When OOXML was first approved, it looked like Microsoft had succeeded in securing ISO approval for their new standard, despite reports of cheating. Soon, though, it became clear that Microsoft was not going to get ISO approval easily when several countries appealed the approval, saying that ISO rules had been broken.

Now Microsoft has lost a little more ground as the OOXML approval was put on hold. The question now, once again, is what will Microsoft do next?

Microsoft may yet manage to pull out of this situation and get OOXML approved. But today’s news makes it seem just a little more likely that OOXML will fall by the wayside and Microsoft actually will adopt ODF as I discussed in an earlier post.  That would be the better outcome.  Of course, the future is hard to predict and something completely different might ultimately come out of this. It looks like we will just have to wait and see.

When I saw the headline “Brazil Appeals OOXML Too! Asks Approval Be Reconsidered” on LXer today (the full article is on Groklaw) and then saw that India had joined the appeal, too, the question in my mind (other than the “I guess when you bypass the process and essentially cheat you don’t win, Microsoft” one) was what is Microsoft thinking right now? Unfortunately, I don’t know and the few who do know what Microsoft is thinking will probably never tell anymore than the PR lines, but, luckily, there may be some clues.

Going back to before even South Africa appealed OOXML’s ISO approval, Microsoft announced that they would be supporting ODF natively in Office. Most of the speculation I saw suggested that the move was made due to pressures from the EU and from governments wanting ODF support for their own reasons. However, with the recent appeals from three countries, I suspect there may be a different reason.

Microsoft must have known from the second reports of foul play around OOXML approval appeared that there would be many who would fight against OOXML approval. Again, I come back to the question “what is Microsoft thinking right now?”

Suppose the people inside Microsoft decided that Microsoft had to seriously worry about OOXML losing ISO approval. What would Microsoft do? First, downplay ISO approval in the press and, second, prepare for a graceful transition if OOXML fails. What does the second part mean, well, since creating a new standard is out of the question short-term, they would have to adopt another ISO approved standard, for example ODF. See where I am going?

Perhaps Microsoft’s adoption of ODF did not, at least completely, come from outside pressure. Perhaps it came from people inside Microsoft worried about a graceful transition to another format if OOXML did not get ISO approval and was unable to catch on without it. And if Microsoft was worried even before any countries actually appealed the approval, they must be worried now. If they are, that might be the best indication of OOXML’s future, which is not looking good.

Of course, this is all speculation and there are many assumptions here, but it is worth keeping in mind that Microsoft may know more about the appeals that are coming in than we do, so it is worth watching their moves to try and predict the future of OOXML. In my opinion, it would be just fine if OOXML died as a standard and Microsoft adopted ODF. Then we get one universal, truly open format that everyone can use. This would help to break up the Microsoft monopoly without destroying the company and it would spark more competition.

If OOXML looses ISO approval, it looks like Microsoft may adopt ODF, and if Microsoft adopts ODF, everyone wins.

NPR station WBUR Boston has announced that it will begin streaming content in OGG format. This is great news since now another major organization has embraced open formats.

While the people most excited about this announcement are almost certainly going to be the Linux users, everyone should really be excited about it. For some reason it seems like open formats are Linux community vs. big companies when really it should be everyone vs. big companies. Even a person who loves Windows and hates Linux should support open formats. Think about it. What con is there to open standards? What pro is there for proprietary formats?

There is really no reason why the issue of open formats vs. propriatary formats is only a Linux issue. Hopefully through the work of the FSF and through places like NPR adopting open formats, this will become a bigger issue that gets more attention outside of the Linux community.

If you have not already seen the news, the ISO (International Standards Organization) approved the OOXML format, despite numerous cases of what I would consider outright cheating. Just after that, Mark Shuttleworth, Ubuntu’s founder, said “it’s sad that the ISO was not willing to admit that its process was failing horribly,” according to ZDNet. While he said nothing that has not already been said, I am very happy to see Shuttleworth, a prominent technology person, bluntly state that he does not approve of what the ISO did.

Even if you are in favor of OOXML, I cannot imagine that anyone wants the ISO setting a precedent of ignoring blatant rule violations. If OOXML passed without cheating, fine. I would have no objection to that. If, however, cheating is reported and ignored, I do have a problem with that and that is what is happening.

The implications of letting this go without making the ISO either show that there was no cheating or admit that cheating did occur go beyond setting a precedent of allowing the rules to be broken. It also encourages Microsoft to continue their unfair practices.

