On CBS MoneyWatch: Best Stocks to Buy Now
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet

By Martin LaMonica
Posted on ZDNet News: Feb 14, 2007 4:45:00 PM

Microsoft is accusing rival IBM of orchestrating a campaign to block efforts to standardize Office document formats.

In an open letter released Wednesday, Microsoft executives contend that IBM is trying to influence the standards process to limit choice. It also said that IBM is encouraging governments to mandate a document format that IBM favors.

The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) is in the process of evaluating Microsoft's Office Open XML (OOXML)--the default document formats in Microsoft Office 2007--as a standard. Such a ratification would be significant, particularly to governments that favor ISO certification for digital documents.

IBM and other Microsoft competitors favor OpenDocument Format (ODF), a format that has been standardized at the ISO. Government customers, including Massachusetts and some European countries, back ODF.

Microsoft contends that IBM is trying "to force ODF on users through public procurement mandates," which would have a negative effect on customers and the marketplace.

The open letter is signed by Tom Robertson, Microsoft's general manager for interoperability and standards, and by Jean Paoli, the company's general manager of interoperability and XML architecture.

In an interview with CNET News.com, Robertson said that IBM is "orchestrating a broad-based campaign" to prevent the ISO from even considering OOXML for standardization.

"We see a level of hypocrisy in IBM's activities...They have long called on us to standardize formats, make the IP (intellectual property) freely available to the broader community, and we've done it. Now that that is done, they are putting a lot of resources to block standardization" of OOXML, Robertson said. "IBM is fundamentally on the wrong side of the industry."

Contacted on Tuesday, an IBM representative declined to comment via phone or e-mail.

In the past, IBM representatives--and other Microsoft foes--have called OOXML technically flawed and not fully "open" because it is controlled by Microsoft.

Robertson said that Microsoft chose to publish the letter to "shine a light" on IBM's activities. He noted that IBM was the only representative to vote against making OOXML a standard at Ecma International, another Europe-based standards body.

He declined to offer more details on IBM's activities because the ISO standardization process is closed.

"Part of (the open letter) is to highlight what IBM is doing and its fundamentally negative implications for customers and the industry as a whole," Robertson said.

Following standardization late last year at Ecma, Microsoft submitted Open XML to ISO through its "fast-track" process, which takes several months.

During an initial 30-day comment period, which ended earlier this month, there were 20 country representatives at ISO that made "contradictions," or comments, on the Open XML specification, according to people familiar with the proceedings. The comments, which could be minor, came from nearly one-third of the total 66 country representatives at the ISO, according to Andrew Updegrove, an attorney at Gesmer Updegrove and a standards expert.

Comments on the ISO submission are expected to be made public by the end of February.

