This link has been bookmarked by 1 people . It was first bookmarked on 19 Nov 2007, by Gary Edwards.
-
19 Nov 07
-
First, let me say that I am a CIO in a small (20 employees but growing fast) financial services company.
I am well aware of how locked-in I am getting with our MS-only shop. I am trying to see my way out of it, but this "ODF vs ODFF" is leaving me very confused and no one is working to clear the fog.
I beg for all parties to really work towards some sort of defined understanding. I don't need cooperation. But, what I don't have is well-defined positions from all parties.
As it is, I feel safer staying the course with MS right now, honestly. It's what I know vs the mystery of this "open cloud" and all the bellicose infighting.
How's that for "in the trenches" data?
I posted a comment on Andy's blog, and I will post the same comment here for your group (minor edits):
I will admit to being very, very confused by all of this ODF vs ODFF posturing.
I will try to put my current thoughts in short form, but it will be a muddled mess. I warned you!
From what I gather, the OpenDocument Foundation (ODFF) is attempting to create more of an interop format for working against a background MS server stack (Exchange/Sharepoint). You worry that MS is further cementing their business lock-in by moving more and more companies into dependency on not only the client-side software but also the MS business stack that has finally evolved into a serious competitive set. At that level, and in your view, the "atomic unit" is the whole document. The encoded content is not of immediate concern.
ODF is concerned with the actual document content, which ODFF is prepared to ignore. The "atomic unit" is the bits and parts in the document. They want to break the proprietary encodings that MS has that lock people into MSOffice. The stack is not of any immediate concern.
So, unless I misunderstand either camp, ODF is first attacking the client end of the stack, and ODFF is attacking the backbone server end of the stack. The former wants to break the MSOffice monopoly by allowing people to escape those proprietary encodings, and the latter wants to prevent the dependency on server software like Exchange and Sharepoint by allowing MS documents to travel to other destinations than MS "server" products.
Is this correct? I have yet to see anyone summarize the differences in any non-partisan way, so I am at a loss and not enough information is forthcoming for me to see what's what. The usual diatribe by people closer to the action is to go into the history of ODF or ODFF, talk about old slights and lost fights, and somehow try to pull at emotional heartstrings so as to gain mindshare. Gary's set of comments on this blog have that flavor. This is childish on both sides.
Furthermore, the word "orthogonal" comes to mind. I often see people too busy arguing their POV, and not listening to others, when there is no real argument to keep making. It's apple-and-oranges. ODF vs ODFF seems like they are caught in this trap. Everyone wants to win an argument that has no possible win because the participants are not arguing about the same thing.
Tell me: Why can't the two parties get along? I can see a "cooperative" that attacks the entire stack. Am I the only one seeing this? Am I wrong? If yes, what's the fundamental difference that prevents cooperation?
-
Page Comments
When asked about the source of his incredible success, the hockey great Wayne Gretzky replied, “I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been.”
You and i need to do the same. Let me state our position as this:
The desktop office suite is where the puck has been. The
Exchange/SharePoint Hub is where it's going to be.
The E/S Hub is the core of an emerging Microsoft specific web platform which we've also called, the MS Stack.
In this stack, MSOffice is relegated to the task of a rich client end
user interface into the E/S Hub of business processes and collaborative
computing connections. The rest of the MS Stack swirls like a galaxy of
services around the E/S Hub.
Key to Microsoft's web platform is the gradual movement of MSOffice
bound business processes to the E/S Hub where they connect to the rest
of the MS Stack.
So what now you might ask? Some things to consider before we get down to brass tacks:
... There is a way to break the monopolists MSOffice desktop grip, but it's not a rip out and replace the desktop
model. It's a beat them at the E/S Hub model that then opens up the
desktop space. And opens it up totally. (this is a 3-5 year challenge
though since it's a movement of currently bound business processes).
... It's all about the business processes. Focusing entirely on the file formats is to miss the big picture.
... The da Vinci group's position is this; we believe we can neutralize and re purpose MSOffice by converting in process existing documents, applications and processes to the web platform ready CDF WICD Full format.
... This in process conversion is only half the problem. We still need CDF WICD Full ready applications that can compete against the Exchange/SharePoint Hub.
... It is far easier to convert OpenOffice ODF to CDF WICD Full than it is to convert MSOffice binary - xml to CDF WICD Full. We fully expect IBM, as a W3C CDF leader, to perfect an ODF to CDF WICD Full
conversion. The da Vinci groups challenge is pull off this same
conversion targeting some segment of the 550 million MSOffice bound
desktops that have not yet been migrated to the E/S Hub.
