A follow up to this post. I was more then a bit perturbed when I read this “open letter”, from Alan Yates. It seems some people within Microsoft just aren't ready to compete fairly. He is brazen enough to bring up words like due process and acts as if Microsoft is the only one looking out for the good of the people. He insinuates somehow that Microsoft software is standard and that anything else is odd, non-standard and unprecedented. He claims that the OpenDocument format is “untested in the marketplace” while ignoring that the Microsoft XML format hasn't even been released yet. He flat out lies and says that all the office suites that support OpenDocument are derived from the same codebase. 30 seconds of due diligence would have cleared that up, but the response from KDE is here. He also insinuates that Microsoft is the only one that could possibly innovate and even brings into question the government procurement process, which has heavily favored Microsoft in almost every case I've seen. He somehow misses the fact that only Microsoft can officially support their current format and the future format is patent encumbered. He also leaves out that Microsoft is more than welcome to both join OASIS and implement the OpenDocument format into MS Office. I don't have time to tear this piece down line by line, but luckily some others have. The amount of shear FUD in this is astounding though and it'll be interesting to see how MA responds.
–jeremy
OpenDocument, OASIS, Open Source, Microsoft
Archive for September, 2005
It's great to see that Massachusetts has finalized its plan to stop using proprietary document formats and standardize on the OASIS OpenDocument format. This wasn't about “ditching Microsoft”, as many outlets seem to be reporting. In fact, it's not about a specific vendor at all. It's about using a document format that ensures that state documents are available via an open spec. It's about ensuring that a single vendor doesn't control how a state government can access its own data. It's about state government allowing its citizens to choose how they can access data without worrying about patents and without dictating platform. In the end, it's one of the most sound decisions you'll see a US state government make. State documents need to be available for hundreds of years. That's something Microsoft cannot possibly guarantee. And it should be obvious why requiring a citizen to purchase a single application that only runs on two platforms and is only available from a single vendor to access data that is critical is not just silly, but asinine. I say good job MA – first the Boston tea party and now this 
Hopefully we'll see some follow through here. The odd part is that the response from the Microsoft rep seemed to be of the “the customer does not have the right to define their own requirements” attitude, insinuating that you should just be happy with what Microsoft offers for a format. This attitude runs contrary to some of the reform we've seem from Microsoft recently. Maybe they won't be able to ditch their predatory monopolistic practices. Maybe they can't be trusted.
–jeremy
OpenDocument, OASIS, Open Source, Microsoft
Microsoft is going through a reorg and Allchin is going to retire after Vista ships. Scoble likes the news (although he's pulled his comments for being too “rah rah”) and even Mini-Microsoft has hope. The one interesting thing that I've gleaned from the press release and ensuing coverage is that Microsoft is going to try to shift to more of a platform or hosted software services company. That is huge news and a huge shift. For a long time, Microsoft has focused on shipping boxed software. The most obvious change here is that MSN will be brought into the core group. Can a company that had focused on shipping boxed software morph like this and still succeed? There is going to be some huge internal struggles here, that's for sure. We may see the company polarized in a way we never have before. Some within Microsoft clearly get it, but others don't. How much the ones who don't will resist this change remains to be seen. One thing is clear though – Microsoft has seen what companies like Google and Yahoo! are doing and they want in. One classic Microsoft thing that I noticed about the release is that it had a 100% positive spin. They want you to believe that they are making all these changes because of forward looking positive reasons, not because because they took a hard look in the mirror and saw slipping ship dates, decreased profits for the first time in ages and more competition then they have seen in decades. Unlike many OSS people, I don't wish bad things on Microsoft. In fact, I'd like to see them succeed in the long run. Not in the predatory and monopolistic way that they have “succeeded” in the past, but in a fair and balanced marketplace. There could be room for everyone. Can the company deal with not being the towering #1 in ever market they're in? Can they stand to not crush every competitor by predatory and quite frankly illegal means? That remains to be seen and the companies recent history makes it really hard to trust them on almost any level. Not impossible though and if they play nice they should eventually be welcomed back into the party.
–jeremy
Microsoft
Ulrich has some problems with the LSB standard. He makes some outstanding points and is clearly an extremely smart guy. The problem as I see it is that the current LSB is broken and badly broken at that. When the answer to a bug report is “use a slow uni-processor machine, it is known to work there”, someone should be fired. A certification with a date of 15-Sep-2005 should not be done on a 300MHz Pentium as it's not indicative of what people are running. Is all lost though? Should the LSB just be completely dropped? Maybe this particular group/spec should be, since they are clearly not doing a good job, but it should be clear on why companies like Oracle want to ship a single binary that works everywhere. If we're serious about mainstream Linux adoption, this is something that I think has to happen. Requiring companies to build for each distro is dumb. It means multiple build environments, additional testing, additional resources. In the end, it means that either the company won't ship on Linux or the company will only support a specific distribution or two. That's bad for everyone. I don't have a solid answer (and from the looks of it, no one does) but this is a problem that needs to be solved.
