just because you can does not mean you should, I am very happy that IBM has taken the high road in this process.
UPDATE: Apparently SourceTech AB just became a Microsoft Gold Certified Partner. So please, someone at Microsoft please tell me there is no quid pro quo going on here? - leszek, on 10/10/2007, -2/+19they are using binary strings in the xml which defeat the main advantages of xml : readability and portability
- lighty14, on 10/10/2007, -8/+22controlscaddy.com has mastered the art of being down at 60 diggs.
- newbill123, on 10/10/2007, -2/+16Substitute "anti-competitive convicted illegal monopolist" for "business" in the three occurrences of betterth's comment and I'll agree with him completely.
- sirhomer, on 10/10/2007, -1/+15Open source hasn't won until Microsoft's monopoly crumbles.. I wouldn't declare a "victory" just yet.
- earlycj5, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12Tell Redhat or others they can't compete in the business place because they're open source.
- sirhomer, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11Money is fake anyways. Bunch of 0 and 1s in a banks computer system.
The code is all that really matters. - neko, on 10/10/2007, -2/+12No wonder they seem lax at patching loopholes in their products - they're too busy finding loopholes in legal systems and standards committees!
- NoTiG, on 10/10/2007, -1/+11google supports microsofts proprietary format?
- bdhughes, on 10/10/2007, -10/+19this can't be a surprise to anyone. except the m$ fanboys.
- sirhomer, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Maybe cause they an anti-competitive, convicted monopolist, promotes corruption, pro-DRM, actively abusive against open source users, and just generally try really hard to piss people off. I'm sick of people who seem shocked that so many people hate Microsoft. They deserve every bit of it.
- specialK16, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8You and the people who dugg you up are complete ***** morons. Business practices maybe, illegal business practices indeed they are.
- tyrione, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9GOOGLE is for ODF.
http://www.oasis-open.org/about/index.php - KesshoRyu, on 10/10/2007, -3/+9Diggs are not a measure of page views.
- specialK16, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Yes, and it shouldn't be that way! This new era of corrupted corporations running everything in the world makes me so sick.
- Spr0k3t, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8That's because their lips are firmly planted around the base of something micro soft. Or did you not know this already?
- arjie, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6No, there ARE Microsoft fanboys. Really, you should listen to them. Lots around here where I live.
- archiesteel, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5I believe those are all the votes (including the nays), not just those who supported OOXML.
- Giga, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5For the last time? Really? Good! I'm looking forward to no longer hearing that stupid statement.
- JohnFlux, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Google joined at the most moment, but voted No. It's a bit confusing the way this article was worded.
- marx2k, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6You have no clue the amount of companies converting their entire business models to open source, do you? If the limited amount of consultants I talk to from across the country that give me their experience regarding their company and their views and practices on closed source versus open source utilization is any indication, you're an idiot with absolutely no base for posting what you did. But hey, everyone is entitled to an opinion, even if it's just paraphrased from other MS fanboy posts
- kris33, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Yeah.
Check the example here:
http://blogs.freecode.no/isene/2007/08/31/norway-says-no-to-ooxml/ - omababy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5inaccurate... Google voted against ooxml
- jeff419, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6That makes about 0 sense. I need to know why Google would do that, if they really did.
- JohnFlux, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4They didn't. They joined at the last moment but voted no.
- Phlosten, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5The Swedish vote has been pulled. Looks like money down the drain for poor old Microsoft. Onwards and upwards for ODF and to the trash bin for OOXML where it belongs. Microsoft, your standard stinks just like your business practices.
- arjie, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I hope you don't get a virus.
- TanNg, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Many of these companies are IBM partner also. Why do you hide this fact?
- caleb4mj, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5Anyone who thought Microsoft would have played fair is an ignorant fool. They're only in it for the money. Its called fascism.
- epiffffany, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3No, you're not opposing MS. You're still using their software and thus powering the entire ecosystem that surrounds it. Like it or not, you're supporting MS indirectly. If you want to oppose MS, then DON'T USE THEIR SOFTWARE.
