M$ Admits Failure To Implement Open Standards For Years

The following statement was released 2012-08-13, promising finally to implement an open standard M$ foisted on the world but did not follow since 2007, five years ago. Deliberately choosing to break an open standard is reprehensible and possibly illegal restraint of trade. The means M$ used to impose that open standards was also questionable. Why bother with a company that offers future standardization when you can have it now with LibreOffice?

M$ does not lead in giving customers choice and flexibility. It lags for years. OpenOffice.org supported ISO 29500 since 2008 and ODF before that.

“Microsoft continues to lead in giving customers choice and flexibility in file format standards and interoperability. With these enhancements, Microsoft Office now provides full read and write support for the most commonly used document format standards, including ISO/IEC 29500 (Strict Open XML and Transitional Open XML), ISO 32000 (PDF), and OASIS ODF 1.2. So no matter which of these formats your documents are in today, you will be able to work with them in the next release of Office. And you will be able to save your Office documents in any of these formats, providing the broadest options for document format interoperability.”

via Office Next – New file format options in the new Office.

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in technology. Bookmark the permalink.

32 Responses to M$ Admits Failure To Implement Open Standards For Years

  1. oiaohm says:

    ch “Thanks for the warning, so I know to avoid SugarCRM like the plague.”

    Really for some business operations SugerCRM is the best option.

    –So what about you try out both Sharepoint and Alfresco and tell us your findings? OK, that would require work, knowledge and honesty on your part, so I’m not holding my breath.–

    Already have. Business Process Management Alfresco is way ahead of Sharepoint. Integration options Alfresco go past Sharepoint. So most of the major ERP integrate properly with Alfresco. There are a lots of ERP that don’t integrate with Sharepoint.

    Means auto push content out services in Alfresco are far more complete than Share-point.

    MS Office intergration with Alfresco is about equal to sharepoint. Libreoffice integration works with Alfresco as a third party plugin at this stage.

    Alfresco cloud is measured by storage not by users. The first 10GB is free. That is hosting in the Amazon Web Services. That is EU certified. Charge rates are standard Amazon Web Services if you don’t like that service you are free to setup you own image to deploy on what ever cloud service you like or even mirror to your own local server.

    So thinking the first 10GB is free you can try alfresco without installing anything.

    ch the reality is basically zero effort to compare other than setting up an account to the cloud version. So if alfresco is suitable or not you know before you do deployment.

    There are very few downsides. Means to use more vendors is always a positive.

    ch each group is different. Ganttproject note I mentioned the Ganttproject and the fact sugercrm and other also do project management more integrated. Same with most good ERP’s have project management that are mostly not MS project compatible.

    So depend on what you are doing does alter the required software.

    ch
    –A quick check shows that XYZ is nowhere near in the same league as ABC —
    Reality this is the problem. You expect the replacement to be the same as the program you are using. Depend on what the requires are you may not require the same. Really mostly you don’t. As soon as you find one difference its over. Does not matter if the business you are in never ever uses that feature.

    So a quick check is normally not good enough you miss why. Webdav link of Ganttproject allows you to link back to some of the ERP’s that you cannot link to with MS Project.

    So you software environment defines if you should or should not be using MS Project. Not having MS Project does not break a business means to operate. There are more than enough other solutions.

    MS Project is not as much of a must as you make out ch. Your server side decides what Project software you should be using more than anything else.

    ch the reality is you are playing in a small pool with very little experience.

  2. ch says:

    BTW: “Exchange and sharepoint with surgercrm is just making your life painful without any good reason.”

    Thanks for the warning, so I know to avoid SugarCRM like the plague.

  3. ch says:

    “have you used Alfresco??”

    Sorry, but I’ve been through this spiel a few times too often:
    1. I mention that commercial product ABC has no comparable FLOSS alternative.
    2. Invariably, some fanboy googles around and comes up with FLOSS software XYZ that does something roughly similar, and promptly swears that it can, like, absolutelypositivelyreally replace ABC – no, in fact it’s even better!
    3. A quick check shows that XYZ is nowhere near in the same league as ABC (like this Ganttproject you threw at me before).

    So what about you try out both Sharepoint and Alfresco and tell us your findings? OK, that would require work, knowledge and honesty on your part, so I’m not holding my breath.

  4. oiaohm says:

    ch –Because the alternatives – so far as they even exist – suck even more.–

    I hear this a lot have you used Alfresco?? Have you used the alternatives to Exchange.

    Suck more not really. The alternatives are better fits in particular cases. Business using like sugercrm integrating to exchange or sharepoint is a major pain in ass. Where integrating to alfresco and one of the many FOSS groupware solutions is straight forwards.

    This is the problem the answer is not black and white. As oldman says its all about the Applications. Wrong mix of applications makes your job many times harder than it should be. Exchange and sharepoint with surgercrm is just making your life painful without any good reason.

