[SASAG] Proprietary Formats on Public Mailing Lists -- Was: Re: System Admin Job opportunity

Michael T. Halligan michael at halligan.org
Sat Sep 1 14:43:06 PDT 2007

On Sep 1, 2007, at 12:37 AM, Jim Hogan wrote:

> Benjamin,
> Darn.  I told myself that I would keep my yap shut, SASAG-wise, for a
> year or two.
> On 8/31/07, Benjamin Krueger <benjamin at seattlefenix.net> wrote:
>> * Mohsen Banan-vendors (vendors at mohsen.banan.1.byname.net) [070831  
>> 22:58]:
>>> More like good wine going down the wrong throat.
>>> ...Mohsen
>> I see that not everyone gets past their "immature anti-Microsoft  
>> zealot" stage.
> Me, I like to think that I don't spend my time being "anti" much of
> anything and I, perhaps unlike Mohsen, might just ignore things like
> DOC attachments. But I figure it is worth pointing out the irony that
> this SASAG discussion is taking place at a time when then monopoly in
> question is busy as a beaver buying votes in pursuit of the *next*
> (hoped-for) single-vendor DOC "standard":
> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070829070630660
> Oops.
> But if you *like* having a single company control your IT destiny, I'm
> not sure that anything I could say would matter.
> Jim

If the market fails to gain enough adoption over Microsoft's  
proprietary format, then is it Microsoft's fault that they succeeded  
while others failed? Beyond a few thousand geeks who don't like  
Microsoft, does anybody really care?As we sit in our ivory towers of  
technical knowledge, we forget that we are not the norm. I doubt the  
average person really wants to mess around with new file formats,  
when the one they've been using for over a decade works just fine for  
them.  RMS is not god, he's just some loudmouthed hippy who could  
learn some manners and improve his hygiene.

More information about the Members mailing list