How open is "open" when Microsoft say it?

David M Williams
Monday, 09 July 2007 11:55

Business IT - Open Source

The U.S. state of Massachusetts is considering re-instating approval for internal use of Microsoft Office 2007 after a two year ban. The draft policy is up for review until July 20.

The issue at the heart of the matter is open vs proprietary file format standards. Microsoft Office 2003, and previous versions, did not have an open file format whereas the current 2007 incarnation of the popular productivity suite provides Office Open XML (OOXML).

The benefits of open file formats are many, not least being the assurance of accessing archived data created using applications that no longer exist as well as being able to open documents created by current-version apps which are not installed on the desktop. A frequent example of the latter is the multitude of Microsoft Works word processing documents which are mailed daily and originate from the myriad of home computer users who have free bundled copies of Works OEM with their new PCs. Yet, they cause untold consternation to hapless office workers who don't understand why they have no success when double-clicking the attachments in their mail client. (Ironically, these are invariably the same office workers who try Microsoft Word's File/Open dialog as the first port of call to opening PDF files.)

Insightful, if cynical, news site The Register believes there's more at play.

In particular, The Register assert the state of Massachusetts were pushing for Microsoft alternatives such as the well-regarded open source suite OpenOffice. The move to actively boycot a Microsoft product was previously unheard of and invoked the Redmond giant's lobbying machine to pressure the legislature to change policy.

It'd be too easy to just say the state of Massachusetts is kowtowing to Microsoft. After all, OOXML has been ratified by Ecma and surely this means it is been independently considered a global standard, open to all, and vendor neutral, right?

viagra cialis levitra comparison