UK Agency Files OOXML Complaint, EU Demurs

Christopher Blanc writes to let us know that although BECTA, the British Educational Communications and Technology Agency, has filed a complaint with EU regulators about Microsoft's business practices, the European Commission won't be doing anything particular about it. BECTA claimed that the OOXML format discourages competition. BECTA lodged a similar complaint with the UK Office of Fair Trading last October. A Commission press officer said, "We are already looking into the issues raised in that complaint already and we are not treating it as a formal complaint to us."

Pay off.

[sigterm9 (1192467)]

Wonder what its going to take in order to make it a "formal" complaint. Maybe attach a tazer to that complaint to get some attention from someone there. Or the Microsoft way, just pay the person to make it formal right?

Yes, Prime Minister

[jd (1658)]

Two memorable quotes that seem highly relevent to this discussion from a series that satirises politics so well that it is now part of the training program for British civil servants.

"Britain should always be on the side of law and justice, so long as we don't allow it to affect our foreign policy."

"It is well known that in the Foreign Office an order from the Prime Minister becomes a request from the Foreign Secretary, then a recommendation from the Minister of State, finally just a suggestion from the Ambassador. If it ever gets that far."

(Read the first as an EU guide to business policy, and the second as to why a demand from a British agency can never be a formal request.)

Re:

[MadMidnightBomber (894759)]

A tourist is wandering down Whitehall and seems to be looking for something. He asks a policeman, "Excuse me, which side is the Foreign Office on?"

The policeman looks confused. "Er, ours I think."

Re:Pay off.

[flnca (1022891)]

Just read the last sentence of the article:

"We are already looking into the issues raised in that complaint already..."

Microsoft is currently facing another EUR 899 million fine for not following EU antitrust regulations ( BBC article [bbc.co.uk] ). Recently, I read an article that mentioned explicitly that OOXML is already being investigated as yet another cause of concern. They're looking into it!

Re:Pay off.

[exley (221867)]

You hit the nail right on the head. To me this article is pure flamebait. This is already being investigated, it was mentioned right in the summary, and the article was even said as being "from the we-know-we-know-already dept." for fuck's sake! All that is filtered out by Slashdot groupthink, though, so that we can launch into the latest edition of the Two Minutes Hate.

I've started tagging most MS articles with "twominuteshate" because most of them are just like this one -- they add nothing new to the discussion and are just an excuse for people to get off on an anti-MS rant. Who the hell is running this site, twitter?

Look, I'm no MS apologist but Slashdot has become like the boy who cried wolf -- even when a valid point is raised (instead of just being a flamebait article), I just can't get enthused because I'm tired of the nonsense.

Re:

[tsm_sf (545316)]

Actually /. started off anti-MS because we used to be a collection of IT-type people who actually had to work with their products and deal with their employees. MS has improved a bit over the years but is now, in the minds of a lot of people, simply a known bad actor.

Basically, what you call "two minutes hate" is just recollection. I'm not sure why so many fans of the company cannot see that a lot of us are simply "once burned, twice shy".

Re:Pay off.

[by Anonymous Coward]

Actually, the article is FUD. Becta never asked that it's complaint be
treated as a new complaint. It asked that it be added to the already
existing complaint regarding OOXML. It has been.

Here is what Becta said in its statement announcing it had sent its
complaint already filed with the UK antitrust regulator to the EU
Commission:

"Following discussions with the OFT, Becta has now referred its interoperability complaint and related evidence to the European Commission in support of the Commission's wider investigation."

Someone decided to write an article as if Becta had been denied its
complaint as being redundant. That isn't accurate. It was added to
the other complaint about OOXML, which is *exactly what Becta asked for*.
Somehow it gets turned around and described as some kind of Microsoft
victory.

Disgusted you say? Ditto.

Re:

[CmdrGravy (645153)]

The stated goal of OOXML is to make an XML based file format compatible with all the proprietary binary bits of Office

And that's fine but why would you then want to also claim it should be an international standard ? This is where the disagreement arises because why should anyone else in the world be concerned about solutions to problems which only arise in one outdated set of Office Suites, what benefit does this bring to the international community ? I would say none at all and such things have no place i

Trasform teaching?

[Gat0r30y (957941)]

Microsoft insisted that it is "deeply committed" to education and interoperability. More schools are upgrading to Windows Vista and Office 2007 as they recognize the benefit of "embracing technology to transform teaching and learning,"

I'm not sure I want teaching to get transformed like this. It doesn't sound pleasant.

Re:Trasform teaching?

