<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: ODF with no excuse</title>
	<atom:link href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2009/05/06/odf-with-no-excuse/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2009/05/06/odf-with-no-excuse/</link>
	<description>A weblog by Charles-H. Schulz.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 08 Apr 2012 07:51:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daniel Powter &#187; QTI</title>
		<link>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2009/05/06/odf-with-no-excuse/comment-page-1/#comment-1926</link>
		<dc:creator>Daniel Powter &#187; QTI</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 May 2009 11:48:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2009/05/06/odf-with-no-excuse/#comment-1926</guid>
		<description>[...] Moved by Freedom - Powered by Standards » Blog Archive » ODF with &#8230; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Moved by Freedom &#8211; Powered by Standards » Blog Archive » ODF with &#8230; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephane Rodriguez</title>
		<link>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2009/05/06/odf-with-no-excuse/comment-page-1/#comment-1921</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephane Rodriguez</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 May 2009 19:12:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2009/05/06/odf-with-no-excuse/#comment-1921</guid>
		<description>Microsoft DOES interoperate with ODF, just they have done their way thanks to a poor interoperability specification that they have used to its full extent.

That is the problem when you are talking about &quot;interoperability&quot;. Interoperability is a long word but is too short to convey the real meaning. Therefore whenever Microsoft talks about interoperability with no more qualification, this is just FUD.

It is going to be very hard to change this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Microsoft DOES interoperate with ODF, just they have done their way thanks to a poor interoperability specification that they have used to its full extent.</p>
<p>That is the problem when you are talking about &#8220;interoperability&#8221;. Interoperability is a long word but is too short to convey the real meaning. Therefore whenever Microsoft talks about interoperability with no more qualification, this is just FUD.</p>
<p>It is going to be very hard to change this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Capitão Óbvio</title>
		<link>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2009/05/06/odf-with-no-excuse/comment-page-1/#comment-1918</link>
		<dc:creator>Capitão Óbvio</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 May 2009 09:55:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2009/05/06/odf-with-no-excuse/#comment-1918</guid>
		<description>I hope the European Comission is watching this...

Oh, and don&#039;t forget the suit against TomTom for trying to interoperate using FAT32...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I hope the European Comission is watching this&#8230;</p>
<p>Oh, and don&#8217;t forget the suit against TomTom for trying to interoperate using FAT32&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: paul -theunverified</title>
		<link>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2009/05/06/odf-with-no-excuse/comment-page-1/#comment-1915</link>
		<dc:creator>paul -theunverified</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2009 23:07:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2009/05/06/odf-with-no-excuse/#comment-1915</guid>
		<description>Redmond is trying to sabotage ODF. If ODF breaks, the Windows customers (who might be less likely to know very much about open source) will be left with the impression that open source == poor quality. Therefore, don&#039;t use open source. If anyone from the DOJ is still paying attention, add this to the list of recent anticompetitive behaviors from Redmond. And Judge Kollar-Kotelly-whatever-additional-lastname, how about some real disciplinary action this time?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Redmond is trying to sabotage ODF. If ODF breaks, the Windows customers (who might be less likely to know very much about open source) will be left with the impression that open source == poor quality. Therefore, don&#8217;t use open source. If anyone from the DOJ is still paying attention, add this to the list of recent anticompetitive behaviors from Redmond. And Judge Kollar-Kotelly-whatever-additional-lastname, how about some real disciplinary action this time?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff</title>
		<link>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2009/05/06/odf-with-no-excuse/comment-page-1/#comment-1910</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2009 16:35:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2009/05/06/odf-with-no-excuse/#comment-1910</guid>
		<description>Take a look at the later entries in Rob Weir&#039;s blog;  Office 2007 SP2 is definitely producing documents which do not conform to the ODF standard.  There are examples of the problems listed on his site.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Take a look at the later entries in Rob Weir&#8217;s blog;  Office 2007 SP2 is definitely producing documents which do not conform to the ODF standard.  There are examples of the problems listed on his site.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: speedbuggy</title>
		<link>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2009/05/06/odf-with-no-excuse/comment-page-1/#comment-1908</link>
		<dc:creator>speedbuggy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2009 15:47:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2009/05/06/odf-with-no-excuse/#comment-1908</guid>
		<description>Thank goodness that Sun already released a fairly good  compatible ODF implementation. Only shows M$FT can&#039;t even copy someone elses work right !!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank goodness that Sun already released a fairly good  compatible ODF implementation. Only shows M$FT can&#8217;t even copy someone elses work right !!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mungewell</title>
		<link>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2009/05/06/odf-with-no-excuse/comment-page-1/#comment-1907</link>
		<dc:creator>mungewell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2009 15:32:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2009/05/06/odf-with-no-excuse/#comment-1907</guid>
		<description>Let me pose a question....
If you are writing a document reader/writer to be compatible with other applications, wouldn&#039;t you perform at least some testing with the other software?

Given that problems reported by Rob Weir (ie. the inability to read a simple formula) are so servere, it would be absolutely un-excusable if MS&#039;s test department didn&#039;t find it. 

Therefore the only logic conclusion is that the &#039;issues&#039; are there on purpose.
Mungewell.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let me pose a question&#8230;.<br />
If you are writing a document reader/writer to be compatible with other applications, wouldn&#8217;t you perform at least some testing with the other software?</p>
<p>Given that problems reported by Rob Weir (ie. the inability to read a simple formula) are so servere, it would be absolutely un-excusable if MS&#8217;s test department didn&#8217;t find it. </p>
<p>Therefore the only logic conclusion is that the &#8216;issues&#8217; are there on purpose.<br />
Mungewell.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Embrace, Extend, and Microsoft Wants to Toss IBM Out of ODF &#124; All about MICROSOFT</title>
		<link>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2009/05/06/odf-with-no-excuse/comment-page-1/#comment-1902</link>
		<dc:creator>Embrace, Extend, and Microsoft Wants to Toss IBM Out of ODF &#124; All about MICROSOFT</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 May 2009 01:21:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2009/05/06/odf-with-no-excuse/#comment-1902</guid>
		<description>[...] too is already weighing in.  If we are to believe several reports who all link to Rob Weir’s own thorough review , Microsoft [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] too is already weighing in.  If we are to believe several reports who all link to Rob Weir’s own thorough review , Microsoft [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Embrace, Extend, and Microsoft Wants to Toss IBM Out of ODF &#124; Boycott Novell</title>
		<link>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2009/05/06/odf-with-no-excuse/comment-page-1/#comment-1901</link>
		<dc:creator>Embrace, Extend, and Microsoft Wants to Toss IBM Out of ODF &#124; Boycott Novell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 May 2009 01:09:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2009/05/06/odf-with-no-excuse/#comment-1901</guid>
		<description>[...] too is already weighing in.  If we are to believe several reports who all link to Rob Weir’s own thorough review , Microsoft [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] too is already weighing in.  If we are to believe several reports who all link to Rob Weir’s own thorough review , Microsoft [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.446 seconds -->