Also, it's worth noting that a proper analog to your comment is "I oppose Walmart so I steal products from their stores." Sorry, but you're just a petty thief and not a freedom fighter. - daftman, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Nah, you're just a well known MS fanboy on digg.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -5/+7Even Apple doesn't support ODF.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -4/+6For the last time. There are no MS fanbois. There are only trolls who pretended to be MSbois
- daftman, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4Apple? Hahaha, Apple has a 10 years lead before Microsoft and where are they now? Overshadowed and overtaken, forcing to vertically integrate their business. In term of technology, Linux is the fastest growing. When MS crumbles, it's Linux that would take the market, not the shiny-techno-hype company like Apple. Why do you think that Microsoft doesn't give a ***** about Apple as a competitor but actually worries more about Linux?
IF you think companies HAVE TO upgrade their OS every week then you are a ***** moron. Companies opt for the LTS from the likes of Ubuntu, Red Hat and Novell, SLED. The problem is that you probably use Linux at the low end desktop consumer level and think you know it at the Enterprise level. It's ***** dumb ignoramus like you that Microsoft love to have around, whispering uneducated ***** into your company's CTO. - Spr0k3t, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Usually I don't read your comments. When I do, ten times out of nine you get buried for ignorant assumptions or off the mark statements.
- Markie1006, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2That is called lip-service.
It's also a way to keep their enemy close. - mabhatter, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Apple's Open Source support is awful where it really counts. Things like ODF, OGG, FLAC, Theora, are all freely licensed or BSD licensed just like the rest of their OS, but Apple won't include them in their mainstream programs to let things be truly free on their OS. I don't understand Apple's horrible case of NIH in the open standards department. It's probably because they've already "got their ticket" thru cross license agreements with Microsoft and other big players but that's no excuse.
- Spr0k3t, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Pirating MS software is the largest form of advertising MS has. If you oppose MS for what they do, you should encourage the use of anything but MS products. Don't really care if you go Apple or Linux, just support the cause you say you are standing up for.
- petepete, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Microsoft are in that list too.
- p0tent1al, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Did he say they were?
- canthraxp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Microsoft and Apple are competing. They are companies, with same goals, with equivalent products (not equal). But as companies, they can have agreements, but linux is another story, since it's a much larger base, there isn't a clear center where to engage in conversation, or a base to develop software for each distro.. but specially. Why would MS/Apple want to have products for Linux if linux users can open the Add/Remove Programs (debian-based) and download one for free? Unless Linux Debian-based systems add a "Online Software shop" repository... (***** that's an amazing idea, but would screw the "FSF" goal)
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1There are Xbox 360 Fanbois, Windows Fanbois, Halo Fanbois but no one universally likes Microsoft.
- masonwikipedia, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1No it wasn't money down the drain for two reasons. MS didn't pay any money, MS encouraged their partners to pay up and vote. And secondly the votes was in favor of a YES for ODF before the new companies joined up. So instead of a yes for ODF, Sweden will not vote at all. MS won a half victory.
- dkoon, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"And even though they are playing within the rules, their actions are so transparent that anyone can read the marked cards. They are very simply using their deep cash reserves to buy the votes needed to get their way."
Does that mean buying votes is within rules? The people makes the rules unfair in the first place just for people to vote unfairly? First time voters should not count at all? If there are holes in the rules from their standard board, I think the best way to eliminate this problem is to change the rules and also drop all the previous standards created within these rules. - Atomic1fire, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1then why doesnt ibm fight fire with fire
it could result in one of those play with fire and your gonna get burned moments
but it could work - mabhatter, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1it's still unethical. If my company was in a similar position, people would be fired for suggesting such action, legal or not. Outside the "fashionable" darling industries, companies take their ethics very seriously. MS points to some "activist" at their local branch for being too "enthusiastic" but this is really just a symptom that MS has not fundamentally changed their corporate ethics in line with the anti-trust ruling.
- Atomic1fire, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1the problem is not with the jobs
the problem is with the dispute that microsofts xml format is not open
and that standardizing it would faceplant into needles a lot of people
essentially sounding painful to the wallet because they cant use a certain feature because its windows only and thus not open which unfairly gives windows an advantage
odf is platform independent
which means it matter what operating system you use
like gasoline in a group of different car models
its going to be burned as fuel anyway so why make it work for one car when you can have them all -
Show 51 - 79 of 79 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is