Comments on: Throwing stones at people in glass houses http://www.robweir.com/blog/2006/07/throwing-stones-at-people-in-glass-houses.html Thinking the unthinkable, pondering the imponderable, effing the ineffable and scruting the inscrutable Tue, 16 Mar 2010 03:07:49 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: davidacoder http://www.robweir.com/blog/2006/07/throwing-stones-at-people-in-glass-houses.html#comment-182 davidacoder Tue, 21 Nov 2006 23:10:00 +0000 http://www.robweir.com/blog/2006/07/throwing-stones-at-people-in-glass-houses.html#comment-182 Rob, I just realised that this was an old post long before the RTM release. It just showed up in my RSS reader as written today?!? Strange. Please ignore my previous comment about the RTM, it was obviously based on my confusion about the publication date of your original article!!! Sorry :) Rob, I just realised that this was an old post long before the RTM release. It just showed up in my RSS reader as written today?!? Strange. Please ignore my previous comment about the RTM, it was obviously based on my confusion about the publication date of your original article!!! Sorry :)

]]> By: Rob http://www.robweir.com/blog/2006/07/throwing-stones-at-people-in-glass-houses.html#comment-27 Rob Fri, 11 Aug 2006 14:30:00 +0000 http://www.robweir.com/blog/2006/07/throwing-stones-at-people-in-glass-houses.html#comment-27 I've never seen a file format spec for MS Works. That's the first hurdle. Perhaps the <a HREF="http://jakarta.apache.org/poi/POI" REL="nofollow" rel="nofollow">POI</a> guys could give you a lead? I’ve never seen a file format spec for MS Works. That’s the first hurdle. Perhaps the POI guys could give you a lead?

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.robweir.com/blog/2006/07/throwing-stones-at-people-in-glass-houses.html#comment-26 Anonymous Fri, 11 Aug 2006 12:48:00 +0000 http://www.robweir.com/blog/2006/07/throwing-stones-at-people-in-glass-houses.html#comment-26 FWLIW, I've decided that, since I've been the one making the stink about the OO.org support for MS Works file formats, I may as well roll up my sleeves and get down to work on it.<br/><br/>Any hints, suggestions, brickbats, bouquets?<br/><br/>Wesley Parish FWLIW, I’ve decided that, since I’ve been the one making the stink about the OO.org support for MS Works file formats, I may as well roll up my sleeves and get down to work on it.

Any hints, suggestions, brickbats, bouquets?

Wesley Parish

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.robweir.com/blog/2006/07/throwing-stones-at-people-in-glass-houses.html#comment-21 Anonymous Thu, 03 Aug 2006 08:09:00 +0000 http://www.robweir.com/blog/2006/07/throwing-stones-at-people-in-glass-houses.html#comment-21 Wesley,<br/><br/>Works is an interresting aspect. Does anyone know whether there will be MSECMAXML support for Works?<br/><br/>I wonder whether an OpenDocument plug-in for Works is possible and has any value? Wesley,

Works is an interresting aspect. Does anyone know whether there will be MSECMAXML support for Works?

I wonder whether an OpenDocument plug-in for Works is possible and has any value?

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.robweir.com/blog/2006/07/throwing-stones-at-people-in-glass-houses.html#comment-20 Anonymous Wed, 02 Aug 2006 22:51:00 +0000 http://www.robweir.com/blog/2006/07/throwing-stones-at-people-in-glass-houses.html#comment-20 So, will the OpenDocument Foundation release the plugin they were beta testing for Mass. last May or will it get buried and Microsoft gets the opportunity to trumpet itself as the industry leader for ODF plugins (whether or not that is really true)? So, will the OpenDocument Foundation release the plugin they were beta testing for Mass. last May or will it get buried and Microsoft gets the opportunity to trumpet itself as the industry leader for ODF plugins (whether or not that is really true)?

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.robweir.com/blog/2006/07/throwing-stones-at-people-in-glass-houses.html#comment-18 Anonymous Wed, 02 Aug 2006 12:03:00 +0000 http://www.robweir.com/blog/2006/07/throwing-stones-at-people-in-glass-houses.html#comment-18 Well, FWLIW, AFA Office Suite Standards go, I would wonder if Microsoft is going to bring in the Microsoft Works users from the cold. I've encountered the frustration of trying to open a MS Works Word document in MS Office Word 2000, and it's not pretty. That's one office suite file format that exists in sufficient numbers to make a serious dent in any foolish claim that Microsoft's Open XML file format is going to automatically cover every previous MS office productivity file format.<br/><br/>Microsoft used MS Works as a cut-down low-octane productivity suite for sweetening the deal for low-cost PCs in the late nineties; you'll find those self-same PC vendors selling their PCs with OpenOffice.org nowadays.<br/><br/>Has anyone seriously tried writing an MS Works file format filter for OpenOffice.org? There must be thousands of PCs around in the Small Office/Home Office sector that may need some help in the not-too-distant future.<br/><br/>Wesley Parish Well, FWLIW, AFA Office Suite Standards go, I would wonder if Microsoft is going to bring in the Microsoft Works users from the cold. I’ve encountered the frustration of trying to open a MS Works Word document in MS Office Word 2000, and it’s not pretty. That’s one office suite file format that exists in sufficient numbers to make a serious dent in any foolish claim that Microsoft’s Open XML file format is going to automatically cover every previous MS office productivity file format.

Microsoft used MS Works as a cut-down low-octane productivity suite for sweetening the deal for low-cost PCs in the late nineties; you’ll find those self-same PC vendors selling their PCs with OpenOffice.org nowadays.

Has anyone seriously tried writing an MS Works file format filter for OpenOffice.org? There must be thousands of PCs around in the Small Office/Home Office sector that may need some help in the not-too-distant future.

