KingBahamut
October 10th, 2005, 04:41 PM
Massachusetts' plan to standardize desktop applications on OpenDocument, an open standard not supported by Microsoft Office, essentially comes down to a matter of control, according Stephen O'Grady. O'Grady has been following the story closely and explains that as a sovereign entity, Massachusetts feels the need to be in complete control of its desktop technology, rather than relying on a single company for its office productivity needs.
External Links
http://searchopensource.techtarget.com/originalContent/0,289142,sid39_gci1132351,00.html
Bits of the article I found inspiring....
(Speaking on whether or not the descision is purely anti-MS)
That doesn't really work for me simply because the OpenDocument format is a standard that anybody can participate in. If Microsoft chooses to participate in it, it certainly can at anytime. [Microsoft] has not, to date, felt that its own Office Open XML formats are superior technically, which is certainly their right to believe. My contention has been all along that if Microsoft wants to cater to customers like Massachusetts that make this decision, all it has to do is implement the OpenDocument format within its product. It already does so for a number of other formats, including WordPerfect and RTF [Rich Text Format]. There are a number of different 'save as' options within Microsoft Word, so all it has to do is add the OpenDocument format to that list and all of the sudden they're competing alongside Sun and IBM and anybody who wants the business of the state of Massachusetts.
I have to aggree. I wouldnt be so hard for MS to include OpenDocument as a support format in its build of Office. I think this is more a sign of exclusionary right to stay away from anything open and remain as utterly propreitary as possible. Just another reason for MS as a company to place itself in a corner.
(Speaking on wether or not other states will do as Mass has done.)
Whether or not other states look to what Massachusetts has done and follow their lead, I think remains to be determined. I have heard some rumbling that there are a couple of other states that want to make some noise in that regard, but I haven't been able to confirm them.
It would seem logical to me that Mass. isnt the only state considering this. It wouldnt seem feasible, specially in an economy where numerous municipal and state level governments are trying to save money.
External Links
http://searchopensource.techtarget.com/originalContent/0,289142,sid39_gci1132351,00.html
Bits of the article I found inspiring....
(Speaking on whether or not the descision is purely anti-MS)
That doesn't really work for me simply because the OpenDocument format is a standard that anybody can participate in. If Microsoft chooses to participate in it, it certainly can at anytime. [Microsoft] has not, to date, felt that its own Office Open XML formats are superior technically, which is certainly their right to believe. My contention has been all along that if Microsoft wants to cater to customers like Massachusetts that make this decision, all it has to do is implement the OpenDocument format within its product. It already does so for a number of other formats, including WordPerfect and RTF [Rich Text Format]. There are a number of different 'save as' options within Microsoft Word, so all it has to do is add the OpenDocument format to that list and all of the sudden they're competing alongside Sun and IBM and anybody who wants the business of the state of Massachusetts.
I have to aggree. I wouldnt be so hard for MS to include OpenDocument as a support format in its build of Office. I think this is more a sign of exclusionary right to stay away from anything open and remain as utterly propreitary as possible. Just another reason for MS as a company to place itself in a corner.
(Speaking on wether or not other states will do as Mass has done.)
Whether or not other states look to what Massachusetts has done and follow their lead, I think remains to be determined. I have heard some rumbling that there are a couple of other states that want to make some noise in that regard, but I haven't been able to confirm them.
It would seem logical to me that Mass. isnt the only state considering this. It wouldnt seem feasible, specially in an economy where numerous municipal and state level governments are trying to save money.