What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
124 Comments
- Gerbil_Juice, on 10/10/2007, -1/+29Man, the technologically ignorant are commenting in full force tonight.
- mariuz, on 10/10/2007, -6/+33goodbye ooxml and thank for all the poison
- ToadLeg, on 10/10/2007, -2/+23The OOXML format has a 6000 page documentation vs the 600 page documentation of ODF. And the 6000 page documentation for OOXML is inaccurate! The OOXML format does not conform to its documentation, and is not complete as a format. The format requires several undocumented edits to a file to change it, to make just one change! OOXML says it's open source, but it's not, and everything it is based on is proprietary. MICROSOFT PAID PEOPLE TO VOTE YES FOR OOXML! That's the only reason it had a chance of winning international approval, and it still lost.
The FOSS community does not force you to do anything. Microsoft tries to force FOSS to have to build support for a fake open source, deeply flawed, crippled format. What do you have against using a very well designed open source format, ODF? If you don't want to use it, don't. But don't force everyone else to use a crippled proprietary format. - Phocion55, on 10/10/2007, -2/+21Is there such thing as a super block on Digg?
- Bamborzled, on 10/10/2007, -1/+19It's Microsoft's new file format for Office 2007. To be specific, it's a bunch of XML documents wrapped in a ZIP container. Microsoft claims it to be standardized and 'open'; in reality you would need inside knowledge of Office in order to create a full implementation of OOXML due to several esoteric and proprietary elements in the specification. Furthermore, the 6000 page specification is obviously designed so that standards committees won't have time to read through the entire thing.
That's close enough, I think. I think people who really take an interest in open standards know what OOXML is and what it's used fore. - prisoner24601, on 10/10/2007, -1/+18The importance of pushing OOXML to either merge with ODF or be dropped entirely cannot be overstated. It's utterly insane that we are trapped with our data locked into products from only one single vendor. Individual end users, corporations and government agencies all have a genuine need to be able to choose software based on value, not data lock-in.
What I find funny is that NO ONE is pushing for standardization of OOXML other than Microsoft. The huge list of vendors who stood up to ask ODF be ratified (and then made numerous ACTUAL PRODUCTS that use it) is in stark contrast to Microsoft standing alone to cram this "me too, but with proprietary features no one else can replicate" so-called format through the ISO. - Tenoq, on 10/10/2007, -0/+15Key words: 'full implementation'.
So no, yanotrite. :P - Otto, on 10/10/2007, -0/+15They're called "shills".
- TehDoctor, on 10/10/2007, -2/+17I believe I speak for everyone on Digg, 7of7, when I call you a giant douchebag.
- prisoner24601, on 10/10/2007, -0/+14You're confusing "more complex" with "more complete" here. There NO question whatsoever that OOXML has more "detail" to it. That's the evil genius of the proposal. It's so Rube Goldberg that no one else can understand it, so they can't make software that will compete with Microsoft's Office cash cow.
- Urusai, on 10/10/2007, -0/+14OOXML is a Trojan horse for killing ODF; it's that simple.
- ToadLeg, on 10/10/2007, -0/+13YES THEY ARE. If it became an international standard it would be forced on everyone.
- ToadLeg, on 10/10/2007, -0/+13Interesting. In what way is OOXML "more complete" than ODF?
- ToadLeg, on 10/10/2007, -2/+15People who use Microsoft don't seem to understand that "Works" != "good". Microsoft can use OOXML just fine, sure, and so could Linux, but it's an inaccurately documented proprietary piece of bloated crippleware that is part of an effort by Microsoft to undermine open source by producing garbage and calling it "open source". Just because something can be used doesn't make it an international standard.
- schoate09, on 10/10/2007, -1/+13To 7of7, over9000, and in the next few hours, estvir and wageslaven, we all would like to say: "Ignorance is a bliss".
- srg13, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12I could say the same about wordWrapLikeWord97 or lineSpaceLikeWord95...
- AlexFerny, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11And yes Office still uses them...
If they are deprecated, why do they need to be in the specs? - prisoner24601, on 10/10/2007, -2/+13It's hard to even BEGIN to know where to respond to 7of7. No one is forcing MS to use ODF or drop OOXML, but we are (quite rightly, and after decades of being trapped in the "upgrade treadmill" and having their data held hostage to one vendor) finally saying "ENOUGH!"