[cp.tar (871488)]

Microsoft insisted that it is "deeply committed" to education and interoperability. More schools are upgrading to Windows Vista and Office 2007 as they recognize the benefit of "embracing technology to transform teaching and learning,"

I'm not sure I want teaching to get transformed like this. It doesn't sound pleasant.

Even worse, it doesn't sound useful.
To anyone but Microsoft, that is.

There is nothing in either Vista od Office 2007 that I am aware of that can "transform teaching and learning" in any significant way. Not for the better, in any case.
For one, I really don't see what makes Office 2007 better than any other office suite; it's not that high-school kids need all the functions provided in it.

I strongly object to schools becoming training grounds where certain software packages will be taught. Schools should be about teaching basic concepts, not specific programs.
(I wouldn't be ranting that much if Office 2007 didn't break compatibility both in file format and UI.)

Computers can be used in class. In certain cases, they may even be extremely useful.
There is much more to it, however, than Vista and Office.

Re:Trasform teaching?

[vux984 (928602)]

There is much more to it, however, than Vista and Office.

Indeed, it would be best if every assignment required them to shift down to the next PC in a heterogeneous lab... a mix of Vista, 2k, XP, Red Hat, Ubuntu, and OSX units, with a mix of MS Office XP, 2007, Mac Edition, OpenOffice 2, iWork...

Teach kids to learn what a spreadsheet, presentation, document is, and what can be done with them, and they'll figure out how to make it do what they need on each platform.

But such a perfect world would be too much to ask... and not nearly as efficient as 200 stations that all boot from a single disk image on a server... whatever the platform is chosen. I'd prefer it not be windows though... I know my kids will get plenty of exposure to that one regardless. So a bias to a minority platform makes sense in a teaching environment.

I'll settle for cheap and free.

[twitter (104583)]

Here I was thinking that a spreadsheet was just a tool for redundant and boring business accounting and that kids should be taught something more fundamental like ... math.

Either way you look at it, a free spreadsheet will teach the same lesson as the non free one, so the schools might as well save their money and teach kids the benefits of free software. When you know how to use one sheet, you know them all so there's no case for a school to waste money on Office. Businesses should learn this lesson too

Re:Trasform teaching?

[DoofusOfDeath (636671)]

I'm not sure I want teaching to get transformed like this. It doesn't sound pleasant.

Actually, it's a time-honoured approach to teaching. In ancient Greece it was widespread for teachers to bugger their young students.

Re:

[Repton (60818)]

[student raises his hand] "Miss! I'm requesting permission to go to the toilet. Cancel or allow?"

[teacher sighs] "Allow ... but be quick!"

BECTA

[Xest (935314)]

For those that don't know Becta is a UK organisation that acts to advice the nations schools on their IT strategies.

It doesn't have any formal powers from what I understand in forcing schools to or not to use certain technologies however it does produce a list of Becta authorised providers which some schools will choose only to work with.

That said it has a lot of power in the UK educational arena and has always been quite pro-open source on many occasions, it's still recommending against Office 2007 in schools and as such has been quite successful in warding many schools off switching to Office 2007.

It's not the most powerful organisation there is and it doesn't really have any power over standards, but it's very influental in UK education and if Microsoft pisses them off enough I could very well imagine them making an ever stronger drive towards open source to the point they will likely put together resources that make it easy for schools to make the switch.

Some areas of local goverment, schools and in some cases, university policy is largely based around what Becta recommends in the UK.

Power, Position and Authority.

[Odder (1288958)]

BECTA may not have any formal power but they are an authority. They are independent and know what they are talking about. It's not about Microsoft pissing them off, it's about Microsoft offering a bad deal.

There is near unanimity in the technical world that OOXML is not a worthwhile or well written standard. It is not complete or consistent. There is not even a working reference and it is also patent encumbered. That it passed is a textbook example of how position and power can be abused. The ISO is ta

Note the wording

[ymenager (171142)]

Note that the EC commission said: "We are already looking into the issues raised in that complaint"

Reading between the lines, and doing some extrapolation based on previous event, I am guessing that what is going in the their minds is something like that:

"Microsoft think they are above our laws and disrespect our authority by ignoring our rulings. That complaint is redundant because we are already investigating the OOXML mess, since it's going to be great ammunition when we need to bash them on the head AGAIN for continuing to break the rules"

Re:Note the wording

[ianare (1132971)]

Exactly. The commission is already on it, so they modded BECTA's complaint -1 redundant. I think that they may call on BECTA when this goes to court, as I'm certain it will.

Also, BECTA's timing on this is impeccable!

BECTA's complaint arrived at the offices of the Commission's competition department just after Microsoft decided to appeal against the 899 million euro (US$1.3 billion) fine it received earlier this year for failing to honor the Commission's 2004 antitrust ruling against it.

