Have you guys seen this? http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/10/30/2113200
On Oct 30, 2007 6:39 PM, Arthur Pemberton [email protected] wrote:
Have you guys seen this? http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/10/30/2113200
After digging into the thread far enough to grasp some coherent feel it only seems worse.
It's as if someone were proposing that the arabic numeral set and Add/Subtract/Multiply/Divide calculators made possible by it - are inferior to their sincere insistent proclamation that unicode cuneriform on clay tablets was inherently superior. and then went forth shilling THAT.
Oren Beck
"Say something enough times and the biggest lies become self convincing truths"
On 10/30/07, Oren Beck [email protected] wrote:
After digging into the thread far enough to grasp some coherent feel it only seems worse.
It's as if someone were proposing that the arabic numeral set and Add/Subtract/Multiply/Divide calculators made possible by it - are inferior to their sincere insistent proclamation that unicode cuneriform on clay tablets was inherently superior. and then went forth shilling THAT.
Oren Beck
"Say something enough times and the biggest lies become self convincing truths"
From the reading I did in the comments it's just a couple guys who
started with an important sounding name, who actually have no influence or authority. I think I'll start a group called the "Center for Americans for Disclosure in Programming" and start shilling for Open Source. That might be official sounding enough to get some attention, like these chumps. ;)
Jon.
On Oct 30, 2007 7:48 PM, Jon Pruente [email protected] wrote:
From the reading I did in the comments it's just a couple guys who started with an important sounding name, who actually have no influence or authority. I think I'll start a group called the "Center for Americans for Disclosure in Programming" and start shilling for Open Source. That might be official sounding enough to get some attention, like these chumps. ;)
Jon. _______________________________________________ Kclug mailing list [email protected] http://kclug.org/mailman/listinfo/kclug
Perhaps it could become self credential issuing as a certain group in Modesto does -credentials issued electronically to all sincere comers. Thus in a short time especailly if your server can survive the /. impact you could proclaim umpteen thousand members right away and prove it too.
Oren Beck
"Religion is deficient in worshipful slavery to dogma when compared to software zealots"
On 10/30/07, Jon Pruente [email protected] wrote:
On 10/30/07, Oren Beck [email protected] wrote:
After digging into the thread far enough to grasp some coherent feel it only seems worse.
It's as if someone were proposing that the arabic numeral set and Add/Subtract/Multiply/Divide calculators made possible by it - are inferior to their sincere insistent proclamation that unicode cuneriform on clay tablets was inherently superior. and then went forth shilling THAT.
Oren Beck
"Say something enough times and the biggest lies become self convincing truths"
From the reading I did in the comments it's just a couple guys who started with an important sounding name, who actually have no influence or authority. I think I'll start a group called the "Center for Americans for Disclosure in Programming" and start shilling for Open Source. That might be official sounding enough to get some attention, like these chumps. ;)
The problem is, that this is going to be some very effective FUD.
On 10/30/07, Arthur Pemberton [email protected] wrote:
On 10/30/07, Jon Pruente [email protected] wrote:
From the reading I did in the comments it's just a couple guys who started with an important sounding name, who actually have no influence or authority. I think I'll start a group called the "Center for Americans for Disclosure in Programming" and start shilling for Open Source. That might be official sounding enough to get some attention, like these chumps. ;)
The problem is, that this is going to be some very effective FUD.
the _real_ ODF promoting non-profit organization needs to sue them immediately if the statements on the /. page are true.
On 10/30/07, David Nicol [email protected] wrote:
On 10/30/07, Arthur Pemberton [email protected] wrote:
On 10/30/07, Jon Pruente [email protected] wrote:
From the reading I did in the comments it's just a couple guys who started with an important sounding name, who actually have no influence or authority. I think I'll start a group called the "Center for Americans for Disclosure in Programming" and start shilling for Open Source. That might be official sounding enough to get some attention, like these chumps. ;)
The problem is, that this is going to be some very effective FUD.
the _real_ ODF promoting non-profit organization needs to sue them immediately if the statements on the /. page are true.
