Microsoft kills off newsgroups

From the Register, this story is pretty sad.  Newsgroup support for Microsoft products is being removed and users are asked to use forums.

I wonder why they do this, that anything old and that works perfectly well needs to be atrophied and become an internet relic.  Like Gopher.  Being a gnus user, I of course have an axe to grind, though I have no subscription to any Microsoft newsgroups.

I'm afraid, other companies  too would also head for the exits and remove their news servers and everyone ends up on flashy, kitschy website that produces a horrid amount of hits for simple web searches. 

My primary objections to forums are that you need  a browser, logins and lots of clicking hither and thither to get things done and I'm yet to see a good forum software whose search feature works well.  Besides, there is something soothing about text only postings viewed in my news reader.

I wish they'd not do this.

Firefox users flip out over sneak MS add-on

This is certainly not going to go down well, is it?  Basically, Microsoft is supposedly pushing an add on that users cannot uninstall and probably not want in the first place.

The last paragraph alone is enough to make people think more about switching to Linux.

Methinks, there might be a lawsuit in the offing.

Using Licenses as a Marketing Tool

After reading this article on moonlight, I've got this uncomfortable feeling over Open Source licensing.

Let me explain.

In the context of moonlight, it is clear that Adobe has significant lead over Microsoft with its flash tools. So, Microsoft has released a competing tool with an Open Source license and patent infringement protection support. It does appear to be a marketing ploy aimed at Adobe by making it available for free and getting market share from the open source crowd(if it works, that is).

As it stands right now, we have two competing tools that deliver rich content or whatever, one with overwhelming market share and the other just about starting out. The underdog ups the ante by releasing under an opensource license and providing support for cross platform running.

While I'm not claiming the open source crowd cannot see what is happening, does it need to get into this at all?

Two software companies are fighting it out, it's their fight; one ropes in the Open source crowd to fight the other. If there was some ideal to all the Licensing stuff, it now looks like it's now used as a marketing ploy between companies. And in the trenches, the programmers are getting played?

The licensing was about rights to programmers(at least I used to think so), now, it's one more tactic in marketing fights.

Cui bono?

OXML plugin for Firefox

Not sure where this heading but Microsoft has released an Open XML document viewer plugin for Firefox.

The plugin itself can be downloaded here.

If users don't know that it is a Microsoft standard document format, would they adopt it without reservations?  The plugin is not downloadable from Microsoft's support pages too.  I can't think of a reason why they'd want to release this plugin; it's not that they've cared before that their documents have to be read from different document editors or viewers.

What gives?

OOXML, objections raised!

By golly, South Africa seems to have some objections over the document format and the approval process that it has officially lodged a complaint. This is going to delay things even more on a normally staid and slow standards body.

Engaging in a bit of schadenfreude, it will be that once the complaint is registered, more complaints will be lodged by other parties once the approval process document trail is shown.

And it's not going be pretty.

Make LaTeX emulate Microsoft Word paragraph spacing

This might be useful for someone who needs to make LaTeX behave like Microsoft Word in its paragraph spacing. You know, the one where the words are stretched to fill in the entire text line area. Well, to achieve that, you need to do the following

\tolerance=1
\emergencystretch=\maxdimen
\hyphenpenalty=10000
\hbadness=10000

Hat tip to Donald Arseneau on this thread. Note that, it makes hyphenation of words very,very unlikely.

Blue Screen of.....never mind

A little macabre thought over this article. Would you want that in your car?

:)

Now, the EC gets interested in OOXML!

Actually no. Given the initial intent and final vote of the OOXML, the EC is now planning to look into the voting process itself.

A little too late now; a bit like the cops in the movies.

Even with all the clamouring, it'll take years for any allegations to be proved or falsified. By that time, OOXML would have become mainstream thus making it all moot.

Rather, the standard should be on indefinite hold till a consensus is reached by all concerned that Microsoft got the votes fair and square.

Who's going to complain about this?

Microsoft? Actually, they'd benefit as they have nothing to hide, wouldn't they?

The Open Source crowd? It's not a standard yet, till the allegations are proved either way, so they might have to wait a couple of years before they have a technical locus standi in this discussion.

That about settles it then?

*wink

All this will be apparent to those who've the "Yes Minister" series where the Minister and the Civil Services folks clash over policy.

OOXML and Microsoft: Getting the votes

Looks like a lot of "negotiations" have changed the outcome of the OOXML standards vote. OOXML is probably going to be voted as an ISO standard. Appears that I spoke too soon.

The next logical thing is get funding for another truly open document standard.

As Andrew Tannenbaum says, the good thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from!

If the open source waters are being muddied, muddy it a little more and move to the new standard. However long it takes. A document is one of the fundamental blocks of business transactions in an electronic world. Making it unreadable at some future date due to legal and technical reasons is clearly not in anyone's interest.

Royalty free, non discriminatory and under a standards body NOT controlled by any entity is what the target should be.

Microsoft and OOXML revisted

When the lede to the story has the lines

by reiterating that it won’t sue over future versions of its file format.

and the title is one about Microsoft, you know it's not going to be good.

For both Microsoft and the public at large.

So, UK might revisit it's yes vote on the OOXML file format.
Microsoft's stand is now wobbly considering they and other vendors have been bashing Sun for not making a Java a true open standard. All approvals had to be routed through Sun and everyone cried foul. Now Microsoft is in the same situation. It seems to need the Open Source tag without losing control over the file format specifications.

That is going to be tough. Very.

It's better to be proprietary and arbitrary in your file formats than to take a stand which is viewed as fake and with suspicion. At least, while not getting good karma, you don't get bad press either.

OOXML and Microsoft; getting nowhere?

India has voted to NO to OOXML.

That was expected. What is surprising is how the battle is being fought. Here's one insider's account of how the votes played out and the after effects.

Reading between the lines, there seems to be a lot of quid pro quo and none of the Indian IT players come out in a better light. Of course, one is well within their rights to question the motives of the blogger too who gave his perspective of things.

However coloured the views might have been, IF there were technical demerits to the standard, then it really is a good idea to throw it out.

Microsoft has only itself to blame on this vote; none of the competition is going to help it along. Clearly, the more the NO votes, the bigger the embarrassment and consequent bureaucratic revisions and time that OOXML is going to get bogged into. The competition is also going to spread a good amount of FUD about it, right or wrong. Questions on patents, whether it is truly open, the NO votes from the academic establishments are ripe for talking points attack.

And I still don't understand why there is a need for another document standard when the ODF (Open Document Format) exists and there is ISO approval for the same.