Sun, IBM Continue Open Standards Double-Speak

What did you expect Microsoft (MSFT)? You give 'em an inch and they take a mile! Sun (JAVA) and IBM (IBM) continue to pummel Microsoft via obscure front groups and Microsoft just grins and bears it.

There are a few things for information-technology [IT] investors to remember relative to this non-news flash:
(1) free software is different than open source software [OSS],
(2) the Software Freedom Law Center [SFLC] wants software to be free as in "air, trees, fish"--their analogy not mine--not free as in "at no cost,"
(3) so-called open standards have nothing to do with open source terms and conditions and/or the OSS development culture,
(4) the concept of open standards is double-speak practiced by Sun, IBM and all of their front organizations as a way to manipulate the IT market, and
(5) document format standards are a solution looking for a problem.

[On the latter point, do you really care that there are over 200 "international" standards for the size of real documents--that is, paper? And have these standards ever had any effect on your investments?]

As described here on March 7, Microsoft is in the process of wasting shareholder value by trying to get its Office Open XML [OOXML]--or Open Office XML--approved as an International Standards Organization [ISO)] document format. OOXML is the way Office 2007 saves documents, spreadsheets and presentations. Actually it is the European Computer Machine Association [ECMA] that is trying to secure ISO approval at Microsoft's behest. If approved, OOXML would join the ubiquitous PDF, put forward by AiiM at Adobe's (ADBE) request, and Sun's ODF, put forward by OASIS at Sun's urging (that's right, if you are invested in these other companies, they are also wasting your money in this meaningless alphabet soup).

On March 12, the SFLC IBM/Sun front organization joined the Open Source Initiative [OSI] statement on March 6 and other IBM/Sun front organizations like the documentfreedom.org (around March 1) in this coordinated attack against Microsoft about so-called open standards. IBM and Sun appear to be orchestrating an almost daily release of such blather. The reason is that ISO members are currently voting on the standard and Sun and IBM fear that approval of OOXML will hurt StarOffice and Lotus sales (actually in Sun's case, it is a concern that StarOffice sales will never get off the ground).

The gist of the breathless SFLC announcement is that Microsoft is not giving up its patent position in trying to get its Office 2007 formats "standardized." This is of course neither new news nor bad news for investors. In fact, it's about the only thing Microsoft is doing right by investors in this whole debacle.

And always keep in mind that standardizing IT docment formats is a solution chasing a problem.

Comments

[User 163509]

Actually, you're wrong on a couple of counts.

First, the document format standards discussion is incredibly important for the future of IT. Have you ever wanted to exchange a document, spreadsheet, or presentation with someone? Then you needed the standard. This is far, far from "a solution looking for a problem".

The current de-facto standard is "Microsoft Office", which equals "you gotta buy Microsoft Office if you want to share documents". The open community has created ODF as a standard, and OpenOffice as an open-source implementation, which is challenging the MS Office domination, just as Linux is challenging MS Windows. Microsoft has countered with OOXML, which greatly favors them as the incumbent, because it's very Office-centric. Depending on who wins the standards debate, Microsoft will either remain on top of the pile, or will be forced to move towards truly open standards.

Second, document standards are not a "front for Sun and IBM to sell more software". The moral equivalency argument of "Sun/IBM are just like Microsoft" just doesn't hold water. The implementation of the ODF standard is open and non-proprietary, just like Linux. IBM, and Sun to a lesser degree, really want to participate in an open market, where open source and competitors can play, because they think it's a better business model for them.

[User 163599]

Worthless article filled with opinionated name calling with no useful facts. How do these people get published?!

[User 163610]

wow.. if you would like to read something more worthless than this article, you should read the author's bio.. lots of experience with doing nothing, creating nothing nor really understanding anything... otherwise, just research.

[User 163634]

Formats are the key to just about everything. Two factors; 1. data has to live, by law in the US, for 20 years in many cases. I would like to see the author or anyone else open a document written in Word or Excel 20 years ago. 2. Finding information is based on metadata, or data tags. Microsoft has locked out the ability to search and find information in any of their formats. That means only MS can search and find MS. This makes using things like Google and Ask or anything else much less effective.

So, format is king for being able to retrieve information in the future not to mention find it.

[Dennis Byron]

To the SeekingAlpha community:

The second and third comments above are typical ad-hominem blogoblather and given the anonymous user names, clearly not part of the SeekingAlpha community. But it is worthwhile to address the comments by the first and fourth anonymous commenters above from an IT investment research perspective--even though they are also probably not from investors.

Let me take the fourth comment first because it requires a very simple response. Yes, I can open up my 20-year-old Word and Excel files because I still have the applications on my PC. I can even open up my 20-year old AlphaWorks documents and spreadsheets for the same reason. I have also saved them in .txt and .rtf so common good backup practice provides plenty of protection. The blogblatherers that surf the web looking for blogposts to attack with any mention of Microsoft, even if as in this case I am criticzing Microsoft, do not understand that users have overtaken them. Maybe that accounts for their frustration.

Psychoanalyzing blogblathering aside, the whole Sun/IBM/front-group argument about legal requirements and Microsoft Office going away is the biggest canard in the current Sun/IBM/front-group campaign against OOXML. Ain't going to happen and even if it did, the applications don't go away.

The first comment above is a little more complex. You can exchange information without "buying Microsoft" in the same backup manner as described in my response to the fourth comment. Microsoft also gives away a PowerPoint reader the way Adobe gives away its .pdf reader. I don't know about a "Word reader" (never needed one) but if they don't, the solution to interoperability without "buying from Microsoft" is simply to save to .pdf (or .html or...)

