On 2008-03-21, chrisv <chrisv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
>>Ahh.. gotta love the IBM employees masquerading as independant entities.
>
> Ahh.. Gotta love Microshaft Fudsters misinterpreting everything they
> read.
>
>>I like this comment:
>>
>>"Oliver Bell pointed out that ODF was passed without as intense a scrutiny
>>as OOXML and that ODF has flaws too. I pointed out that ODF is not quite
>>why the meeting was being held that night, and as far as I'm concerned,
>>that's no longer relevant."
>>
>>In other words, "Yeah, you're completely right, and we're all hypocrites,
>>but because of my financial bias as an IBM employee, i'm going to ignore
>>this and deflect it."
>
> Idiot. There is nothing hypocritical in giving extra scrutiny to any
> "standard" proposed by the monopolizers from Redmond.
>
IMHO, yes there is. I think that all international standards should be
treated equally.
>>"He then pointed out that it would not be fair for us to have a lower bar
>>for ODF and a higher bar for OOXML. I wish I had the erudition that night
>>to point out that if the bar was lowered for OOXML, then ... well, two
>>wrongs don't make a right. "
>>
>>Wow, so he's admitting ODF is a piece of crap.
>
> Dumbshit. He admitted no such thing.
>
>>So there goes the defense
>>of "But we already have a perfectly good standard".
>
> Stupid twit. A standard need not be "perfect" to be "good".
>
I've pretty much stayed out of these arguments, because
I haven't really researched all of the issues - but, from the little I
have done, it seems that many of the claims against OOXML also apply to
ODF. It is pretty hypoctritical to people with vested interest in the
outcomes, to hide that fact and then point out flaws that exist in their
own horse. A biblical verse about motes in eyes comes to mind...
And by the way, I have done some work with WordprocessingML (office
2003, but these are the formats that OOXML are based on) - and it is
not nearly as bad as some of these people would have you believe. This
is about money. Money for Sun and IBM - it's plain and simple.
--
Tom Shelton
|
|
