[ILUG] word processors

[Matthew French]

David Neary suggested something about Microsoft and standards:
> Only because Microsoft destroyed the opposition to the extent
> that MS Office is the only office package that has a user base
> worth talking about, it has to be said. But MS are good for
> setting standards, it's true :)

Eh? Depends what you mean by a standard.

<rant>
MS are good in that they provide a reference implementation that is an exact
1-to-1 mapping with the standard (in other words, the implementation is the
standard). But there is no documentation, no opportunity to suggest
modifications, no alternative implementation that could also be considered
"standard". Microsoft standards also tend to evolve without rhyme or
reason - "coolness" and "featuritis" being more important criteria than
sound, scalable, secure design.

I would think the words "proprietry" and "standard" are almost opposites.
</rant>

Now POSIX is a standard, and Linux has used that to great effect. Of course,
it is a standard characterised by political in-fighting and back stabbing,
but that is all behind us now. We hope...

Talking of which, some arb quotes about standards and committees:

"The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them."

"A camel is a horse designed by committee."

:)

- Matthew (who is supposed to be writing a standards document at the moment)



_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com