« Big EU Fines Against Microsoft Have an OSS Subtext | Main | How the IT Big 12 Uses Open Source Software »

A back to the future feeling (‘deja vu all over again’ if you are a NY Yankees’ fan) begins at the start of every ODF vs. OpenXML article or email exchange. There is a good thesis/commentary series in progress right now at freesoftwaremagazine.com (by Ed Macnaghten) if you can work your way through the Microhate (from commenters, not the initial author).

Right away, the premise that ODF came down from Sinai is introduced (insert your own favorite direct-divinty-involvement religious analogy; I don’t mean to be insensitive to others but Moses’ story just happens to be the one with which I am familiar). There is no mention of ODF’s source, Sun Microsystems. OpenXML, on the other hand, came from those fallen archangels in Redmond (typically called “morons,” “shills,” “scumbags,” and worse in the FSF world and throughout the otherwise good article and email exchange to which I am referring you). In reality of course, ODF came from Sun by way of a German company it acquired in 2000. No stone tablets. A committee of IBM, Novell, Adobe and other Microsoft competitors worked with Sun so that you don’t have to call it a Sun standard. But get real. Why should Sun contributions to the standards movement be more standard than Microsoft’s contribution?

Each article has an obligatory genuflection to the State of Massachusetts IT Department for fighting the good fight in the Moses vs. Fallen Archangel's battle. Unless you are from Massachusetts (I am), you probably do not know that we are not only the home of the Perfect Storm as in the movie about deadly tuna fishing but also as in the Perfect Storm where political intrigue and well-greased political palms come together with corporate lobbying in a way that would make Machiavelli blush. Consider:
-- The whole open source controversy in Massachusetts (predating but related to the ODF decision referenced in freesoftwaremagazine) was orchestrated by IBM Global Services (IGS) presenting to a committee made up of, among others, Sun personnel.
-- IGS ran a review of the state’s IT practices and needs in late 2002 into early 2003. Why IBM might be the subject of another post.
-- Among the February 2003 IBM report's over 50 recommendations for future State of Massachusetts IT procurement and usage, the IBM-led, Sun-involved commission approved, without debate or public comment, the following: "Leverage existing application assets by establishing an “open source” program within the Commonwealth."
-- Ironically, given the subsequent controversy, having made this recommendation, the state commission found an “open source” program to be of low feasibility.
-- The CIO politician in charge of hiring IBM and seeding the OSS movement has moved on to work in the “dreaded private sector” (an inside Massachusetts politico joke line) and also has hit the speaking circuit (I have no problem with him doing this but doing it during 2005 while on the state payroll and while getting comped and expensed by the usual array of unbiased ODF vendors--not Microsoft of course--is what cost him his job) .
-- The state legislature failed to fund the much ballyhooed ODL conversion in 2006 and a second CIO resigned.

Everybody in the FSF community keeps pointing to Massachusetts as an OSS "success." But it didn't happen and it was all orchestrated not by high-minded volunteers for the cause like those at freesoftwaremagazine.com but by IBM in the first place. It is possible that saner unbiased IT staff in Massachusetts (termed “Microsoft bigots” by the local OSS crowd) said not being able to use Word and purchase technology from Microsoft would just plain be crazy. But given what I said about the state’s political process above, it is also likely that Microsoft finally figured out how the game is played here. The Microhaters here have even tied Redmond to the highly publicized Abramoff political consulting scandal. But to be fair, the first ex CIO himself says it’s because Microsoft programmers are better dressed (perhaps that is why he hired IBM to study his department and come up with some unbiased views).

Having apparently learned how to manipulate the Massachusetts political world, manipulation any where else in the universe is a piece of cake. Deftly Microsoft is moving OpenXML along to ISO approval by first getting it approved by the former European Computer Manufacturers' Association, now called ECMA International (apparently because there are very few European computer manufacturers left). ODF already received ISO approval and—I am guessing here—ISO approval is pretty much required to do business with EU governments.

Of course, all this begs the questions, “Why do we need standards anyways?” and “Why do we need a standard office document format?” I will write about that in the future but if you have an opinion to share, let me know through the comments box.

Posted by dennisb in OSS Culture |Digg This|Add to del.icio.us

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.ebizq.net/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1474