  5. ch says:

    “Psst, dude let me clue you in”

    Thanks, but you have already proven your incompetence to my full satisfaction.

    “freely admits”

    Guess what? Doesn’t need any “admitting” when you’re just realistic. Software is still in its infancy, and “suck” is pretty much the norm. Yes. Exchange sucks (in some areas), and so do Windows, Office, Sharepoint etc. So why do we still use them? Because the alternatives – so far as they even exist – suck even more.

    “its BYOD these days”

    That’s why MS designed WP7 for BYOD before the term BYOD was established. It might pay off with WP8.

  6. oiaohm says:

    ch and oldman have either of you worked with openchange mapiproxy with exchange to improve performance. Or alfresco or any of the alternative to reaching for the MS product.

    The reality the reason for MS Windows servers are reducing.

    At some point the ERP you have will want to integrate fully with Email system I bet. This will be simpler with a fully Linux solution oldman. So you would say Exchange where you are is time limited if its not already gone.

    Amount of Linux in the server room will keep on expanding.

  7. oldman says:

    “DO you have experience with Linux Yes or no?”

    With Bell Labs Unix starting in 1978
    With AIX starting in 1990
    With Red Hat Linux starting in 2000

    I am on a team that is responsible for supporting 350+ virtual and physical Linux hosts supporting Mission critical Enterprise LOB ERP applications.

    My latest project is creating a demonstration version of Red Hat kickstart that will allow for provisioning server that come up configured with VMWare tools, attached to our Red Hat sattelite server configurred to authenticating via our red hat directory server and with the puppet enterprise agent installed configured and ready to go.

    Your turn.

  8. dougman says:

    DO you have experience with Linux Yes or no?

  9. oldman says:

    “Searching for “exchange” and “sucks”: about 33,600,000 results, imagine that!”

    DO you have experience with exchange Yes or no?

  10. dougman says:

    CH the Troll, quotes from Wikipedia.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BlackBerry#Competition Second Paragraph, Despite market share loss, on a global basis, the number of active BlackBerry users has increased substantially between 2007 and 2012.

    However, he fails to include the following:

    The primary competitors of the BlackBerry are smartphones running Android, the Apple iPhone…..BlackBerry has struggled to compete against Android and Apple and its market share has plunged in recent years, leading to speculation that it will be unable to survive as an independent business.

    Psst, dude let me clue you in, “Past Performance Does Not Guarantee Future Results”, got that? OK, here’s another one, “Prior Results Do Not Guarantee Future Outcome”

    CH the Troll, freely admits, “Exchange is derfinitively not perfect, and I know some places where it sucks”

    Searching for “exchange” and “sucks”: about 33,600,000 results, imagine that!

    Also, using Crackberry is out. Passé. Dead as a dodo. In SMB’s its BYOD these days and if your lucky, like I am, the SMB will fund your SMART thingy at cost. 🙂

    http://www.heraldonline.com/2012/09/06/4242048/65-of-global-enterprises-to-allow.html

  11. ch says:

    “Corporate World Troll CH slogs Blackberry as a viable solution.”

    To repeat: “Despite market share loss, on a global basis, the number of active BlackBerry users has increased substantially between 2007 and 2012.”

    “CH thinks “Because we can afford” must apply for the rest of the planet.”

    No – but by and large, it does apply to businesses in developed countries.

    “CH states that “I’ve administrated” and “I don’t remember any bugs” applies to everyone else.”

    Well, it’s a huge company (400k+ employees) with a good number of Exchange servers, and if Exchange really were so buggy, I would know. Exchange is derfinitively not perfect, and I know some places where it sucks, but bugs simply are not an issue. Of course you can’t know anything about that since you’ve never worked with Exchange.

  12. dougman says:

    Corporate World Troll CH slogs Blackberry as a viable solution. Meanwhile, outside the cubicle and in the REAL world:

    For the three months ending in July, Android and iOS combined US smartphone subscriber share reached 85.6 percent, according to comScore. That’s 3.4 percentage points higher than April.

    Meanwhile, Research in Motion and Microsoft mobile platforms receded to 9.5 percent and 3.6 percent share from 11.6 percent and 4 percent, respectively.

    CH thinks “Because we can afford” must apply for the rest of the planet.

    CH states that “I’ve administrated” and “I don’t remember any bugs” applies to everyone else.

  13. ch says:

    “CH the Troll, winces when called out on his actions and logic.”

    And who exactly “called me out” here? You definitively not.

    “Getting back on subject, the take away is that M$ chumps pay for a “use” license,”

    What? I have to pay? OMG! The sky is falling!

    “the software is buggy and expensive”

    I’ve administrated Exchange for years, and don’t remember any bugs that I came across.

