Matthew French wrote:
> 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.
I meant that since everyone is using the same software, no-one
has any inter-operability issues. So the internal document format
of the market leader is a "standard" in that everyone uses it.
> 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.
That's kind of what I was getting at...
Cheers,
Dave.
--
David Neary,
Marseille, France
E-Mail: bolsh at gimp.org
Maintained by the ILUG website team. The aim of Linux.ie is to
support and help commercial and private users of Linux in Ireland. You can
display ILUG news in your own webpages, read backend
information to find out how. Networking services kindly provided by HEAnet, server kindly donated by
Dell. Linux is a trademark of Linus Torvalds,
used with permission. No penguins were harmed in the production or maintenance
of this highly praised website. Looking for the
Indian Linux Users' Group? Try here. If you've read all this and aren't a lawyer: you should be!