... Once in CDF WICD Full, the documents are web platform
ready, highly interoperable, and available to E/S Hub alternatives. The
MSOffice monopoly advantage is arguably neutralized at it's head point,
the MSOffice desktop.
... The battle against the MSOffice <> E/S Hub juggernaut will
be won or lost based on volumes of business processes being re written
to Open Hub alternatives. It will not be won (or lost) at ISO or other
standards groups. Ultimately the marketplace will decide.
... The day after IBM informed Sam and i of their grand strategy
involving W3C centric CDF technologies, based on the fluid web platform
conversion of Lotus Symphony ODF to CDF *, we shut down the Foundation.
The point of our agreement being that we meet in the cloud with CDF *
conversions. IBM will bring OpenOffice ODF into the cloud. The da Vinci
group will bring MSOffice binaries and xml documents.
Here are some viewpoints that might help you make the conceptual shift we've made.
Since i've been writing about the Open Stack vs. MS Stack challenge
since long before i joined the OASIS ODF TC at it's founding in
November of 2002, it was natural that i brought to ODF a universal file
format vision that extended far beyond the desktop. In many ways, my
relationship with OASIS ODF was doomed from the start since my grand convergence ideals were at fundamental odds with Sun's.
This five year clash of ideals and purpose is responsible for your
confusion, and perhaps that of many others. In fact, Sam and i are
personally responsible for writing much of the ODF kool-aid, setting
public expectations and beliefs to our universal file format objectives; which admittedly went way beyond the desktop centric chartered purposes Sun had set and followed.
Let's try a few statements that will hopefully frame the context
within which CIO's can determine for themselves what is the best way
forward. Note that through conversions to CDF WICD Full, all of our previous differences can be resolved at the Open Hub, in the cloud.
If you think the purpose of MS-OOXML and the MS-OOXML Compatibility
Pack plug-in as simply an XML replacement for Microsoft Office binary
file formats, you miss the true purpose of MS-OOXML.
If you think that MS-OOXML is simply a proprietary response to OASIS
ODF, you really misunderstand what Microsoft's end game strategy is.
MS-OOXML was designed to work at both ends of the MS Stack core
pipeline, connecting MSOffice with the Exchange\SharePoint Hub, which
is the core of the Microsoft Web Platform.
ODF on the other hand was designed exactly for the purposes it's name implies, "OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) TC.
It's a desktop office suite specific XML file format. ODF was not
designed for the same purposes as MS-OOXML. It was however designed for
a very fluid conversion of desktop to W3C web platform technologies.
Think of MS-OOXML as a transitional bridge for moving legacy
MSOffice bound business processes to be re written at the
Exchange/SharePoint Hub by vertical line of business developers. These
replacement business processes are Microsoft web ready, and
fully capable of leveraging the advantages of web collaboration,
intelligent workflows, and stack wide data streaming, data
binding/extraction, and web service integration.
In many ways the file format wars are a front masking the quiet but
massive movement of MSOffice bound business processes to the
Exchange/SharePoint Hub.
This is what you and i must focus on. We have a rare opportunity to
compete against this quiet but massive movement of business processes,
but only if we can empower open source and proprietary competitors to
be fully competitive with Exchange/SharePoint. For the most part this
means taking away the E/S Hub advantage of superior integration with
MSOffice.
The da Vinci group is uniquely qualified to take on this challenge.
Our conversion process is based on the same internal conversion process
MSOffice applications use to generate MS-OOXML. We believe that CDF WICD Full can perform at the Open Hub layer similarly to the advantages MS-OOXML provides the Exchange/SharePoint Hub.
Don't confuse the Hub with the desktop. They are different. Hub documents must be fully web ready and desktop - device ready.
The challenge for the da Vinci group is that of piping in process MSOffice documents into CDF WICD Full
without loss, and without disrupting existing bound business processes.
There is also the issue of maintaining this bridge between legacy
desktop business processes and new Open Hub business processes written
to emerging Hub powerhouses like Zimbra and Alfresco.
Please note that while IBM Lotus Notes-Symphony work is proprietary,
and that the da Vinci group itself is a private operation, the CDF - WICD
galaxy of W3C ecosystems is enormous. Mozilla, Apache and the Eclipse
Community are areas of intense development and innovative
implementations.
What to Do
Do not buy Exchange/SharePoint servers. Do not buy MS Office
Communications servers. In fact, stop buying into anything Microsoft
offers. The MSOffice desktop lock-in can be broken by re writing your
business processes to Open Hub alternatives like Zimbra and Alfresco.
Once you get the business processes to an Open Hub, you can start
replacing the MSOffice desktops with open alternatives.