We cannot afford to let this go. I am glad Mark Shuttleworth has taken a stand and I hope more prominent figures follow.

The EU seems to think Red Hat got it right on Microsoft’s press release (which was about interoperability, read more here) yesterday. According to Linux Insider, the EU has said that, while they would appreciate “any move towards genuine interoperability,” they have seen similar statements from Microsoft in the past and they will not be impressed until Microsoft really does something. Additionally, the EU stated that Microsoft’s recent action “does not relate to the question of whether or not Microsoft has been complying with EU antitrust rules in this area in the past.”

That is a lot of bad news for Microsoft, which was presumably hoping to get the EU off their backs with their recent press release. It looks like the EU will not go easy on Microsoft in their current investigations no matter what and unless Microsoft really does what they said they would, it looks like the EU will continue to keep the pressure on Microsoft.

The real question now is what Microsoft will do next. There are basically two options for Microsoft, really do what they said or deal with the EU in some other way. Or else they could just send some expensive laptops the way of the EU courts…

Earlier today Microsoft announced plans to increase interoperability and be more friendly to open-source software, but, as Red Hat points out, it is just a press release and does not guarantee that everything they say will happen will happen soon, or ever. After years of pressure from the European Union (EU), Microsoft has announced that they will not sue non-commercial open-source developers, make efforts to improve interoperability, and publish APIs for many of their products meaning, for example, that plugins for additional formats in Office could be added.

All of this sounds great, but as Red Hat’s responce to Microsoft’s statement points out, “we’ve heard similar announcements before, almost always strategically timed for other effect. Red Hat regards this most recent announcement with a healthy dose of skepticism.” Although I would like to think Microsoft was truly planning on being more friendly to open-source software, I just cannot help thinking that Red Hat is right. Until Microsoft really does what they say they will do, it is just a publicity stunt to get the EU off their backs. I just hope they really do follow through.

Those who closely followed the first OOXML standardization vote (in which OOXML was not standardized, but was given a chance to make changes and be voted on again) will remember that shortly before the vote, many Microsoft partners joined the group of voting members in the standardization process and voted in favor of OOXML. At the time, I felt that that tactic seemed scummy, as many Microsoft tactics do, but I did not think legal action would be taken against them for it. Now it has, or at least it might.

The EU, continuing to keep a close watch on Microsoft, is beginning an investigation into Microsoft’s actions in the first OOXML vote to decide if anything illegal was done, according to the Standards Blog. Although it is not clear if this investigation will have any impact on Microsoft or the OOXML vote (the author of the Standards Blog says he believes that this investigation will not have enough time to effect the upcoming vote,) the more attention is brought to bear on Microsoft’s questionable practices the better. The more these issues are put in front of people, the more likely it is that Microsoft’s opposition will become unified to fight back against these unfair practices.

A lot of people (myself included) have been closely following OOXML’s progress to becoming an international standard and speculating on its chances of success. I suspect, however, that standardization will not decide OOXML’s death or life, instead the decision will already be clear by the time the ISO finally gets around to voting on it again.

This post makes a very good point about the state of OOXML. As it says, it is simply not safe to save your files in the OOXML format, since it is still being changed and has not yet been adopted (officially or unofficially.) Right now, there is no good reason to save documents in the OOXML format and unless this somehow dramatically changes in the next months, OOXML will already be on the way to death by the time it has another chance at becoming a standard. In short, the OOXML war, much like the Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD war, will eventually come down to how many people use each format, not which format becomes the standard. In this respect, OOXML is fighting an uphill battle. Formats already exist that people are (for the most part) happy with, so why should anyone go to the effort of converting everything into OOXML?

For me, the only remaining question is could standardization create a significant boost to OOXML’s adoption to pull it back from death? It is hard to say what the answer to this question is. If it did make a significant enough impact, it would be through governments, whose documents must remain accessible for tens or hundreds of years. Only time will tell the answer to this question, if time does ever tell the answer. It is quite possible OOXML will not receive ISO standardization anyway.

It may be too early to say if OOXML will be adopted or not, but I think it is fair to say that international standards will only be a small part of the picture.

For anyone not familiar with the OOXML standardization process that has been going on, OOXML is Microsoft’s new office document format and the ISO is the International Standards Organization. Previous, OOXML was rejected by the ISO, but it will be voted on again in the future.