    “M$ always playing catch-up to the competition”

    Which competition do you have in mind?

    “Exchange deployments are wayyyyy expensive”

    Sure – if you do the “creative calculations”. Here in the real world, businesses hardly notice.

    “Blackberry is irrelevant”

    In amateur land, yes. In the corporate world, not.

    “Why pay more??”

    Because we can easily afford that, and …

    “Why Windows??”

    – MS Office
    – Exchange (and BES)
    – Sharepoint
    – and a gazillion of other stuff

  14. dougman says:

    CH the Troll, winces when called out on his actions and logic.

    Getting back on subject, the take away is that M$ chumps pay for a “use” license, the software is buggy and expensive, M$ always playing catch-up to the competition , Exchange deployments are wayyyyy expensive, Blackberry is irrelevant and lock-in with M$ is easy to get in bed with but super expensive to get out of.

    Only MVPs or ones with vested interests, will say Linux is not a viable solution.

    Why pay more?? Why Windows??

  15. ch says:

    You made one wrong claim after another. I refuted them, and now you can do nothing but call me a troll. So where are your legs, black knight?

  16. dougman says:

    CH the Troll, deflects and thinks I have no legs.

  17. ch says:

    “quoting from Wikipiedia”

    I’m sometimes lazy, it was easy to find – and written in a way that even you should be able to understand.

    “CH the Troll”

    Thanks for admitting that you don’t have a leg to stand on.

  18. dougman says:

    CH the Troll, shows his penitent marketing insight by quoting from Wikipiedia.

  19. ch says:

    “Primary and Secondary exchange servers with a backup server, so that’s a total of three”

    For a whole lot of 50 users?

    “yes, I know you can use virtual machines but that would incur an extra cost.”

    So VMware costs more than physical hardware? Please stop, it really hurts.

    I know an IT service company with about 400 users. They have four physical machines and a SAN to run all their server stuff on – and they have a lot of server stuff including Exchange. Oh, and one admin for all of that.

    “Who uses a blackberry these days”

    This is what WP says:
    “Despite market share loss, on a global basis, the number of active BlackBerry users has increased substantially between 2007 and 2012. For example, for the fiscal period during which the Apple iPhone was first released, RIM reported that they had a user base of 10.5 million BlackBerry subscribers. At the end of 2008, when Google Android first hit the market, RIM reported that the number of BlackBerry subscribers had increased to 21 million. Likewise, in the fiscal period where phones running Microsoft’s Windows Phone 7 hit the market, RIM announced that the number of BlackBerry subscribers had reached 55 million. Finally, in the quarter ended June 28, 2012, RIM announced that the number of BlackBerry subscribers had reached 78 million globally.”

  20. dougman says:

    CH, Primary and Secondary exchange servers with a backup server, so that’s a total of three and yes, I know you can use virtual machines but that would incur an extra cost.

    Yes, Zimbra doesn’t cover for Blackberry Exchange Server. Who uses a blackberry these days, of that’s right we use Android!

    http://mrpogson.com/2012/09/06/1-3-million-android-activations-per-day/

  21. ch says:

    “Here is the TRUE cost for utilizing 50-users with Outlook-Exchange:”

    Mr Dougman, I have good and bad news for you.

    The bad news: You are so incompetent at everything IT that it hurts.

    The good news: You seem to have the right mindset for a job in “creative accounting”. Would you consider moving to Las Vegas?

    However, before you apply for that kind of job, you should polish your “creative” skills. If you want to get away with a spreadsheet filled with random stuff, make it realistic-looking enough it will at least pass a cursory examination.
    РUsing physical machines for each server you need is out. Pass̩. Dead as a dodo. Virtual machines rule. And a tape library? Sheesh!
    – Three physical machines and one full-time admin would be appropriate – for something like 5000 users, but most definitively not 50. Be more careful with your exaggerations.
    – Including BES in your little made-up list was a bad move: This means Zimbra is not an option, so your whole point is defeated. Please strive to avoid such Big Mistakes in the future – in Vegas they can be bad for your health.

    Oh, and “utilizing 50-users”? Yikes.

  22. dougman says:

    Ted, thinks using M$ you can go cheaper, I think not.

    Hmmmm,

    In July of 2012, it was announced that there will not be another Windows Small Business Server product after SBS 2011. SBS 2011 Essentials will be succeeded by Windows Server 2012 Essentials. One of the primary differences between Windows Server 2012 Essentials and previous versions of Small Business Server is that Windows Server 2012 Essentials does not include Microsoft Exchange which is used for messaging and collaboration, including the ability to host email.

    Doh!, M$ wants its users to pay more for the same as before.

    Take 5% of the quoted cost, there’s your answer.

  23. oiaohm says:

    Ted Small Business Server is no more next cycle. There is no 2012 Small Business Server.