–jeremy
LSB, Linux
“Dell releases its first Linux consumer product with Mandriva”… or at least that's what the press release says. As I've mentioned on this blog many times in the past, a real OEM deal is critical to the success of Linux on the mainstream desktop. While this press release is a start, I don't think the title is 100% accurate. Look at the page for the 110L on the Dell site. It's not in the Home section, but the Business & Education section. A closer look at the press release seems to confirm this: Mandriva worked with Dell to certify this first consumer laptop, which is now being sold direct to students by Dell. Notice also that the Dell page does not list Linux as an option (even worse is the huge “Dell recommends Microsoft Windows XP Professional.” on every page). So, if this deal is only available to students, and a normal “consumer” can't just go to the Dell site and order Linux what makes it a consumer product? I'm not sure. In the end, while a deal like this is a great start and kudos should go to Mandriva for attempting to break ground on this, the press release title seems a little optimistic and more needs to be done. I'm still looking forward to the day where someone can go to a major PC manufactures website and simply see Linux as an option on any arbitrary model. I may be waiting a while…
–jeremy
Dell, Mandriva, Linux
While on the topic of Microsoft, I'm not sure how I've never run across this blog before, but it seems I am not the only one to think that Ballmer may be holding Microsoft back. At any rate, Mini-Microsoft is a very interesting read that is written by an anonymous Microsoftie who, despite being disgruntled, clearly still cares about the company. I already regularly read Scoble and will be adding this blog to my list.
In other Microsoft news, CNET recently interviewed Bill Gates. One funny quote: So that would be the philosophical difference between Microsoft and what Google is up to at this point?
Gates: Well, we don't know everything they are up to, but we do know their slogan and we disagree with that.
This comes off as meaning something like “We disagree with not being evil”. While he surely meant something like “Google says they are not evil, but we disagree with that”, it still made me chuckle the first time I read it
–jeremy
Microsoft
It was great to see that Microsoft actually publicly admitted that it learned something from an Open Source app. From the article: “We've learned from Apache,” acknowledged Bill Staples, product unit manager for IIS. Version 7.0 takes the IIS feature set and breaks it down into individual components, or modules, that can be loaded on an as-needed basis. The result is a Web server with much less overhead.
IIS will also gain .htaccess-like functionality. It has always amazed me some of the things that you just can't do in IIS. That being said, I hope Apache isn't resting on it's laurels, since it could learn a couple things too. The management interface is almost non-existent and a nice API to enable easier scripting of certain tasks (such as adding and deleting vhosts) would be a welcome addition. To me the story here is not what will or will not be in IIS7 though. It's in the fact the Microsoft has reached a point where they will openly admit in a public forum that Open Source produced software that they'd like to learn from. That's a big step and to me speaks volumes This absolutely would not have happened even a year ago.
–jeremy
Open Source, Apache, Microsoft, IIS
Scott Berkun, one of the UI guys for IE 1-5, has switched to Firefox for 100% of his browsing. I think it's significant, given his ties to IE. What's even more significant is what he has to say about the two apps. Things like “IE is a ghetto” and “Firefox has quality & polish”. He gives a pretty candid look into just how much IE has stagnated. He also posts some of his gripes with Firefox. I have to completely disagree with one of his points (I absolutely hate the fact the new IE windows open with content in them), but he brings up some very valid points. Luckily Asa and crew are listening. As he says, quality feedback is imperative to an apps success.
–jeremy
Firefox, Mozilla, IE
Just in case you haven't seen the new Sun ad campaign, here are the ones that got rejected (there's a tab on that page to see the ones that will actually get run). This comes shortly after they flew a banner over the Dell HQ. This isn't the first time Sun did something like this. You may remember that they tried to hire a fleet of exterminators to attend the Windows 2000 launch to remind people how many bugs it had (the plan was canceled by the owner, who feared that Bill Gates would buy the company just to close it…which should give you an idea how the average person viewed Microsoft at the time). Now, marketing 101 says that if you are a market leader you never mention a competitor, and if you are not a market leader you mention them, so that people put you in the same category. That's clearly what Sun is doing here. I'm not sure I'd want to be in the same category as Dell on this one though. They make cheap servers that are known for being just that – cheap. Sun has traditionally been an innovator, which is something Dell does little of in the server market. I guess times have changed though and you can see why Sun would want to try and change their focus. At any rate, they are getting some major press out of the deal, so mission accomplished. IBM did a non-traditional marketing blitz when they started to support Linux, and look how well it worked for them. Sun is clearly in a different spot than IBM was, and the campaign has a much different slant…but generating that buzz was the same end goal.
–jeremy
Sun, Dell, IBM, Marketing
Google just took the wraps off yet another BETA service. They have been on fire lately. This time, it's a Blog Search which most people had to see coming. With all the recent complaints I've seen about Technorati, this may be a opportune time for Google to jump into this market. Hopefully they can alleviate some of the splog problems that most engines have been having. While it probably won't happen, I'd like to see a concerted collaborative effort on this (ie. get Google, Yahoo!, Technorati, IceRocket and whoever else is interested to get together and pool efforts to reduce duplication of effort). I'll have to start comparing the major engines at this point and decide which one I'm going to use long term. I was surprised (but happily surprised) to see that a search for jeremy as of right now returns me as #1! Nice job Google
–jeremy
Google, Technorati, splog, IceRocket, Yahoo, Blog
Subscribe