Microsoft buying Yahoo?

So I started going through my RSS feeds this morning, and I saw that a big news item was Microsoft's $44.6 billion offer to buy Yahoo.

I'm not sure how I feel about this. If the purchase goes through, I hope MS won't screw up flickr.

I think Yahoo uses open source technology for a lot of their services. I'd hate to see that change, too.

Someone posted an interesting comment at Linux Journal. The commenter pointed out that Yahoo owns Zimbra, a potential Exchange competitor. I wonder how much that contributed to Microsoft's offer.

OpenDocument Foundation reversal

At times on this blog I've discussed the open document format (ODF), an XML-based file format intended to be used in office productivity software (word processors, spreadsheets, and the like). This file format would be a completely open standard, and would compete with proprietary file format like those used in Microsoft Office.

A major proponent of this format, the OpenDocument Foundation, has evidently recently decided to dump ODF in favor of an obscure alternative called the Compound Document Format, developed by the World Wide Web Consortium. So now I really don't know what to think. I wonder if the foundation will change its name.

Microsoft (with their OOXML format) must be having a good laugh about this.

OOXML Monkey in the Wrench

I've been meaning to write about the OOXML nonsense, but just haven't had time. Microsoft failed in its recent (but probably not final) attempt to have OOXML listed as an ISO standard file format. Groklaw has the details of the vote.

The Groklaw article also discusses Microsoft's version of the results--Microsoft tried to spin it as a success. When I first skimmed Microsoft's press release (which I saw on Google News before reading any intelligent analysis), I was fooled into thinking that OOXML had passed.

There has been a lot of criticism of the ISO process, accusations that Microsoft has effectively purchased the votes that they did get. Hopefully ISO can reform some of their processes before the next vote on OOXML (which I think happens in early 2008).

e-voting source code disclosures

Efforts by Microsoft and a few vendors of e-voting technology recently failed to amend New York state legislation in a way that would have weakened source code escrow provisions.

New York state passed legislation in 2005 requiring that e-voting software source code be placed in escrow for examination. Microsoft (whose Windows operating system is used by some e-voting products) lobbied to amend that legislation. This amendment would have exempted code not specifically designed for voting technology. I suppose this would have made it easier for Microsoft and the e-voting vendors to claim that most or all of their code is to generalized to be considered voting-specific, and would therefor be exempt from examination.

California has similar source code disclosure provisions regarding e-voting technology. One e-voting vendor (Election Systems & Software) had been holding out for months, but recently (and grudgingly) turned over their source code to the California Secretary of State.

Looks like event Presidential candidate John Edwards is getting into the act.

ODF v. OOXML

ONLamp has a pretty good article about the differences between ODF and OOXML. ODF (Open Document Format) and OOXML (Office Open XML) are both XML-based file formats which can be used to store word-processing documents, spreadsheets, etc. There is fierce competition for adoption between these two formats, notably in the arena of long-term government document storage. This competition is controversial for a number of reasons, including the fact that OOXML is a Microsoft product.

A google search for 'OOXML "men in black"' turns up quite a few hits regarding allegations of Microsoft lobbyists and lawyers trying to sway state legistatures (like Florida) toward OOXML.

Microsoft Protection Rackets

There's an interesting linuxtoday.com article about some of the recent patent indemnification deals Microsoft has signed (Novell, Xandros, Linspire, and LG). Actually, it's more about the companies who've gone on record saying they'll have no part of it (Red Hat, Canonical [Ubuntu], and Mandriva).