Better school funding

[Bullfish (858648)]

would probably allow for more choice in platform. Since the 80's, both MS and Apple have donated and plowed money and software into schools. Both are proprietary and that's why they did it. To create future market. MS had deeper pockets and over time outspent Apple. That was the 80's. By the 90's, business by then was solidly MS DOS/early Windows and had a flock of people entering the workforce who were MS familiar. This is continuing today. Schools have come to depend on donations of software and computers and if MS wants to pony up vista machines with OOXML Office 2007 packages, they'll take it.

I can't fault a school for taking such a deal (provided they are true donations). MS is just taking advantage of the fact that schools in a lot of jurisdictions are underfunded. For that to change, the electorate has to kick up a stink. In the meantime, if I'm running a school and need money for a new boiler etc, and MS gives me free software and computers, I'm taking it. That's an expense I don't have to worry about. At least the developing world got OLPCs.

OOXML is bad and here's why...

[mlwmohawk (801821)]

I hear a lot of people defending OOXML or oblivious as to why it is really a problem. Let me spell it in no uncertain terms.

Microsoft has illegally used its monopoly position to eliminate competition. This is a fact as found in a court of law.

One of the methods of illegally maintaining their monopoly has been the upgrade treadmill. With regards to MS Office document formats, it works like this: version 'N' of the office software can not read documents created by version 'O.' This forces users of version 'N' to upgrade to version 'O.' -- Profit for Microsoft.

3rd party ISVs are in a similar situation, once they finally figure out how to support the document version in version 'N,' they have to continue development to support vesion 'O.'

This means that 3rd party ISVs and users have a continuing problem maintaining their environment and interoperability without risking incompatibility or continually expending capital.

"Standards" are generally used to stop this exploitation and create a more level marketplace allowing innovation above the standardized foundation, eliminating the constant capital expenditure of keeping up.

The OOXML is a sham. It is nothing more than a continuation of Microsoft's monopoly defacto bullshit standard. OOXML is nothing more than a way to game the system and do nothing more than they already do. Upon release of a new MS office version, they submit their changes to ISO, and move on from there.

It gives users and ISVs no relief. It creates no usable standard. It does nothing to level the market place. It does nothing to help the consumer. It does nothing to help the industry.

Re:

[tokul (682258)]

This forces users of version 'N' to upgrade to version 'O.' -- Profit for Microsoft.

And Microsoft does not sell Office upgrades. Try upgrading, if your SA is expired or you have outdated OEM version. "Upgrade" costs same amount of money as full retail version.

Let me just remind everybody...

[Daniel Phillips (238627)]

the European Commission won't be doing anything particular about it... A Commission press officer said, "We are already looking into the issues raised in that complaint already and we are not treating it as a formal complaint to us."

Remember, these are the same guys [videolan.org] who tried to push through software patents in violation of EU law. The European Commission is distinct from the European Parliament. The commission is not particularly democratic, or apparently even particularly law abiding judging from the software patent affair. It should come as no surprise that the Commission would wish to look the other way in the OOXML affair.

Re:

[lordholm (649770)]

Well, with democratic, if you mean not directly elected, then you are right.

The commission is appointed my the state governments of the EU and scrutinised by the European parliament (and since the last time it is clear that they can kick out single members that they don't like).

Now, compare this with how the state cabinets are elected in a parliamentarian system (as is the case in all of EU), the parliament is elected and they appoint a government. The exact contents of this government is typically arrange

Re:some standards are more equal than others

[genican1 (1150855)]

One doc standard, ODF, is cool; another, OOXML is somehow evil. A truly bizzare thought process.

One of them is actually open.

Re:some standards are more equal than others

[holloway (46404)]

OOXML isn't open due to the poor quality of the specification. Where the specification is vague or completely undefined it means that defacto standards will step in and that's how Microsoft Office maintains its monopoly. Here's my list of example remaining problems in OOXML [iso-vote.com] that will result in the ISO promoting a defacto commercial application, Microsoft Office.

Re:

[hairyfeet (841228)]

Just curious: Do you happen to know if they still have "render like Office 97" in the spec? I knew any kind of "open" standard when it comes from "the king of the funky formats" would be an impossible to follow pile of gibberish that even their own engineers wouldn't be able to make a functioning model out of, but when I read the line "render like Office 97" in the highlights of the first spec I nearly choked laughing! Like there is anyone at Microsoft that can even remember what the legacy voodoo code from

Re:some standards are more equal than others

[holloway (46404)]

Hi,

They've either documented or removed those 'behaveLikeWW8' style flags. As engineering criteria however the documentation hasn't been reviewed to see whether it accurately describes Microsoft Office, and it was added late in the process (early 2008, I think).

