What is Digg?22 Comments
- geoboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Why looks at this negatively by saying "too bad for Microsoft"? It'll only be bad for Microsoft if they choose not to support it, which is their own damn fault. Anyway, my point is that this is a hugely positive move towards an open standard for preserving documents. Really, I wish more of government would take an active role in embracing open, non-proprietary standards.
- BxBoy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Ditto!
- Ratteler, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It would be he same support issues if they upgraded to the latest version of Office. At least this way they support open standards. Soemthing a Govt. agency should have a RESPONSIBILITY to do.
- compu73rg33k, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Bout ***** time. Down with M$ and up with OpenSource!!!!!!
- matt72186, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Haven't you heard? The next Microsoft Office will use an open format, and be compatible with OpenOffice's formats... Probably in reaction to this.
- gregcotten, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Really, I wish more of government would take an active role in embracing open, non-proprietary standards
Hey geoboy - More like non-standard, if you ask me. It's non-standard because it's not a widly accepted format.
-Greg - ebob, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I thought that Massachusetts was converting to OpenDocument. Come to find out it's only the small, island nation of Massachesetts that's converting. Do they even have computers there?
Also, I would not pay $250 for an office sweet when there are plenty of sweets on the receptionist's desk. - aetherane, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I personally think this is a bad idea. Not conceptually bad, just that getting this set up will take up IT time. I interned under a rep there a year or two ago and when people asked for the it department, it would take about a month for them to get back. Even after its implemented there will likely be a large number of training / support issues.
- immrlizard, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I may be the only one, but I don't care for how open office works. I do like 602software though. You have to remember that the only reason that M$ has such a big share in the market of office apps is because of how many "friends" shared it with all of their friends. I don't have anything against M$, but I will never pay $250 plus for an office sweet when there are alternatives.
- kevjava, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The next Microsoft Office will use an open XML format, but Hell will freeze over before Microsoft makes an outside effort to be compatible with OpenOffice.org.
And Massachusetts isn't that big in the scheme of things, considering all the other people in the world that Microsoft sells to. They're not worried enough about Massachusetts to start opening Office up.
If you talk to people about Office suites, the number one hook Microsoft still has is compatibility. If they opened up their formats, customers would have little reason to pay for the new Office when it came out, and corporate users wouldn't be tied to Windows/Office/Exchange/ActiveDirectory. - spyres, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0----If you talk to people about Office suites, the number one hook Microsoft still has is compatibility.
You do realize that MS Office has compatibility issues (pretty annoying ones at times) across their Office product line throughout the years?
----who cares?
Microsoft and Massachusetts evidently - zwilliams, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Just give M$ time, they'll patent XML and all its flavors because the USPTO is full of either retards or greedy people.
- Bicho, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I appreciate how government agencies understand the need for completely open formats. It protects its citizens from the need of proprietary software. It also protects these agencies from vendor and application lock-in.
It allows all vendors (even MicroSoft) that are willing to adhere to the OpenDocument format to compete for that agencies business. Massachusetts has selected a document format, it has not directly selected or rejected any particular vendor. - adml_shake, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Microsoft should worry about this. This is a trend thats gaining momentum. More and more IT groups are looking for ways to cut costs as their budgets shrink. More 3rd world countries are looking at Linux as a better alternative to Micorsoft, so then some head IT guy reads about it and thinks "well hey, these countries are doing this......I wonder if it's fesable here?" The only think holding some of these companies back is the lack of tech support they can call up at 4 in the AM when the server goes down. But with Red Hat Enterprise thats not really the case anymore. We'll see this gain momentum as more and more people are being taught how to use linux in a H.S. and college setting.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Microsoft responded harshly to the plan, calling it "inconsistent and discriminatory."
Now isnt that, the pot calling the kettle black?
http://www.betanews.com/article/Mass_Finalizes_Plan_to_Drop_MS_Office/1127507226 - adml_shake, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0^^ lol, you kidding I give MS 5-10 years before they bribe someone in the Patent office to say they had a version of Linux developed before anyone else did.
- applesux, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0OMG - Office Sweet?..... SUITE!!!!!!
- bitz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Sweet! Let's hope more follow their example!!
- b04155, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"If you talk to people about Office suites, the number one hook Microsoft still has is INcompatibility. If they opened up their formats, customers would have little reason to pay for the new Office when it came out, and corporate users wouldn't be tied to Windows/Office/Exchange/ActiveDirectory."
fixed it for you - DickBreath, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The next version of Microsoft Office will use a format, which Microsoft claims to be "open".
I think that is a more accurate statement than the fanbois... The next version of Microsoft Office will use an open format.
Microsoft's "open" format is patented. Each individual user of non-Microsoft code (read OpenOffice.org) must individually execute a royalty free patent license agreement with Microsoft. Yeah, that sure is "open". It is so "open" that it makes GPL/LGPL code completely incompatible. (Note: OpenOffice.org is LGPL.)
Also a nit. There is a software package named "Open Office" from a Korean company. Open Office is proprietary and closed source. This Korean company also owns the trademark on the term Open Office.
There is another software package called OpenOffice.org. Please note the DOT-ORG. - thegrinder, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Is it really that hard to spell Massachusetts?
- wildjohn999, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0who cares?
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is