Exactly what I thought. But I'm not sure how they would accomplish this.
--- Arthur Pemberton [email protected] wrote:
Have you guys seen this? http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/10/30/2113200
As a couple of Slashdot responders correctly point out, the "OpenDocument Foundation" is one tiny organization with a name that is way too big for its britches, and hardly any bite with its bark.
===================================== One responder states: =====================================
""The OpenDocument Foundation", in spite of its name, is nothing. They are not the "official" foundation backing ODF. They are just two guys, with a good name and without a garage, which used to develop a OOXML ODF converter. Read this for more information: Cracks in the Foundation [robweir.com]."
http://www.robweir.com/blog/2007/10/cracks-in-foundation.html (http://tinyurl.com/35qge9)
===================================== And another responder clarifies it even more: =====================================
Actually, it's just three guys: http://opendocumentfoundation.us/we.htm
Not much of a foundation.
The *real* ODF group is: http://www.odfalliance.org/memberlist.php [odfalliance.org]
I think that the only honest thing the "The OpenDocument Foundation" can do is rename itself "The Compound Documents Format Foundation", since to do otherwise would be as deceitful as Microsoft choosing to name OOXML "Office Open XML". But honestly, I doubt they will. Their comparison chart between CDF and ODF betrays a few lies:
http://opendocument.foundation.googlepages.com/GOSCON_Chart.pdf [googlepages.com] (http://tinyurl.com/2kxf7t)
In particular:
* CDF is not OOXML compatible, nor has any implementation shown this to be possible. ODF at least has a not-100% compatible conversion. * ODF has a lot more big vendor support than CDF * Neither are universal formats, but ODF is supported by more vendors and software projects at the moment.
Personally, I think that the reasons for "The OpenDocument Foundation" changing it's support from ODF to CDF is self-interest. When ODF was first introduced, there was money to be made for a small company to write MS Office/Corel Office/Mac Office plugins and other conversion services. But then Sun and others started offering free converters and conversion services. There's just too much competition too quickly
CDF, OTOH is not as well supported universally, so there's a lot more room for a small company. And if the CDF growth rate is slow, the "The OpenDocument Foundation" has the chance to become *the CDF conversion experts* and make a lot of money. Also, since CDF (if you believe their claims) is more web oriented, it would be good for transactional converters of many types that need to be used for each message. With ODF, you convert your document once and don't have to worry about going back (by purpose....ODF is best for documents that have to be read, as is 100 years from now). The difference in profit between one-time business and licensed per transaction business could huge, even if CDF has a smaller market.
=====================================
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
On 10/31/07, Leo Mauler [email protected] wrote:
--- Arthur Pemberton [email protected] wrote:
Have you guys seen this? http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/10/30/2113200
As a couple of Slashdot responders correctly point out, the "OpenDocument Foundation" is one tiny organization with a name that is way too big for its britches, and hardly any bite with its barkz-
Sure, but will Manager X know this? Will business magazine writer Y take heed of this?
- Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine ( www.pembo13.com )
If a bunch of us were to create a "Window Computing Foundation", then say that we decided that MS Windows is inferior to X running on *nix, wouldn't MS sue the crap out of us under the theory that it's trademark infringment (despite the fact that X Window System was created before MS Windows 1.0)?
If a bunch of us did anything and then said something, there's already a good chance of Microsoft suing us just for the hell of it.
On 10/31/07, Monty J. Harder [email protected] wrote:
If a bunch of us were to create a "Window Computing Foundation", then say that we decided that MS Windows is inferior to X running on *nix, wouldn't MS sue the crap out of us under the theory that it's trademark infringment (despite the fact that X Window System was created before MS Windows 1.0)?
Kclug mailing list [email protected] http://kclug.org/mailman/listinfo/kclug
-
Arthur Pemberton -
David Nicol -
feba thatl -
Jon Pruente -
Leo Mauler -
Monty J. Harder -
Oren Beck