Microsoft Interoperability - How well are they doing
From Schoolforge-UK
According to Microsoft's web site: "Interoperability is all about different software products working together. Microsoft embraces interoperability—through our products today, with the new generation of XML-enabled software, through technology and IP licensing, and in our partnerships with companies that are dedicated to helping software products work together."
How well are they doing? I've been Googling around a bit, and the answer from Microsoft's point of view seems to be: pretty well. To a layman, they seem to be making all the right noises. From an open source point of view, however, the picture is very different. Here's an update on three fronts: XML document formats, server interoperability, and software patents.
XML Document Formats
Microsoft has announced that it will introduce new XML-based file formats for its Excel, PowerPoint and Word applications when the company launches its Office 12 software package next year. The default formats use XML and ZIP, and they will be fully documented. Anyone will be able to get the full specs on the formats and there will be a royalty free license for anyone who wants to work with the files.
The sad part is that Microsoft's new XML document formats aren't the same as the wide-open, shareable, portable, standardized XML office document format, the OASIS Open Document Format recently developed by the rest of the world. As Paul O'Grady notes in his weblog: "Good intentions and such aside, however, if Microsoft really wants to demonstrate that they're open they'll go one step further and support the Open Document Format alongside their own non-independent version."
Update: eWeek has this analysis of the Microsoft XML licence.
JohnIngleby 08:27, 19 Jun 2005 (BST)
Server Interoperability
You're probably aware that Microsoft just managed to avoid punitive fines from the European Commission by presenting fresh proposals on how the company intends to implement the Commission’s March 2004 Decision in the field of interoperability (see IP/04/382). The March 2004 Decision required Microsoft to disclose complete and accurate interface documentation which would allow non-Microsoft work group servers to achieve full interoperability with Windows PCs and servers.
The bad news is that the EU's competition commissioner agreed to exclude open-source software developers from the benefits of Microsoft's disclosures until after the company's appeal is concluded, which is likely to be several years away. The reasons are well explained in this eWeek article but the result is that open source projects such as Samba must continue to use reverse-engineering techniques to ensure GNU/Linux interoperates with Windows. Unless of course there are software patents involved...
Software Patents
Microsoft has joined in the general outcry over the state of the US patent system, while at the same time playing a full part in the industry lobby that is promoting the EU Commission's software patents directive.
Regular readers of these pages will know that the EU directive is phrased in such a way that while software "as such" is excluded from patentability, other clauses contain exceptions that render this exclusion almost completely meaningless. If the present wording of the directive is passed in July, thousands of software patents already granted by the European Patent Office (many to Microsoft) will acquire the legal status they do not presently enjoy. If the directive is passed into law, many people see a bleak future for open source software in Europe. It's that serious.
According to FFII The second reading of the directive will take place in the EU Parliament quite soon, most probably in July. Amendments to the directive may still be made at the second reading, and they're being co-ordinated by Michel Rocard, the former French prime minister. However, they will require an absolute majority of MEPs, i.e. 367 votes.
With very few honorable exceptions, British MEPs of all three main parties were remarkably supine over supporting amendments in the directive's first reading in September 2003. You can find who your MEPs are here, and paper letters (headed if possible) to them will make a difference. You could tell them about the threat to open source, and the money that can be saved by schools using open source.
JohnIngleby 12:34, 14 Jun 2005 (BST)