And yes, IBM/Sun and Microsoft are equivalent when it comes to standards efforts. Unlike blogoblatherers, I don't care about moral equvalence but from an IT investment research perspective, all three of them are wasting shareholder money.

-- Dennis

[gc5674]

To the Ad-Hominem Blogoblather:

More importantly, does one actually get paid for writing this kind of stuff? I suspect that if they do, it is based on the number of words, not the quality or content. If selling my soul on a weekly basis to post electronic billboards for Redmond pays cash, count me in.

I can only laugh as critics are called silly names while any comment that goes against the grain is quickly edited.

Dennis - how does one join the SeekingAlpha community and more importantly if I join, will I suddenly start agreeing with this article?

-- Blogoblather

[InflectionResearch]

I've been a daily or weekly SeekingAlpha reader for well over a year. Dennis makes a good point here and it is discouraging that more and more posts (especially those mentioning Apple, Microsoft, and Ebay) have these nonsensical comments.

[JimD]

Well, I do not have enough disk space to keep old applications around on my pc - I was not smart enough to save my files at .txt (without all the formatiing that was needed in the document) - I do not want a PDF export, as that is not editable - so how do ensure that I can read my documents?

When I no longer pay to use Microsoft Word, and I am using another product - what am I to do? Think of it this way, you know the electric outlet - you can plug something into it day after day, buy a new gadget - just plug it in - a standard. Yes, different countries have different standards and they do sell adapters, but why should I have to buy a new adapter to visit a new country?

Why is MS fighting an interchangable standard anyway (meaning, get with the program and enhance the already adopted (OASIS) standard instead of creating their own).

[Purple Knot]

Interesting reading. Does the author have a Pay Pal account ready to pay M$ in the year 2012, to unlock and read the documents he created in the year 2008, as they will have the source key, not he.

[User 165495]

I believe that basic Office type tools are bound to become freeware, with support for all the important standards.
More importantly, I believe that the tools are becoming components that can be re-assembled with other components to create powerful new composite applications. IBM has already released Lotus Symphony as freeware - with spreadsheet, word processor, and presentation software supporting MS formats, ODF, and PDF output. These are the same components that are supplied as eclipse plug-ins for the Lotus Notes V8 client. I think that this component strategy will enable much more powerful use of office tools within the context of end user applications instead of launching Word or PPT or Excell as a separate application and somehow managing the association of that document to a business application - Get it for free at symphony.lotus.com/sof...

[Charles K.]

So Dennis, your response to their comments about needing open standards is that you don't have a problem because you save your files in a open standard? (yes, text files and rich text files are open standards) You didn't refute their point, you proved it. And if standard ANSI text files provided a way to adequately save modern formatting, I'm sure we'd just stick with them, but because they don't, we do need updated standards.

Additionally, pushing for adoption of ODF isn't just about generating software sales, since OpenOffice is free and actually very good. StarOffice and other software pieces seek to add additional features to entice you to buy their product over using freeware, but the whole point is that you are not locked into one particular software vendor and could switch to freeware or another vendor with no impact. Both IBM and Sun have adopted the business model of trying to provide you services you'll actually want to buy rather than locking you into their products. A novel concept. (Actually, to be fair to IBM, they've been doing it for years. Sun's just a late comer to their game).

[Dennis Byron]

Dear Charles K:

Thanks for the comment.

No the answer is not in backing up the files but in having access to the application you created the document/file in. Typically, you have a perpetual right to use it. Backing up to .txt or .rtf (which maintains most 1990s-era formating) or an image (in the case of .ppt) is just a prudent way to protect assets. Obviously, you should do this with all software you have licensed. (By the way, there is no need to keep it on your hard drive as one commenter suggests.)

But the bigger issue is that the term Open Standards (always upper case) is double speak, a term created to mean almost the opposite of what is intended. What is a closed standard? All so-called International Open Standards are simply retroactive acknowledgement of the market winner.

Your analysis of Sun (JAVA) and IBM (IBM) as paragons of virtue when it comes to standards and business model are hopefully just indicators that you are young. I envy you for that.

-- Dennis

[Orion]

User 165495 anything to do with Lotus is crap. We are using it at work and everyone complains about i t - it is 10 years behind MS office!!!

As for OOXML whether is approved or not as a standard it is going to become one as .dox format for examle it is one. I am saying .doc format it is standard because every business document I have to send (or a CV) it is required to be in .doc format - so that says everything, the consumers decide what they are going to use not anyone else!

Using MS .NET you can easily manipulate document saved in this format (one simple example: you can display them as a web page), or for that matter any other programing language on any platform, all the developer needs to know is XML :)

[RandomReader]

I have worked with Sun on open standards as well as open research such as JXTA, an obscure P2P technology that is the basis of the future communications network of the Army. These types of contributions push the forefront of advanced technologies that everyone will benefit from (in this case in the form of the next generation of networking as with the Darpanet in the 70's).

So what does this have to do with open document standards? Open specifications allow for multiple vendor implementations of equivalent functionality. This allows for a truly competitive marketplace. When new functionality beyond that specification is desired, it forces contributors to work together to guarantee that the interchange representation of this functionality is vetted by the eyes of future implementors. Is this tipping the hand to competitors? Yes, it is, but at the reward of customer loyalty and respect for being an active leader in what is important to them, a quality product and technology.