BillG sings blues over open standards, becoming obsolete, Winblad says
,----[ Quote ]
| Winblad carefully avoided commenting on BillG’s reluctance to embrace open
| standards but hinted that the company’s position will likely not change for
| some time to come.
|
| [...]
|
| “20 years ago I asked Bill what is the thing he feared most,” Winblad
| recalled, “and he said it was that ‘We’d live to be 100 and we’ll be
| carbon-based pets” of machines with artificial intelligence.
|
| “There will be no need for us,” she recalled Gates saying.
`----
http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=1479
B0rg.
Related:
,----[ Quote ]
| [Microsoft:] ...we should take the lead in establishing a common
| approach to UI and to interoperability (of which OLE is only a part). Our
| efforts to date are focussed too much on our own apps, and only incidentally
| on the rest of the industry. We want to own these standards, so we should
| not participate in standards groups. Rather, we should call 'to me' to the
| industry and set a standard that works now and is for everyone's
| benefit. We are large enough that this can work.
`----
http://www.os2site.com/sw/info/comes/px09509.zip
Halloween Memo I Confirmed and Microsoft's History on Standards
,----[ Quote ]
| By the way, if you are by any chance trying to figure out Microsoft's policy
| toward standards, particularly in the context of ODF-EOXML, that same
| Microsoft page is revelatory, Microsoft's answer to what the memo meant when
| it said that Microsoft could extend standard protocols so as to deny
| Linux "entry into the market":
|
| Q: The first document talked about extending standard protocols as a way
| to "deny OSS projects entry into the market." What does this mean?
|
| A: To better serve customers, Microsoft needs to innovate above standard
| protocols. By innovating above the base protocol, we are able to deliver
| advanced functionality to users. An example of this is adding
| transactional support for DTC over HTTP. This would be a value-add and
| would in no way break the standard or undermine the concept of standards,
| of which Microsoft is a significant supporter. Yet it would allow us to
| solve a class of problems in value chain integration for our Web-based
| customers that are not solved by any public standard today. Microsoft
| recognizes that customers are not served by implementations that are
| different without adding value; we therefore support standards as the
| foundation on which further innovation can be based.
`----
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070127202224445
Microsoft Looks for the Big Guns in OOXML In-Fighting
,----[ Quote ]
| Bill Gates has reportedly been making phone calls to the Secretary of Defense
| and the Secretary of Commerce to push the American National Standards
| Institute to ignore the votes of its advisory committees and vote "yes" on
| ISO standardizing Microsoft's Open Office XML (OOXML) format, the one in
| competition with the OpenDocument Format (ODF) pushed by IBM and Sun.
|
| Gates reportedly picked up the phone when the last INCITS ballot failed by
| one vote to support Microsoft.
`----
http://xml.sys-con.com/read/419573_p.htm
Swiss Cheese [for OOXML]
,----[ Quote ]
| The present spin doctors of Microsoft and ECMA managed to convince Mr.
| Thomann to reject every serious technical and general concern we had
| regarding OOMXL by pointing to compatibility reasons. At the end we had a
| majority against Microsoft but which (giving the unfair rules) results in a
| Swiss vote for Microsoft. Mr. Thomann was fretting and fuming at the end of
| the meeting how it can be that successful international companies (we had
| representatives from IBM, Google, ...) vote against the best interest of
| their customers and theirself!
|
| Yes, this is how the democratic system at SNV / ISO works. After the meeting
| I could not eat as much as I wanted to puke...
`----
http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-15521/swiss-cheese
http://antitrust.slated.org/www.iowaconsumercase.org/011607/3000/PX03020.pdf
No is no, to OOXML
,----[ Quote ]
| I’ve heard several reports of supporters of OOXML trying to get national
| standards bodies to change their votes from “NO with comments” to “YES with
| comments” because “it’s the same thing.” The logic, which I’ll explain in a
| later post, is that any comments will trigger a ballot resolution meeting, so
| there is no need to be so negative and vote NO.