You can store your corporate data written with Crayons on Post-It Notes if you want to. No one will say you are not allowed to, nor that Microsoft can't sell you $300 Crayons and $800 Post-It Notes if that works for you. The rest of us are putting our foot down and saying we will ONLY store our data (OUR DATA!) in a format that is genuinely open and can be readily understood and implemented by ANY vendor with an idea who thinks they can write a decent software package. We're DONE being dependent on one company. OOXML is a farce of a so-called standard and was created to undermine data portability, not facilitate it. - ClOlD, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11So, I need to pay you before you let me cross the bridge, right?
- ToadLeg, on 10/10/2007, -2/+11OOXML would be a huge disaster for everyone, for decades to come, if it became a standard.
- geminitojanus, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9There's actually a lot of mathematical formula flaws in ODF as well as MSOXML, but unlike Microsoft, the powers that be are actually trying to solve those problems, see OpenFormula.
- sjaaksken, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9Harlowsmonkey, I'm not sure that what you say is valid... as I'm not a document format specialist I've searched for maybe other sources where they point this mysterious PMT tag out, but have only found your comment. Also, openopffice is completely open source. So you should be able to track back to what it means. It's not even sure it even is an ODF tag and not an open office tag, you just seem to assume it is?
And another thing that makes me wonder about your credibility is the ODDFPRICE function. I quote [quote](A more dramatic example would be the ODDFPRICE function, also completely undocumented in ODF[/quote]. But than I ran into this document:
http://oooauthors.org/en/authors/userguide2/calc/published_final/0314CG-DescriptionOfFunctions.odt
which states CLEARLY:
ODDFPRICE(settlement; maturity; issue; first_coupon; rate; yield; redemption; frequency; basis)
Calculates the price per 100 currency units par value of a security, if the first interest date falls irregularly. Settlement is the date of purchase of the security. Maturity is the date on which the security matures (expires). Issue is the date of issue of the security. First_coupon is the first interest date of the security. Rate is the annual rate of interest. Yield is the annual yield of the security. Redemption is the redemption value per 100 currency units of par value. Frequency is the number of interest payments per year (1, 2 or 4). Basis is chosen from a list of options and indicates how the year is to be calculated.
Another thing: if OOXML was a decent open format it would've passed without problems. Instead microsoft had to bribe people. Tell me, when you bribe someone, is that because you think your product fits all standards or does it mean you're trying to get something you don't deserve? Also microsoft's statement declares there has been unseen participation in the validation of the format. Actually yeah, but nothing to be proud of: ODF had a clean sheet when it got approved, OOXML received 10.000 comments for improvement. That's indeed unseen, but rather in a pathetic way. - bobzibub, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9Got your hex editor out then?
I remember that it allows blobs for older versions.... - qwuinc, on 10/10/2007, -3/+12Stay tuned for the embrace & extend tactics if and when they give up on pushing OOXML..
- Phocion55, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10To 7of7 and over90000, what do you have to say about Office XML supplying INVALID XML EXAMPLES in the specification?
For any STANDARDS committee to actually give a "YES" to a specification riddled with non-validated XML snippets of code is just mind bogglingly ludicrous. How are we supposed to take you seriously?!
An XML document must be valid and well-formed. This is Beginners XML 101.......the freaking basis XML was built on!!!!!!
How can you create a standard that hundreds of nations are going to rely on when you don't even have the most basic fundamentals down? - prisoner24601, on 10/10/2007, -2/+11Speaking as someone who is not a Linux user, but just a user who is COMPLETELY FED UP with paying the Microsoft Tax every time they want refresh their coffers by releasing a new Office file format, your causal dismissal of this issue is truly sad. I don't know what your motivation for your comment is, but just be sure there are many of us who are going to digg down people making technically-correct criticisms of minutiae in ODF as red-herring arguments against it. Yes, ODF needs some revision work. OOXML, on the other hand, WOULD need to be radically overhauled to remove the incredibly convoluted assumptions in it to accomplish its purpose IF that purpose was to actually make data portable. But that's not the purpose. It's intended to be so completely bjorked that no one outside the walls of Microsoft has a decent chance of implementing it, so in that sense, this convoluted mess that is OOXML is perfectly designed to accomplish exactly what Microsoft intended it to. You don't have to be a Linux fanboy to be VERY interested in getting your data freed from the "there's only one vendor I even CAN buy from" problem.