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

  • Talkback
  • Most Recent of 134 Talkback(s)
Fast Tracking
FRom when I served on a standards committee the only documents that I remember being fast-tracked were thouse that had already been ratified by at least one other standards body, i.e. an ANSI, ECMA, I... (Read the rest)
Posted by: Unc Al Posted on: 02/19/07 You are currently: a Guest | | Terms of Use
Microsoft calls IBM hypocritical on document standards  Loverock Davidson | 02/14/07
Nice  nucrash | 02/14/07
I have no clue  Loverock Davidson | 02/14/07
From the article  nucrash | 02/14/07
And thats exactly why Microsoft has the open letter  Loverock Davidson | 02/14/07
You can fool most of the people most .......  martin23 | 02/14/07
Thanks for that.  xuniL_z | 02/14/07
illumination  martin23 | 02/15/07
Did you mean...  John L. Ries | 02/14/07
This has been debated at length for nearly 2 years  fmcgowan | 02/14/07
So it is Microsft v. 38 others (inclucing IBM)  B.O.F.H. | 02/14/07
Funnier and more outrageous than Mike Cox  ejhonda | 02/14/07
no way!  galileon | 02/14/07
I disagree  John L. Ries | 02/14/07
Two faces of the same coin  klumper | 02/14/07
Not even a clue!  linux for me | 02/14/07
This is just the fox complaining that we built a fence around the chicken  DonnieBoy | 02/14/07
Read the Objects - 1. MS Proposal contradicts the Gregorian Calendar!  BanjoPaterson | 02/15/07
FUD as usual  say_what | 02/14/07
So?  John Zern | 02/14/07
The company complaining currenty has a monopoly in Office Suites, and uses  DonnieBoy | 02/14/07
Exactly! Well said!  mwiley_z | 02/14/07
So you applaud restrictions on your choices?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 02/14/07
What free choice.  martin23 | 02/14/07
Did you ever consider  xuniL_z | 02/14/07
Microsoft think for us  martin23 | 02/15/07
The new MS "standard" has a lot les market share than ODF right now. Also,  DonnieBoy | 02/15/07
A Language Problem  stomfi@... | 02/14/07
Talk to the hand  Yagotta B. Kidding | 02/15/07
Yes, good post, we need two document formats like we need two highway  DonnieBoy | 02/14/07
Fine, dump ODF then.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 02/14/07
And why would we want to do that?  John L. Ries | 02/14/07
Say What???  No_Ax_to_Grind | 02/14/07
Care to name the viable competition to MS Office?  B.O.F.H. | 02/14/07
Thoug it does make sense  John Zern | 02/14/07
FINALLY!  prwexler@... | 02/14/07
You think IBM is any better?  nucrash | 02/14/07
IBM can be a hypocrite  nucrash | 02/14/07
Everything that IBM is doing is on the up and up, it is that cry-babies  DonnieBoy | 02/14/07
IBM on the UP and UP???  No_Ax_to_Grind | 02/14/07
We are only talking about the standards battle. This is all proceeding  DonnieBoy | 02/15/07
Cat, Kettle, Black . . .  Plain Logic | 02/14/07
So what?  BFD | 02/14/07
4.3 --- Just a Mike Cox Wannabe ... (nt)  Plain Logic | 02/14/07
What kind of Kool-Aid have YOU been drinking. . .  bearded-grey | 02/14/07
The thing is that  xuniL_z | 02/14/07
Here you go  say_what | 02/14/07
Interesting List --- All the Anti-IBM'ers should read it...  Plain Logic | 02/14/07
Hyperbole  Yagotta B. Kidding | 02/14/07
And what abouit you?  trm1945 | 02/14/07
OOXML a Standard?  Stuka | 02/14/07
That's the point of standards...  moonchacha | 02/14/07
There is already an extreamly good standard that MS could have used.  DonnieBoy | 02/15/07
It isn't an extremely good standard for spreadsheets  DevGuy_z | 02/15/07
Utter tosh  whisperycat | 02/16/07
Crux  Sheeva | 02/19/07
Let's beg the question  John L. Ries | 02/14/07
Whats the difference:  galileon | 02/14/07
I'll tell you  mosborne | 02/14/07
aah, I see, but  galileon | 02/14/07
You'd think  Richard Flude | 02/14/07
thanks for that link  galileon | 02/15/07
Read the objections  John L. Ries | 02/14/07
The difference  antitrust | 02/14/07
Microsoft can sure dish it out but they can't take it!  mwiley_z | 02/14/07
When did MS block a standard?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 02/14/07
What is your definition?  TheHonestTruth | 02/14/07
Standard =  No_Ax_to_Grind | 02/15/07
Read what he said, he is talking about blocking adoption of the standard  DonnieBoy | 02/15/07
And again you are wrong  No_Ax_to_Grind | 02/15/07
And, the dominant player adding to the standard with no warning without  DonnieBoy | 02/15/07
No, FROM being certified.  DevGuy_z | 02/15/07
There can be no discussion  TheHonestTruth | 02/15/07