Focus on W3C technologies as the driving components behind everything you do with the web platform.
Go to the CDF - WICD developer communities such as Mozilla,
Apache and Eclipse, and let them know what you've determined are your
primary friction points.
And finally, understand that the web platform is where the puck will be. For everything.
Hope this helps, and thanks for the pointed questions,
~ge~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
AlphaDog ... Watch for this!
Imagine in the near future that IBM releases a version of Lotus
Symphony with an easy to reach list of conversion exports. The list
includes:
AlphaDog
When asked about the source of his incredible success, the hockey great Wayne Gretzky replied, “I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been.”
You and i need to do the same. Let me state our position as this:
The desktop office suite is where the puck has been. The
Exchange/SharePoint Hub is where it's going to be.
The E/S Hub is the core of an emerging Microsoft specific web platform which we've also called, the MS Stack.
In this stack, MSOffice is relegated to the task of a rich client end
user interface into the E/S Hub of business processes and collaborative
computing connections. The rest of the MS Stack swirls like a galaxy of
services around the E/S Hub.
Key to Microsoft's web platform is the gradual movement of MSOffice
bound business processes to the E/S Hub where they connect to the rest
of the MS Stack.
So what now you might ask? Some things to consider before we get down to brass tacks:
... There is a way to break the monopolists MSOffice desktop grip, but it's not a rip out and replace the desktop
model. It's a beat them at the E/S Hub model that then opens up the
desktop space. And opens it up totally. (this is a 3-5 year challenge
though since it's a movement of currently bound business processes).
... It's all about the business processes. Focusing entirely on the file formats is to miss the big picture.
... The da Vinci group's position is this; we believe we can neutralize and re purpose MSOffice by converting in process existing documents, applications and processes to the web platform ready CDF WICD Full format.
... This in process conversion is only half the problem. We still need CDF WICD Full ready applications that can compete against the Exchange/SharePoint Hub.
... It is far easier to convert OpenOffice ODF to CDF WICD Full than it is to convert MSOffice binary - xml to CDF WICD Full. We fully expect IBM, as a W3C CDF leader, to perfect an ODF to CDF WICD Full
conversion. The da Vinci groups challenge is pull off this same
conversion targeting some segment of the 550 million MSOffice bound
desktops that have not yet been migrated to the E/S Hub.
... Once in CDF WICD Full, the documents are web platform
ready, highly interoperable, and available to E/S Hub alternatives. The
MSOffice monopoly advantage is arguably neutralized at it's head point,
the MSOffice desktop.
... The battle against the MSOffice <> E/S Hub juggernaut will
be won or lost based on volumes of business processes being re written
to Open Hub alternatives. It will not be won (or lost) at ISO or other
standards groups. Ultimately the marketplace will decide.
... The day after IBM informed Sam and i of their grand strategy
involving W3C centric CDF technologies, based on the fluid web platform
conversion of Lotus Symphony ODF to CDF *, we shut down the Foundation.
The point of our agreement being that we meet in the cloud with CDF *
conversions. IBM will bring OpenOffice ODF into the cloud. The da Vinci
group will bring MSOffice binaries and xml documents.
Here are some viewpoints that might help you make the conceptual shift we've made.
Since i've been writing about the Open Stack vs. MS Stack challenge
since long before i joined the OASIS ODF TC at it's founding in
November of 2002, it was natural that i brought to ODF a universal file
format vision that extended far beyond the desktop. In many ways, my
relationship with OASIS ODF was doomed from the start since my grand convergence ideals were at fundamental odds with Sun's.
This five year clash of ideals and purpose is responsible for your
confusion, and perhaps that of many others. In fact, Sam and i are
personally responsible for writing much of the ODF kool-aid, setting
public expectations and beliefs to our universal file format objectives; which admittedly went way beyond the desktop centric chartered purposes Sun had set and followed.
Let's try a few statements that will hopefully frame the context
within which CIO's can determine for themselves what is the best way
forward. Note that through conversions to CDF WICD Full, all of our previous differences can be resolved at the Open Hub, in the cloud.
If you think the purpose of MS-OOXML and the MS-OOXML Compatibility
Pack plug-in as simply an XML replacement for Microsoft Office binary
file formats, you miss the true purpose of MS-OOXML.
If you think that MS-OOXML is simply a proprietary response to OASIS
ODF, you really misunderstand what Microsoft's end game strategy is.
MS-OOXML was designed to work at both ends of the MS Stack core
pipeline, connecting MSOffice with the Exchange\SharePoint Hub, which
is the core of the Microsoft Web Platform.