    2008 Small Business Server does not come with free outlook either.

    Small Business Server 2008 cannot operate in a live backup form. The kicker.
    http://www.newgen.ca/knowledge-center/articles/microsoft-announces-the-end-of-small-business-server/
    Yes and since July 5, 2012 Small Business Server is officially not for sale. So I cannot officially price 2008 Small Business Server Ted. 2008 Small Business Server would be only old stock somewhere. No new discs are being pressed.

    dougman compare is the real current day price Ted.

    Few months ago before MS sprung the Small Business Server end of life on us you had somewhere to go there.

  24. Ted says:

    “Here is the TRUE cost for utilizing 50-users with Outlook-Exchange:”

    Not even remotely close.

    Exhibit A – Small Business Server.

    Do you have a proper cost comparison to Zimbra anywhere? One by someone who knows how to use a spreadsheet?

  25. Clarence Moon says:

    It works for me.

    I am sure that it does, Mr. Pogson, but it doesn’t work for the market segment that pays Microsoft umpteen billion a year for MS Office and allied servers. As you have noted often, only a fraction of Windows computers have MS Office installed although the freebie version being added to most pre-loads today may be upping that ratio.

    People who run their businesses with MS office automation pay for it and those who do not may or may not use something else. But the rate of consumption of MS Office is well documented. Let Open Office and LiberOffice fight it out for the most often given away trophy.

  26. Actually, I read Wikipedia too quickly. They had Outlook for DOS… I’ve probably had it on PCs that I used without even knowing it. I always did e-mail by other means and used a paper calendar. I have orage now. It works for me.

  27. dougman says:

    The world Outlook is very bleak these days and M$ loves to take your money unhindered.

    Here is the TRUE cost for utilizing 50-users with Outlook-Exchange:

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AiOAHPPgX5xZdHk3aHhCMmZmaUN4cUJLSS1aZ2dsUFE#gid=0

    Deploying Zimbra, a SMB could reduce the final cost down to just 3-5% over M$ solution.

    Why pay more?? Why Windows?? <— Makes for a nice advert..

  28. kozmcrae says:

    Clarence Moon wrote:

    “Just as a healthy person is not going to opt for a heart transplant just because it is covered in an insurance plan, they are not going to opt for a conversion to Linux and Open Office or Libre Office.”

    You’ve got that analogy completely assbackwards Clarence. Microsoft is the one who convinced the hapless patient to trade in his natural healthy heart for a mechanical Microsoft heart that needs constant maintenance and upgrades all at extra cost. Now he’s dependent on Microsoft to keep him going or he’ll die. Microsoft has him right where they want him. You know that’s the reason Microsoft resisted open document standards for so long. Everyone knows that Clarence.

  29. ch says:

    “There was no “Outlook” before 2007 and the world made appointments and such.”

    (Of course you meant to type “1997”, not “2007”.)

    Yes, people made appointments before – and it sucked mightily. My very special other is a secretary, and she knows how horrible it was to fix a date for a meeting with five managers involved – lots of phoning, writing in paper calendars, erasing (they soon learned to use pencils, not pens) and re-scheduling … To the secretaries of the world Outlook was – and is – a dream come true.

  30. Clarence Moon thinks “Outlook” is essential. It’s not. There was no “Outlook” before 2007 and the world made appointments and such. We have many powerful tools for coordination of large organisations these days. That is of little concern to the bulk of users of PCs. I have never used Outlook and don’t know anyone who has.

    Further, Munich created absolutely no chaos. That’s why they went so slowly and carefully. They are happy with the result. It works. It saves money. It uses open standards. It’s great.

    There is no difference between a business and a government as far as IT goes. They both have revenue and expenditure and try to have some balance between. Government has other priorities than making money but so do businesses. M$’s monopoly was not about making money but taking away the power of anyone else to make money in the desktop PC.

  31. Why bother with a company that offers future standardization when you can have it now with LibreOffice?

    One word, Mr. Pogson, “Outlook”. Or, if you need 2 words “Microsoft Exchange”. You do not seem to understand the commercial office environment so you prate about bits and bytes and such. Get a clue, no one really cares about that. they want smooth transitions that are not system changing events.

    Look at the chaos created in Munich over the past decade due to attempting such conversions. That is possible in a government setting, which is an absolute monopoly itself if you think about it, but it is not possible in an operating business. Just as a healthy person is not going to opt for a heart transplant just because it is covered in an insurance plan, they are not going to opt for a conversion to Linux and Open Office or Libre Office.

    Given that the participants in the two groups cannot get alone with one another, how is it that you think customers will want to jump in?

  32. dougman says:

    It amazes me the amount of “catch-up” that M$ does, as all the while chumps pay for a “use” license for it’s software.

Leave a Reply