`----
http://www.sutor.com/newsite/blog-open/?p=1762
IBM is still locked out of the Portuguese OOXML meeting
,----[ Quote ]
| In spite of various communications, we [IBM] are still locked out and will
| not be allowed to participate. Microsoft will be there, as well as a special
| Microsoft guest, as will various Microsoft business partners, and others.
`----
http://www.sutor.com/newsite/blog-open/?p=1755
Microsoft criticized for Open XML petition
,----[ Quote ]
| The petition is an attempt to make it appear that Open XML
| has "pseudo-grassroots" support, argues Mark Taylor, the
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
| founder of the Open Source Consortium.
`----
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-6173625.html
W3C sets standards for SOA and Web 2.0
,----[ Quote ]
| In early September W3C introduced Web Services Policy 1.5, giving developers
| a way to connect web services standards such as SOAP 1.2, WSDL 2.0, and XML
| Schema to new Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) based applications.
`----
http://www.regdeveloper.co.uk/2007/09/17/grddl_web_services_policy/
Fast WLAN - will the standard fail?
,----[ Quote ]
| The Australian research institution CSIRO holds a US patent covering the use
| of certain WLAN technologies, such as multi carrier technology OFDM and
| forward error correction (FEC). In 2005 they applied to the courts regarding
| claims for licensing fees arising from the patent, which inspired a number of
| WLAN businesses to launch a counter-suit. The following year, a court fund in
| CSIRO's favour, the judge deciding that the patent was valid.
`----
http://www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/96063/from/rss09
More obvious misgivings about Microsoft and SOA
,----[ Quote ]
| My take is that inside of Microsoft its aggressor A-types are all about
| dissing SOA and promoting .NET ad nauseam. At the same time the Microserfs
| and developers must understand the inevitability of SOA for at last a portion
| of the most advanced and innovative enterprises’ and service providers’
| architectures.
|
| And so, as the world turns toward SOA, Microsoft will fight quietly inside of
| itself about what it really is as a company — a partner to its customers, or
| a parasite on the hide of productivity.
`----
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Gardner/?p=2538
Microsoft: My way or the highway with SOA?
,----[ Quote ]
| Microsoft isn’t changing its tune with SOA, the authors say, noting
| that “Microsoft again appears to be crafting its own rules and vision. The
| company has so far declined to participate in certain key emerging industry
| standards relevant to SOA. It has a different perspective on what SOA is and
| a different approach for crystallizing its vision.“
`----
http://blogs.zdnet.com/service-oriented/?p=931
Microsoft absent from open standards movement around SOA
,----[ Quote ]
| Now, a new series of SOA standards is headed to OASIS, ones that could
| create a whole market segment around SOA common programmatic principles,
| but Microsoft is nowhere in sight. The absence of Microsoft from the
| Service Component Architecture (SCA), and its sibling Service Data
| Objects (SDO), definitions process can mean one thing: Microsoft will
| pursue its proprietary approach of baking pseudo-SOA into its
| operating system stack as long as it can.
`----
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Gardner/?p=2483
Microsoft needs REST
,----[ Quote ]
| Yaron Goland defended his Microsoft colleague, Dare Objasanjo, as a poor
| sitting duck. He justifies the decision to scrap APP as tactical and not
| strategic. He states: “We considered this option but the changes needed to
| make APP work for our scenarios were so fundamental that it wasn’t clear if
| the resulting protocol would still be APP… I also have to admit that I was
| deathly afraid of the political implications of Microsoft messing around with
| APP.” According to Goland, “we couldn’t figure out how to use APP without
| putting an unacceptable implementation and performance burden on both our
| customers and ourselves.”
|
| The implications for this APP vs. Web3S debate can potentially be enormous.
| Just as we are on the brink of creating simple architectures that are
| interoperable using simple standards, the industry risks splitting into
| separate, incompatible camps again. It is probably no coincidence that we
| have Microsoft on one side and Google, IBM and Sun on the other. This will be
| a fundamental problem for enterprise customers if Microsoft extends this
| strategy into any REST architectures that it introduces into the enterprise.
| Any enterprise systems that expose their data using APP, which is likely in
| the near future, will be incompatible with any Microsoft system that expose
| their data with Web3S.
`----
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Newton/?p=14
|
|