What remains however are Microsoft OLE references without documentation or patent coverage, accessibility problems, and huge areas of OOXML entirely without documentation [robweir.com] that mean that ISO OOXML promotes defacto standards.

Read my blog [holloway.co.nz] for a few posts on how no one voting on OOXML saw a final specification.

Re:

[AlgorithMan (937244)]

thanks for the list - i think i got another topic for you: iirc ooxml REQUIRES apps to have the same year 1900 bug (I'll google that)

Re:

[holloway (46404)]

Thanks but I'm not really maintaining a list, those are only examples and I made that document as part of New Zealands ISO process. New Zealand and Canada voted No.

ok, i found something about that

[AlgorithMan (937244)]

Ok, I found something about that issue:
the year 1900 bug has been "resolved" by declaring it non-mandatory...
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/101224 [heise.de]
(german)

Re:

[holloway (46404)]

...which isn't a good fix at all. By adding complexity rather than removing it they're increasing the barrier to market entry. There are hundreds of these so-called fixes that just add more complexity and variation and so you need to implement a lot more code than is necessary.

Re:some standards are more equal than others

[Gat0r30y (957941)]

No need to flame, the french like their small independent booksellers and they moved to protect them.
I don't think anyone really believes that any document standard is evil, it was the process of getting everyone to agree on one or the other that bothered me. It looked to me like MS just bought the commission so it could continue its monopoly.

Re:some standards are more equal than others

[homer_s (799572)]

No need to flame, the french like their small independent booksellers and they moved to protect them.

If the French really like small independent booksellers, why would they need a law to protect them?
Wouldn't most French people patronize the small bookstores thereby driving amazon out of business?

Of course, if it turns out that most people prefer amazon's low prices, then your statement that "the french like their small independent booksellers" would be proven false.

Re:some standards are more equal than others

[Jeremy Erwin (2054)]

If you ever had to write a parser for OOXML, you'd understand.

OOXML is sabotaged.

[Zombie Ryushu (803103)]

Open Office may implement OOXML, in fact it will in version 3.0 out of sheer necessity. But. MS Will implement OOXML incorrectly deliberately. OOXML will have cryptic format parameters like IndentLikeWord95. Only MS will know what that means. So, OO.org will have an OOXML implementation that half works on other platforms, but screws up stuff and OO.org will be playing "Lets see what strange modifcation we have to fix now."

If ODF had become the accepted standard, MS would have had no choice but to start using ODF as well, or Governments would start leaving eventually. By Ram-rodding the Standards process they create a psuedo-standard they control and can break for other platforms. The whole election was a total sham. So there you have it, at least five more years of OO.org playing formate and feature catch up to MS.

Re:OOXML is sabotaged.

[tuxgeek (872962)]

If ODF had become the accepted standard

I'm sorry, I thought ODF already was an accepted standard. It had passed ISO and became a stable and solid format before it was ever implemented in office applications such as K-Office, OOo and Star Office.

Monkey-Boy-Balmer couldn't stand the thought of an even playing field and interoperability between platforms and just had to muck everything up.

But I believe Microshaft have shot themselves in the foot here, this will become apparent with time, as many members of the EU are calling foul over the ISO approval of OOXML. ODF offers file compatibility year after year whereas OOXML will be changed with every software upgrade and future versions will not be able to open and read older versions, and vise versa.

Re:

[aliquis (678370)]

WHY make support for it because you "have to"? Then there are no reason for people to not use it. I do understand people are desperate for users for whatever reason (why give a shit if the software are free anyway?)

But as long as open office supports say doc many people will save in doc, and same in ooxml aswell. Just ignore the format. The less support it have from others the better if you want it to die as a standard. By supporting the format you make it MORE of a standard.

Re:OOXML is sabotaged.

[Darkness404 (1287218)]

Tell me, when has MS ever "opened up" technology except to get people hooked and then change it? Or to destroy a competitor? I can name you many ways in which they did, IE for Unix/Mac which they abandoned as soon as Netscape was dead. On a similar note, ActiveX which in some ways forces people to use Windows and IE because the technology was (incorrectly) added into bank websites and similar. MS never, ever adheres to standards except for a way of making money and as soon as they have enough marketshare they extend and extinguish it.

Re:

[by Anonymous Coward]

Really?

