Re: [MLUG] Open Document Format in Minnesota?

[Stephen Montgomery-Smith <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

Mike Miller wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2007, Jerry Gamblin wrote:
>
> > > I think Massachusetts has already done this.  I hope this passes in 
> > > Minnesota and that many states will follow:
> > >
> > > http://ros.leg.mn/bin/bldbill.php?bill=H0176.0.html&session=ls85
> >
> > The Massachusetts case is interesting. OOS "people" spent a ton of 
> > money to get the open document format passed in the state and signed 
> > into law. It was thought (on the internet anyway) this would be the 
> > start of widespread adoption of OpenOffice (etc) until Microsoft 
> > released there own ODF and sold Massachusetts one of the largest 
> > Office 2007 licenses to date.
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Office_Open_XML
> >
> > It looks like Minneotas law will be the same thing.
>
>
>
> Microsoft can continue to do their thing indefinitely, but they are 
> slowly being worn down.  They were forced, entirely against their 
> interests, to start using an open file format.  I don't know if their 
> version of open XML is any better than the one that had already been 
> developed by OpenOffice group.  Having their own format widely adopted 
> will give them a little more time, but in the end, having an open format 
> takes away one more reason to want to use MS Office instead of Open Office.
>
> For me, widespread adoption of an open file format is a lot more 
> important than the success of Open Office.  I think this will do a lot 
> to encourage competition.
>
> Mike

I agree with Mike.  That this law forces MS to do the right thing is a 
good thing.  The open document movement is primarily about getting 
things open, not an anti-MS movement.

--

Stephen Montgomery-Smith
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://www.math.missouri.edu/~stephen

_______________________________________________
members mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/members