Wesley Parish

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.robweir.com/blog/2006/07/throwing-stones-at-people-in-glass-houses.html#comment-17 Anonymous Mon, 31 Jul 2006 04:51:00 +0000 http://www.robweir.com/blog/2006/07/throwing-stones-at-people-in-glass-houses.html#comment-17 [7. SCOPE OF LICENSE. ...You may not disclose the results of any benchmark tests of the software to any third party without Microsoft’s prior written approval]<br/><br/>That also mean that you are free to post test-case for anyone to try.<br/>Heck, this doesn't even prevent you from publishing a script that actually automate the run of the benchmark, so long as you don't spoil the suspence by publishing the result :-) [7. SCOPE OF LICENSE. ...You may not disclose the results of any benchmark tests of the software to any third party without Microsoft’s prior written approval]

That also mean that you are free to post test-case for anyone to try.
Heck, this doesn’t even prevent you from publishing a script that actually automate the run of the benchmark, so long as you don’t spoil the suspence by publishing the result :-)

]]> By: Martin http://www.robweir.com/blog/2006/07/throwing-stones-at-people-in-glass-houses.html#comment-14 Martin Fri, 28 Jul 2006 22:53:00 +0000 http://www.robweir.com/blog/2006/07/throwing-stones-at-people-in-glass-houses.html#comment-14 This is precisely why I value OpenDocument more than MS/ECMAOOXML. If someone needs the format updated or re-examined, it's very easy to do so. Furthermore, one can use the format in any way they choose without worrying about being sued. This is precisely why I value OpenDocument more than MS/ECMAOOXML. If someone needs the format updated or re-examined, it’s very easy to do so. Furthermore, one can use the format in any way they choose without worrying about being sued.

]]> By: Ben Langhinrichs http://www.robweir.com/blog/2006/07/throwing-stones-at-people-in-glass-houses.html#comment-13 Ben Langhinrichs Fri, 28 Jul 2006 14:04:00 +0000 http://www.robweir.com/blog/2006/07/throwing-stones-at-people-in-glass-houses.html#comment-13 Microsoft is falling into the classic trap of believing its own hype. If you can convince the rest of the world that your approach is better while frantically fixing the things that are wrong your approach, you can sometimes hit that sweet spot where your marketing and your vision and your reality are all in the same place at the same time. At least, that is what software development companies often tell themselves. What really happens is quite different.<br/><br/>Usually in any project, there is a tendency for the customer's expectations to get higher and higher and the developer's expectations to get lower and lower. When the project is released to the customer, there is a huge divergence and lots of screaming. That is because there was inadequate communication and openness. If you have a well run company, they will avoid this issue by keeping everything as open as possible between the customer and developers, and setting expectations constantly to make sure that everybody is close together.<br/><br/>So, Microsoft, which should know better, is treating this standards project the first way. They are pumping up the customer (the general public, companies and governments) expectations, while one can only guess that the development team is discovering all the nasty realities, such as the difficulty of writing an XML based almost directly on your binary implementation and then remembering it has to handle all the previous binary implementations. It may be that Open XML renders Office 2007 documents perfectly, because it is just the binary code exposed as XML, but will it handle .doc documents from Office 98. or will it turn out that it is easier to go to a well thought out general purpose XML standard (e.g., ODF) than to go to an XML standard that was designed explicitly for one binary implementation.<br/><br/>In any case, those two visions are diverging, just as the Vista project expectations are diverging. Microsoft as a whole mostly hears the external marketing vision, and may itself be largely unaware of how divergent the visions have become, but they will learn.<br/><br/>Meanwhile, ODF may be brusied and beaten up a bit, but every step happens publicly, so the expectations are on course. Of course, there are still a few ODF advocates who go around making stupid and outrageous claims about 100% fidelity will all older Office documents, which is silly. Let the reality speak for itself, and Microsoft will have to let its reality speak as well. Then we shall see. Microsoft is falling into the classic trap of believing its own hype. If you can convince the rest of the world that your approach is better while frantically fixing the things that are wrong your approach, you can sometimes hit that sweet spot where your marketing and your vision and your reality are all in the same place at the same time. At least, that is what software development companies often tell themselves. What really happens is quite different.

Usually in any project, there is a tendency for the customer’s expectations to get higher and higher and the developer’s expectations to get lower and lower. When the project is released to the customer, there is a huge divergence and lots of screaming. That is because there was inadequate communication and openness. If you have a well run company, they will avoid this issue by keeping everything as open as possible between the customer and developers, and setting expectations constantly to make sure that everybody is close together.

So, Microsoft, which should know better, is treating this standards project the first way. They are pumping up the customer (the general public, companies and governments) expectations, while one can only guess that the development team is discovering all the nasty realities, such as the difficulty of writing an XML based almost directly on your binary implementation and then remembering it has to handle all the previous binary implementations. It may be that Open XML renders Office 2007 documents perfectly, because it is just the binary code exposed as XML, but will it handle .doc documents from Office 98. or will it turn out that it is easier to go to a well thought out general purpose XML standard (e.g., ODF) than to go to an XML standard that was designed explicitly for one binary implementation.

In any case, those two visions are diverging, just as the Vista project expectations are diverging. Microsoft as a whole mostly hears the external marketing vision, and may itself be largely unaware of how divergent the visions have become, but they will learn.

Meanwhile, ODF may be brusied and beaten up a bit, but every step happens publicly, so the expectations are on course. Of course, there are still a few ODF advocates who go around making stupid and outrageous claims about 100% fidelity will all older Office documents, which is silly. Let the reality speak for itself, and Microsoft will have to let its reality speak as well. Then we shall see.

]]>