MUST READ: Congress demands answers from Google over Glass privacy concerns

Topic: Emerging Tech

Texas Democrats push ODF standard

Summary: Texas Democrats are trying to make open source into a partisan issue.

Dana Blankenhorn

By Dana Blankenhorn for Linux and Open Source |

Texas Democrats are trying to make open source into a partisan issue.

Their vehicle is HB 481, authored by Marc Veasey of Ft. Worth, who has sought to make a reputation as a thorn in the side of Texas' ruling Republicans, supporting hate crimes legislation, mass transit, and the Obama stimulus.

That is another way of saying the bill's chances fall somewhere east of slim and west of none.

What's amusing are some of the arguments against the bill, as compiled by Aman Betheja of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

The main argument, advanced by a Microsoft lobbyist, is that the bill is anti-competitive, and would be "like choosing Betamax over VHS."

There is also a fear that users would have to replace their current software, although I believe Microsoft has been pretty scrupulous in supporting the Open Document Format.

It's the fact that this is being discussed at all that is newsworthy. The rise of open source as a partisan issue, whether pushed by Tories in England, Hindu nationalists in India, or Democrats in Texas, has been remarkable.

Topics: Emerging Tech, Open Source

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

47 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion

  • MS view is anti-competitive when using an open standard

    Bet they would not say that if the bill supported their format.
    LittleGuy
    Reply Vote

  • the bill is supported by smart Texans

    Texas gave us some of the best people in the nation.
    It is no surprise that astute people from there see the advantages of ODF and OSS, unlike other states.
    Linux Geek
    Reply Vote

    • ...and I'm one of them...

      However its quite possible the zombie conservative voters in this state will see that he is a Democrat and thus any legislation proposed by him must be inherently evil and anti-capitalist. Nevermind if its pro-consumer and might cut government spending.
      storm14k
      Reply Vote

      • LOL

        There are as many Zombie Democrats as there are Zombie Conservatives in existence. That said, I am Conservative, I use Linux, I believe in Open Standards AND actual competition. So, how do I fit into the cookie cutter you labeled an entire state with?

        As I said earlier, Conservative does not always mean Republican (Bush making the DOJ toothless being an example where he was anti-capitalist). Texas is very conservative, and pretty smart too. :D

        TripleII
        TripleII-21189418044173169409978279405827
        Reply Vote

        • I think this was my point....

          Open source has been pushed politically from
          many different points on the political spectrum.
          Whoever is out of power gravitates toward it as
          politically appealing.
          DanaBlankenhorn
          Reply Vote

  • Socialism just keeps rearing its ugly head

    All of this (GPL flavored) Open Source push within the government is ridiculous. Anyone who has ever put any thought into it, knows that proprietary technologies are what push the envelope in the advancement of technology and commerce ? from biotechnology to the software industry. Proprietary businesses produce orders of magnitude more jobs, taxes, investments, innovation, etc. Even businesses that use Open Source technologies (E.g. Red Hat) depend on proprietary technologies and business processes to generate profits and pay their bills.
    P. Douglas
    Reply Vote

    • Open standards that force competition on the merits, benefits the whole

      country, not just a few select large corporations. The ability of any one company to extract a percentage from any market without competition does NOT benefit the public in general. Open standards prevent that.
      DonnieBoy
      Reply Vote

      • I'm all for open standards, however ...

        ... that doesn't seem to be the issue here, since <a href=http://www.star-telegram.com/metro_news/story/1266591.html>the legislator didn't advocate moving towards OpenXML or ODF, but rather adopting ODF and supporting Open Source applications</a>.
        P. Douglas
        Reply Vote

        • Precisely to save taxpayer money!! Supporting two standards would be very

          expensive. And supporting the rats nest called OOXML would also result in wasting taxpayer money. He was right to pick the only consensus standard that was passed unanimously and will result in the lowest cost to taxpayers.
          DonnieBoy
          Reply Vote

          • Right, save money

            by forcing users to adapt software that caters to the lowest common denominator.

            GuidingLight
            Reply Vote

          • Even Microsoft can not name anything lacking in the ODF standard that is

            needed for MS Office.

            The truth is that ODF contains all that is needed to represent documents, it is NOT rocket science. MS formats are a rats nest. Plain and simple.
            DonnieBoy
            Reply Vote

    • I've got a custom made titanium mountain bike to sell you.

