Critical questions for national bodies considering OOXML/DIS 29500

A Tale of Two Debates

Eric White's Blog — Sun, 23 Mar 2008 23:00:11 GMT

So I've been in this job for nearly three months. Seems much longer than that. I've been feeling the

re: Critical questions for national bodies considering OOXML/DIS 29500

Cmdr Flibberty Jibbits — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 06:17:27 GMT

Yeah, I do feel intimidated, hence I ended up using nicknames to avoid further attacks and problems for my customers and employers.

It has been a very successful intimidation and FUD campaign, just like the good old days when IBM invented the FUD concept.

I do not blame them, it is a very juicy market, and this is IBM's chance to get a large piece of that slice from you guys so its understandable that they wont take any prisoners.

In the end, both Sutor and Weir are merely tools, the policy was probably agreed at higher levels in the org chart, they are merely the faces charged with executing on the strategy.

Neither of them is particularly brilliant and as such they have had to resort to moderating and censoring any dissenting opinions and post on their sites. "Hypocrisy 101" from Jesper also turned out to be a very funny post (see the comments, where Rob makes a cameo appearance only to leave when the questions get difficult, just as predicted by the very post itself).

Anonymous yours,

Cmdr Flibberty Jibbits.

re: Critical questions for national bodies considering OOXML/DIS 29500

Mark Blafkin — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 22:11:30 GMT

It seems that the vast majority of IBM's finger pointing actually is an attempt to divert attention from its own actions. As Jan van den Berg former SecGen of Ecma writes in his blog today, IBM is throwing stones from a big glass house. He catalogues a number of time aggressive and borderline illegal actions by IBM and its employees on the OOXML vote. Heck, one IBM employee is even advocating a Denial of Service attack on the OOXML community site!

See here:

http://janvandenbeld.blogspot.com/2008/04/hypocrisy.html