Today I experienced two moments of bewilderment, the second one mixed with dismay. At first, when I googled for something unrelated, on one of the returns I saw a forum post where someone said "Icaza himself says that OOXML is superb". Well, first I was amazed, then I shrugged, and wrote it off as a troll, and continued with my other tasks. Two hours later I remembered again.
So I googled once more. This time simply for OOXML +superb. And sure enough, I found this (may also be found here).
The Google group where this quote (which is only 5 days old) is from, is setup by Miguel himself, specifically to provide a feedback forum for his blog. Here is the quote. The emphasize was added by me:
- OOXML is a superb standard and yet, it has been FUDed so badly by its competitors that serious people believe that there is something fundamentally wrong with it. This is at a time when OOXML as a spec is in much better shape than any other spec on that space.
Besides, it is always better to have two implementations and then standardize than trying to standardize a single implementation.
Come on, Miguel! Please tell us this is not what you said. This must be a forgery. Google must have f+cked up with its archive. Microsoft hackers must have cracked the hosting server. Or your email account, and they posted under your name. Or you didn't mean it. You had a terrible headache that Wednesday night. You thought it's April Fool's Day, and it was a good joke. You just wanted to test if it gets noticed.
Whatever. Just tell us that it is not what you really think about OOXML.
Update: So it's true. It IS his opinion, and it is not misrepresented. -- I'm speechless. Returning to the base office after a long workday spent on a customers' site, not only do I find my blog entry having been submitted by someone to Slashdot and to Digg, but also Miguel has now personally confirmed above quote in a long Slasdot comment. If you want to read all of his arguments, be sure to search for 'miguel (7116)' on each of the expanded Slashdot pages. I'm tired now, and I myself haven't yet read all of his reasonings (and probably never will). I'm also speechless... (oh, I said so already...).
Syndicate Blogs
C'mon; Get a life!
This is coming from a Linux lover (Not synonymous with Microsoft hater!):
Microsoft's work over the past few years have shown creativity, maturity and stability. From Vista, to Office 2007, and less heard about SteadyState, the useful Powertools, DirectX, and more; Microsoft undeniably has some of the best talent in the world working for it. I dare someone to argue that. Some of you babbling imbeciles make it seem as though Miguel owes it to the community to bash anything Microsoft, regardless of its actual worth.
The Linux community needs to grow some balls, really.
Why are you reading it then
Let's see, Microsoft has raised the bar in what we expect from computers to a degree. However, they've done it with some of the most reprehensible, immoral conduct of any large corporation. Past conduct is always a good indication of what to expect in the future. Do you really want to back and support a company with the history of Microsoft's conduct.
--
Bugz
Not only that
...but also Miguel started a very unelegant attack to a reader of "cofradia digital" when that user commented on the news of Novell presenting its implementation of Microsoft's "Silverlight" for SuSE Linux as "the next source of litigation", Miguel started an attack in a sarcastic tone mocking him as "feeling like you are going to save the world", "new generation of linux people who don't code but have strong (and stupid) views" and calling him "Batman" and "Clark Kent".
Miguel did a great job by creating and promoting Gnome and may even be a great programmer but his good contributions in the past do not precludes him from making mistakes.
I think that Miguel, along with Novell has now plainly become a Microsoft Shill.
Here is the unfortunate episode (in spanish):
http://cofradia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=comments&op=showreply&tid=86730&sid=20217&pid=86723&mode=&order=&thold=#86730
Miguel is a fucking idiot, i
Miguel is a fucking idiot, i lost all the respect i had for this guy.
i hate him, he should be working for M$ and not for FOSS.
Slashdotted
/. has picked up on this, and Miguel has replied.
Dugg
http://digg.com/linux_unix/Miguel_de_Icaza_Gnome_creator_linux_developer_and_OOXML_supporter
wtf
I suppose the implication is that there is only one implementation of ODF but two of OOXML?
I dunno, the second sentence seems like a non-sequitur.
...Well and now I read the message it seems that the second paragraph isn't actually related to the first paragraph but refers to something else in thread. Maybe?
Anyways I suppose years of being of Mono developer has made him a Microsoft apologist. Really from what I hear C# is a legit standard, yet I hear folks who have what sounds like an ideological opposition to C# (which is pretty normal for languages anyways).
About C# and Mono
Okay, here goes:
C# is a legit ECMA standard, as far as I can see. I don't remember if it was accepted by ISO or not, but it's okay. As is the standard for the CLI written underneath it.
The problem with Mono and what Miguel is doing, is that Mono is NOT just the C#/CLI standard; it includes Microsoft's entire .NET API (which ISN'T part of the standard) and VB.NET, and other components like that. And now Silverlight (which is also Microsoft's tech). I don't believe it's C# people necessarily are opposed to (personally, I think C# > VB.NET, anyway), it's the idea of pushing .NET deep into Linux and giving Microsoft the FUD leverage they need to start with the patent BS again. I mean, people aren't complaining about DotGnu, which is also an implementation of C#...
Re: About C# and Mono
C# and the CLR are an ECMA standard, but were never proposed as an ISO standard.
The problem with Mono and what Miguel is doing, is that Mono is NOT just the C#/CLI standard; it includes Microsoft's entire .NET API (which ISN'T part of the standard) and VB.NET
So just don't use those parts if you think there is a problem with them. C# is just another programming language, and the CLR is just another virtual machine. If you like the technology, then use it for Free Software, and if you don't then use something else. Nothing to get particularly worked up about.
I mean, people aren't complaining about DotGnu, which is also an implementation of C#...
As they aren't complaining, it might suggest there is something slightly irrational going on
We all must earn our pay.
We all must earn our pay. Sad but true.
--
japc