You mean to say that YOU have seen the final version of the OOXML format, when nobody else has and ISO is late in publishing it?

http://www.robweir.com/blog/2008/05/release-ooxml-final-dis-text-now.html#links [robweir.com]

Wow, you must be magic. Or Alex.

Re:

[by Anonymous Coward]

One doc standard, ODF, is cool; another, OOXML is somehow evil. A truly bizzare thought process.

I honestly don't know what you're talking about. Is it bizarre to say that one standard is better than another? To the contrary, I think it would be bizarre to assume that all standards are equally good.

Re:some standards are more equal than others

[mrsmiggs (1013037)]

The actual complaint is not in relation to OOXML but the interoperability of Office 2007 with Open Office et al. BECTA can not recommend Office 2007 because it does not currently support ODF a format widely used by it's cheaper rivals. BECTA's concern here is that they kids (well their parents) on the edge of poverty will have to shell out for Office 2007 and Windows or face being unable to work on their documents at home. If Office 2007 without addons is deployed in a school it is an active barrier to learning and Microsoft should be ashamed for allowing parents to even have to think about the question 'Office 2007 or food?' when they go shopping.

Re:

[m0rph3us0 (549631)]

Everyone has to make a decision between X and food. Goods and services are scarce resources that people need to economize. I'd be willing to bet that most of the parents you are talking about also smoke, buy lottery tickets, and alcohol.

The same parents will also have to make the choice between a computer and food.

It would be interesting to see how many families are rich enough to be able to afford a computer, yet cannot afford Windows 98 and Office 97. Which would enable them to inter-operate with a comput

Re:

[powerlord (28156)]

The actual complaint is not in relation to OOXML but the interoperability of Office 2007 with Open Office et al. BECTA can not recommend Office 2007 because it does not currently support ODF a format widely used by it's cheaper rivals. BECTA's concern here is that they kids (well their parents) on the edge of poverty will have to shell out for Office 2007 and Windows or face being unable to work on their documents at home. If Office 2007 without addons is deployed in a school it is an active barrier to lear

Re:

[Drgnkght (449916)]

so maybe this is just another Eurocrat implementing a "bash America" strategy.

You're mistaken. (I'm being generous.) There are plenty of us U.S. citizens who think it's crap as well. Don't drag misguided patriotism into this.

Re:some standards are more equal than others

[janrinok (846318)]

Slightly off-topic but I couldn't let it pass unchallenged....

a "bash America" strategy.

The complaint regarding free shipping was levelled at Amazon.fr. This company is trading in France and France has the right to make sure that all companies that operate within its borders comply with the relevant laws to ensure a level playing field for all businesses. Now, how do you make that US bashing?

Re:

[maxume (22995)]

The complaint is that the format is a standard in name only (i.e., it is vague and difficult to implement).

Re:So let me get this right

[Danse (1026)]

The complaint is that the format is a standard in name only (i.e., it is vague and difficult to implement).

Actually, it's more than difficult, it's currently impossible for anyone but Microsoft to implement it, and even they can't seem to do it.

Re:So let me get this right

[WiglyWorm (1139035)]

One of the biggest problems with this "standard" is that it specifically allows proprietary add-ons. That's no standard at all. Programs like Ooo.org will still not be able to properly open a Office document because A) you can bet your ass that Microsoft Office will be using any number of proprietary add-ons to the format, thereby screwing up Ooo.org's ability to render it correctly. And B), Microsoft will do like what they ddi with the internet and intentionally render it incorrectly. Since they have the lion's share of the market, this "not to standard" rendering will of course be the standard, and competitors will be forced to guess at how microsoft intentionally broke the standard in order to display Microsoft Office generated OOXML files, or just not display them correctly at all.

When Microsoft was doing this with the web, web developers had to create all kidns of hacks to get their page to display properly in IE, often times breaking the page in Mozilla. The non-techie types, of course, don't blame this on IE, they say that it must be Firefox that doesn't work correctly. It will happen exactly the same way with Ooo.org. It won't be Office that's doing it wrong, it will be blamed by the ignorant on Ooo.org.

I've gone on the record supporting Microsoft before, but OOXML is not one of the times I'll be doing that. This whole thing stinks.

Re:

[prockcore (543967)]

No.. seems I'm sick of the hypocritical and ignorant slamming that's prevalent here on slashdot.

Very few of the complaints about the format are technical in nature, and those that are can also be leveled at ODF.

Personally I don't even use an office suite... and any office files I receive get opened in google docs.

Re:

[compro01 (777531)]

Actually, they are receiving lots of money from MS. Last time I checked, they'd received some 900 million Euros so far in the form of fines from MS for not following EU antitrust regulations, this OOXML bit being part of that.

They ARE looking into it.