- gadgetuk, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10Well, this is important stuff. At least with an "Open" standard this stuff can be fixed by various contributors - it's not locked by a single vendor. That's the crux of the argument really - nobody can (realistically) say that ODF is superior to OOXML, it's just that it's open and has no proprietary extensions that will lock certain features into MS applications.
- Excessive, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9~# rm -rf /digg/L33tMasta ; /usr/bin/mv /digg/L33tMasta /dev/hell
- prisoner24601, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9Extensive is not the same as complete!
- ToadLeg, on 10/10/2007, -3/+11OOXML is an inaccurately documented proprietary piece of bloated crippleware that is part of Microsoft's effort to undermine open source by calling garbage "open source". The only people who support OOXML are paid to by Microsoft.
- sjaaksken, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10707 I guess you just don't understand the concept of using standardization. What you're saying is like: Hey, since the screws to open my pc case all are conforming to the standard (same size), it's taking away my liberty to use other screws! The horror! Instead you want different sizes of screws for each separate pc-case and even screws that are molted into the case so you can't get them out but only the vendor can.... you know, because THAT is freedom yay! And all those people wanting to have same size screws so they can open their cases without being tied to their vendor are freedom hating terrorists!
*sigh* - AlexFerny, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7news flash - everything is defined in ODF tard
- Tippis, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8May I suggest unchecking the Linux/Unix category if it disturbs your world view that much.
- daftman, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7I do. You want some?
- maninalift, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9All you need to know is that OOXML comes from the same people who brought you the microsoft word form. Anyone out there want to make a nomination for the worst file format ever?
Mine is the aforementioned microsoft word form (although I suppose it is not exactly a document format - but it's close enough). Because:
> It has zero compatibility between versions of Office (Open Office is often better at reading MSW forms but not perfect). Formatting always messes up when you are sent a form created be someone else then it is impossible for you to correct the formatting because:
> It imposes arbitrary editing restrictions. This is a total mess, I can put a load of return characters in a form box but when I delete them _some_ of the objects further down the document don't return to their original positions and nothing ever looks the same again.
> Any end user of the form is expected to own MS Office and to load it up in order to view the document. It's so messy to load up a word processor just to fill out a form.
The end result is that the poor administrators make forms in this format thinking that it will be the most professional looking and the most compatible but they end up creating self-destructing documents that explode as soon as they touch anything a minor version-number away from the software they were created on and require hackery from the end user just to get them to display. - ToadLeg, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9http://www.linuxmint.com/ Download "Cassandra 3.0 Main Edition", burn it to a CD, put it in your computer, restart. Without installing or touching your hard drive, Linux Mint will boot as a "Live CD" and you can see what Linux is (it will run much slower than usual as a Live CD because it will be running from the CD, not the hard drive, but may still be faster than Windows). Then come back and say something about Linux. It is not a "pile of trash" and it is sad that you think it is. Here's a direct link to the torrent: "LinuxMint-3.0.iso.torrent" http://www.lintelligence.de/getdownload/971099d9827522c/1189057317/568
Microsoft "is going to get their way" by making a lot of money. They really don't care who uses their system, except that it gives them money. - kahrn, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6I suggest you stop using sites that are powered by linux/unix. Wait a second.. digg is powered by *nix too!
- daftman, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8By reading his comment and digging him up or down, you're actually give him attention.
That's what trolls want. Attention.
I suggest we should just leave him at +1 digg and ignore his post.
Anyway, I think you are still being too nice. - ToadLeg, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6It cannot be overstated how bad it would be if OOXML became an international standard through bribery, manipulation, and dishonesty. Interoperability and compatibility would fly out the window as every office application would struggle to keep up with the undocumented updates and proprietary obfuscation of the disaster that is OOXML. Only Microsoft would stand to gain because they would be holding all the cards.
- kris33, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Yeah. You have to write all this:
< w:p >
< w:r >
< w:t >Hello, world.
< /w:p >
To just get this:
< p>Hello, world. - ToadLeg, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Right......that's what they've done, by blocking it as an international standard. If it became an international standard it would be "in" and it wouldn't matter if Linux supported it or not.
- ToadLeg, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6I'll try to act like that's not just a bunch of nonsense:
1) Not having a thumbnail view is not a bug, it's a lack of a feature. There are an infinite number of features not implemented in any program.
2) I think by "people complaining" you mean "people suggesting". If the suggestion has been implemented, what is the problem?
3) How long does it take for Microsoft to implement new features? About 5 years for a new operating system if I remember correctly, but that doesn't really matter because Microsoft has many more important things to do; namely, patching a system so badly coded that even though people can't see the source, they still find vulnerabilities to exploit, constantly.