ODF on the other hand was designed exactly for the purposes it's name implies, "OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) TC.
It's a desktop office suite specific XML file format. ODF was not
designed for the same purposes as MS-OOXML. It was however designed for
a very fluid conversion of desktop to W3C web platform technologies.
Think of MS-OOXML as a transitional bridge for moving legacy
MSOffice bound business processes to be re written at the
Exchange/SharePoint Hub by vertical line of business developers. These
replacement business processes are Microsoft web ready, and
fully capable of leveraging the advantages of web collaboration,
intelligent workflows, and stack wide data streaming, data
binding/extraction, and web service integration.
In many ways the file format wars are a front masking the quiet but
massive movement of MSOffice bound business processes to the
Exchange/SharePoint Hub.
This is what you and i must focus on. We have a rare opportunity to
compete against this quiet but massive movement of business processes,
but only if we can empower open source and proprietary competitors to
be fully competitive with Exchange/SharePoint. For the most part this
means taking away the E/S Hub advantage of superior integration with
MSOffice.
The da Vinci group is uniquely qualified to take on this challenge.
Our conversion process is based on the same internal conversion process
MSOffice applications use to generate MS-OOXML. We believe that CDF WICD Full can perform at the Open Hub layer similarly to the advantages MS-OOXML provides the Exchange/SharePoint Hub.
Don't confuse the Hub with the desktop. They are different. Hub documents must be fully web ready and desktop - device ready.
The challenge for the da Vinci group is that of piping in process MSOffice documents into CDF WICD Full
without loss, and without disrupting existing bound business processes.
There is also the issue of maintaining this bridge between legacy
desktop business processes and new Open Hub business processes written
to emerging Hub powerhouses like Zimbra and Alfresco.
Please note that while IBM Lotus Notes-Symphony work is proprietary,
and that the da Vinci group itself is a private operation, the CDF - WICD
galaxy of W3C ecosystems is enormous. Mozilla, Apache and the Eclipse
Community are areas of intense development and innovative
implementations.
What to Do
Do not buy Exchange/SharePoint servers. Do not buy MS Office
Communications servers. In fact, stop buying into anything Microsoft
offers. The MSOffice desktop lock-in can be broken by re writing your
business processes to Open Hub alternatives like Zimbra and Alfresco.
Once you get the business processes to an Open Hub, you can start
replacing the MSOffice desktops with open alternatives.
Focus on W3C technologies as the driving components behind everything you do with the web platform.
Go to the CDF - WICD developer communities such as Mozilla,
Apache and Eclipse, and let them know what you've determined are your
primary friction points.
And finally, understand that the web platform is where the puck will be. For everything.
Hope this helps, and thanks for the pointed questions,
~ge~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
AlphaDog ... Watch for this!
Imagine in the near future that IBM releases a version of Lotus
Symphony with an easy to reach list of conversion exports. The list
includes:
Also imagine that this version of Lotus Symphony can import all of these file formats (except PDF).
Given the developer fervor within web platform communities such as
Mozilla, Apache and Eclipse, and, the legacy work with Lotus Notes,
Lotus Domino, WebSphere, DB2 and Oracle, my thinking is that Symphony
would hit the download trifecta. Maybe even replace OpenOffice as the
dominant ODF application.
Sun and Novell would no doubt respond. But not the way most might think.
I would not expect Sun to enable a similar W3C web platform
conversion menu in OpenOffice. Instead, they would give careful
consideration to enabling such a menu in StarOffice only. With
StarOffice on Open Solaris being the ultimate prize.
My assumptions here are based on the fact that IBM and Sun are
leaders in every aspect of the W3C CDF efforts, including the WICD
profiles.
~~~~~~~~~
Also imagine that this version of Lotus Symphony can import all of these file formats.
Given the developer fervor within web platform communities such as
Mozilla, Apache and Eclipse, and, the legacy work with Lotus Notes,
Lotus Domino, WebSphere, DB2 and Oracle, my thinking is that Symphony
would hit the download trifecta. Maybe even replace OpenOffice as the
dominant ODF application.
Sun and Novell would no doubt respond. But not the way most might think.
I would not expect Sun to enable a similar W3C web platform
conversion menu in OpenOffice. Instead, they would give careful
consideration to enabling such a menu in StarOffice only. With
StarOffice on Open Solaris being the ultimate prize.
My assumptions here are based on the fact that IBM and Sun are
leaders in every aspect of the W3C CDF efforts, including the WICD
profiles.
~ge~
<script type="text/javaScript">var DIIGO_TOOLBAR_VERSION="2007081101";</script>
Would you like to comment?
Join Diigo for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.