      Fifty bucks. It's all legal too. I should mention, though, that if you need any attachments or parts you'll have to get them directly from me. I use only standard parts, my own standards that is. A new seat will cost you $350. I've also managed to influence the Government to declare my standard as a national standard. Soon the other bike makers will have to license their parts from me.

      Sound like a good deal?
      kozmcrae
      Reply Vote

      • Using OpenXML ...

        [i]I've also managed to influence the Government to declare my standard as a national standard. Soon the other bike makers will have to license there parts from me.[/i]

        Using OpenXML (which is an Open Standard) does not require you to pay a licensing fee.
        P. Douglas
        Reply Vote

        • If Microsoft ever finally implements the standard, we might talk about it.

          In any case, the OOXML standard is a rats nest and would cost Texas a lot more to implement.
          DonnieBoy
          Reply Vote

        • Not one program in existence supports it.

          Office is a third cousin twice removed from the ratified ECMA standard. Microsoft themselves has stated they are under "no obligation" to support what changes may come, and as far as I know, they are still 3 years away from coming up with ANYTHING resembling a valid standard. (Still slogging through the 3K comments, and VERY VERY low priority)

          ODF, however, is supported by StarOffice, OpenOffice, GoogleDocs, Abiword, LotusNotes, KOffice and soon (sooner than OOXML) Office 12 (name?). This is off the top of my head, there are probably 6 more.

          So, which one makes sense?

          TripleII
          TripleII-21189418044173169409978279405827
          Reply Vote

          • That is not true

            [i]Office is a third cousin twice removed from the ratified ECMA standard.[/i]

            Not according to <a href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_Open_XML>this article</a>. The following is a quotation from the article.

            [i]Starting with Microsoft Office 2007, the Office Open XML file formats (ECMA-376) have become the default file format of Microsoft Office, the currently market-leading office suite. Microsoft Office 14 will be the first version to implement the ISO/IEC IS 29500 compliant version of Office Open XML.[/i]

            Therefore Office 2007 is ECMA (Open Standards) compliant, and Office 14 which should be released next year, will be ISO (Open Standards) compliant.

            <a href=http://www.openxmlcommunity.org/applications.aspx>This web site</a> provides information on third parties who support OpenXML. The following is a quotation from the site:

            [i]In Germany alone there are over 160 cataloged [German] solutions supporting Open XML.[/i]
            P. Douglas
            Reply Vote

          • In other words, MS still does not support the OSI standard! But, in any

            case, it would be foolish and expensive to support two standards. There is a ton more support for ODF, including from MS, and it is a much better standard than the rats nest MS document standards. Texas will get a lot more competition and lower prices with ODF.
            DonnieBoy
            Reply Vote

          • Not one certified compliant.

            There is NONE, not ONE ISO certified compliant solution. You admit it, so why would you mandate on a standard that NOBODY is compliant to yet?

            The standard is not yet even completed with a final version published. We are still waiting for the final version. (A further perversion of the process, 1 month is the mandated time to release a fast tracked standard, but I digress). You are right, Office IS the proposed ECMA standard when it was submitted.

            You do remember the 3000 changes and massive rewrites and proposed amendments right? MS wanted it rubber stamped so that they could convince buyers they followed a standard. I will believe Office is compliant when an independant analysis verifies compliance. Regardless, where can I pick up this Office Suite today? What do you mean it's currently vaporware?

            Their plan was a failure, get it rubber stamped with no changes, claim it's a standard, lock people in forever in the name of an unimplemetable standard. That plan failed because the standards process, as corrupted as it was, reworked the entire thing.

            TripleII
            TripleII-21189418044173169409978279405827
            Reply Vote

        • There is no "OpenXML" standard

          The term you are looking for is "Office Open XML" (OOXML), a name probably chosen for being easily confused with the terms "Open Office" and "XML".

          Even Microsoft can't write documents that are compliant with the voluminous OOXML standard, so there is no chance that anyone else can. The probability of interoperable OOXML documents is extremely close to zero.

          I think that was the whole point of OOXML - MS could claim their document format complies with an open standard, yet they can continue to maintain essentially proprietary file formats.

          As an example, Microsoft's implementation of ODF if incompatible with nearly every other implementation.

          Open stadnards [b]do not[/b] guarantee interoperability.
          Fred Fredrickson
          Reply Vote

    • Your opinion and

      not a proven fact. But you know what they say about opinions.
      bjbrock
      Reply Vote
CNET Join | Log In | Privacy | Cookies Close