4) WTF does Linux vs Windows have to do with OOXML? Well, actually, everything, because Microsoft is trying to use OOXML to attack Linux, a system that only "Attacks" Microsoft by taking away potential profit. - srg13, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8I hope that that comment is satirical... Because I bet that even the people who wrote the spec would rather kill themselves than write a 100% OOXML compliant reading/writing application.
- vdog, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7This isn't a Linux issue. It's about MS trying to get their own standard adopted as the standard that everybody will use. If they can make it the standard that we all should use, they'll be able to lock us in (despite the name, the standard is not open). This would create an environment where no-body can compete with them- only their software will be able to open our documents. That's bad for everyone, whether you're a Linux user or not.
- foreplay, on 10/10/2007, -0/+52.15.3.64 useWord97LineBreakRules (Emulate Word 97 East Asian Line Breaking)
This element specifies that applications shall emulate the behavior of a previously existing word processing
application (Microsoft Word 97) when determining the line breaking rules for East Asian text within a
WordprocessingML document.
[Guidance: To faithfully replicate this behavior, applications must imitate the behavior of that application, which
involves many possible behaviors and cannot be faithfully placed into narrative for this Office Open XML
Standard. If applications wish to match this behavior, they must utilize and duplicate the output of those
applications. It is recommended that applications not intentionally replicate this behavior as it was deprecated
due to issues with its output, and is maintained only for compatibility with existing documents from that
application. end guidance]
It does state that its deprecated but the part about how it cant be put into narrative for office open xml has me stumped. if you cant explain it how can it be considered open for others to use. if it cant it has absolutely no place in the specifications. - Tippis, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Maybe you should actually read up on this so-called "propaganda" and "mis-information [sic]".
The reason it got stopped is precisely because it is *not* propaganda and misinformation, but rather hard facts about obvious technical flaws in the proposal. - geminitojanus, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5To be 100% accurate, the formulas format is still a draft, it's called "OpenFormula", and it specifies all of the behaviors that are missing (as well as fixes a lot of broken functions often used in spreadsheets while maintaining a backwards compatibility mode, for functions like CEILING). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenFormula
There are still a few things wrong with it that they're working out the kinks in before the submit it for standardization, because they'd rather get it mostly right the first time than have to publish 80 corrections at a later date. - foreplay, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5If ooxml becomes an international standard then its available to be used by governments around the world who have started to realise that most of their data is locked into file formats they don't actual know how to read any more. the British national archive stumbled over this problem a while ago http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6265976.stm
ooxml really isn't an open standard microsoft will be the only ones able to implement it fully. couple that with the fact they control 95% of the desktop market and if you were smart enough you would realise they can lock everyone into continue using Microsoft office for the next ~ 20 years. There will be little to no competition in the office market driving up prices.
now if odf starts becoming widely adopted (and they sort out the rest of the spec) people will be able to choose which office application they use since open office, iworks, koffice, hopefully microsoft office and probably a few web browsers will be able to display and or edit the odf format. so The playing field becomes level will people continue to slash out £360 ($725) for the full Microsoft office, i doubt it. they will have to drop their prices and if you really want that ribbon interface you will have to pay a lot less. everyone but Microsoft comes out happy and we have an open market again. - foreplay, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Just because the minute odf was ratified as a standard millions of computers users worldwide never switched to the format does not make it a failure. doc is universally used and will take a long while before it is supplanted by anything else.
first governments will start to use it to store their data, offices will start to use it to be able to use government documentation. hopefully schools will start to use it since it will be cheaper to use open office rather than Microsoft office. then students follow suite to be able to edit work at home. its a gradual process but hopefully it will come.
once ms office is out of the way Linux may actually become a real alternative heaven forbid. - Niten, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5That's an odd thing to say. Care to explain how OpenOffice "does not cut it", especially in light of OOXML's technical deficiencies (inconsistent use of measurement units, behavioral specifications based on Word 95, etc.)?
My experience is that 95% of the time someone claims they need Microsoft Office because OpenOffice won't do the job they need, they're flat out wrong. I have an ex-roommate who repeatedly told me he needed to use Excel instead of OpenOffice Calc due to some unspecified "lack of functionality"; however, when I pressed him, he couldn't actually think of any significant functionality missing from the OO.org program. -
Show 51 - 100 of 124 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is