Embrace, Extend, Extinguish  sj_z | 02/15/07
Isn't that EXCATLY how it should be?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 02/15/07
That is assuming that the additions were needed or usefull. Or, just added  DonnieBoy | 02/15/07
And that is decided in the market place.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 02/15/07
Yes, the market place will decide, and one factor, expecially for  DonnieBoy | 02/15/07
except that...  sj_z | 02/15/07
OH PLEASE!  alandd | 02/14/07
It is just that Microsoft wants two kinds of highways, those that Microsoft  DonnieBoy | 02/14/07
Pure Bullshat  No_Ax_to_Grind | 02/14/07
But...  handydan918 | 02/14/07
you are right  xuniL_z | 02/14/07
Unix was created by the phone company (Bell Labs).  B.O.F.H. | 02/14/07
ANd that is the case with Office  No_Ax_to_Grind | 02/15/07
Right, MS would LOVE to be in charge of a changing standard, and have  DonnieBoy | 02/15/07
Pot calling the Kettle black  cdiazh | 02/14/07
Is anyone surprised the political ploys continue?  Anton Philidor | 02/14/07
Am I surprised Microsoft is using a political ploy?  Insight Driver | 02/14/07
If Microsoft Office could work with ODF...  Anton Philidor | 02/14/07
If MS could work with ODF....  John L. Ries | 02/15/07
A number of competitors reverse-engineered...  Anton Philidor | 02/15/07
You are right that MS hates standards, and will only be dragged into them  DonnieBoy | 02/15/07
What's the difference between "ideology" and "principle"  John L. Ries | 02/15/07
My distinction: principles you choose...  Anton Philidor | 02/15/07
They have...  John L. Ries | 02/15/07
Competing software is including the Microsoft formats  Anton Philidor | 02/15/07
Object Oriented  Yagotta B. Kidding | 02/15/07
Kneecapped at birth  Yagotta B. Kidding | 02/15/07
Of course...  antitrust | 02/14/07
Everybody really should read all of the objections to the MS format.  DonnieBoy | 02/14/07
So what???  No_Ax_to_Grind | 02/14/07
new standards  antitrust | 02/14/07
Wrong on just about every count.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 02/15/07
Lets look at the WiMAX standard.  Yagotta B. Kidding | 02/15/07
a suggestion  sj_z | 02/15/07
A suggestion for you...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 02/15/07
Take a Look  Yagotta B. Kidding | 02/15/07
You can submit whatever you want...  John L. Ries | 02/15/07
Yeah, define these...  UserLand | 02/15/07
Sorry. Here's a link that should work.  UserLand | 02/15/07
And MS is HELPING  No_Ax_to_Grind | 02/15/07
Right, MS would LOVE to be able to continue disadvantaging competitors!!  DonnieBoy | 02/15/07
ODF demands 7 of OOxml but only references 3 itself. Read this in reply  DevGuy_z | 02/15/07
Correction: ODF doesn't demand objectors do.  DevGuy_z | 02/15/07
Pot calls kettle black.  kraterz | 02/14/07
Well, thats the pot calling the kettle black, isn't it?  Glynne_M@... | 02/14/07
Yes, you are exactly right.  xuniL_z | 02/14/07
Thanks & deep respect for your message... (NT)  Solid Water | 02/14/07
the devil in sheeps clothing (thats IBM)  code_Warrior | 02/14/07
All the user wants is a universal document format  whisperycat | 02/15/07
Why you are dead wrong.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 02/15/07
No, ODF has everything that is needed, THERE IS NOT ROCKET SCIENCE IN THE  DonnieBoy | 02/15/07
No it doesn't. Must look at source code.  DevGuy_z | 02/15/07
You are right, for competive reason, MS wants to be able to continue to  DonnieBoy | 02/15/07
yeah like the MS bugs  sj_z | 02/15/07
The fact is ...  George Mitchell | 02/15/07
Microsoft vs everybody else ...  George Mitchell | 02/15/07
MS's Proposal is Half-Baked - e.g. Redefines Gregorian Calendar  BanjoPaterson | 02/15/07
STFU MS stop the crying  Quebec-french | 02/15/07
Andy Updegrove  boutseeds | 02/15/07
ODF is incomplete  zzz1234567890 | 02/16/07
Fast Tracking  Unc Al | 02/19/07

What do you think?

advertisement
advertisement

White Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

SmartPlanet

  • Thought-provoking progressive ideas on diverse topics that intersect with technology, business, and life, and matter to the world at large. Visit SmartPlanet
  • More from IBM
  • Innovate your business' process model, play against the market, compete against others on our scoreboards and WIN! Try INNOV8 2.0: A BPM Simulator
  • Enabling Real-World Business Transformation through IBM Service Management Read the EMA Analyst Report
Click Here