|
Does Verizon's Voyager stack up to the iPhone? |
|
|
5 IT skills that won't boost your salary
[1,407]
Women 4 times more likely than men to cough up personal info
[589]
Japan's 10 funniest tech-related commercials [Videos]
[407]
Throwing away a promo CD is "unauthorized distribution"?
[1,265]
Adults too quick to dismiss educational video games
[682]
Attack of the iPhone clones [Slideshow]
[578]
10 things IT needs to know about AJAX
[1,258]
This Year's 25 Geekiest 25th Anniversaries [Slideshow]
[409]
|
|
"Open API" is Redmondese for
"Open API" is Redmondese for "Lock In that generates patent revenue".
Don't let them fool you for one second...
OOXML is patented like SMB, it's not an open standard that is free like ODF is. OOXML=royalty, ODF=no royalty.
Any software that opens ooxml is subject to their patent royalties.
Nothing else that comes out of their (or anyone else's) pie holes matters because of this simple fact.
Anyone that starts talking about OOXML can be shut down with "How much are the royalties that I need to pay Microsoft to use their 'open' OOXML standard? So I should pay MS for a non free standard when a perfectly good free one exists?"
They shouldn't be opening their 'standards' they should be using the same ones the rest of the world uses. It could be fixed with one office service pack that implements the standards that the rest of the industry agreed on.
Hopefully everyone sees this development for what it is, the opening move in their patent troll game. If people had any sense they'd be ditching office for open office, just like they did with wordperfect 12 years ago.
Users want to be able to open any type of document. MS isn't giving them what they want so they should go somewhere else.
-Viz