Obama Voices Support for ODF

ODF supporters are welcoming presidential hopeful Sen. Barack Obama's promise to put government data online in universally accessible formats should he be elected. "We have to use technology to open up our democracy. It's no coincidence that one of the most secretive Administrations in history has favored special interests and pursued policies that could not stand up to sunlight. As President, I'll change that. I'll put government data online in universally accessible formats," Obama said in a speech at Google's Mountain View campus last week, where he also revealed his detailed IT plan for a more open and technically enabled government.

Marino Marcich, the managing director of the ODF Alliance, applauded the move as a sign of the growing recognition of the importance of the issue. "Public information that can be read and downloaded by anyone without need of a particular brand of software is central to the mission of the ODF Alliance and a key feature of the OpenDocument Format," said Marcich. "We are excited that leading American officials are joining the growing chorus of international and domestic voices that have already recognized the importance of truly open standards."

View: Full Story on eWeek

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

HP Profit Rises as Notebook Sales Grow

Next Story

Procter & Gamble and NBC Create Pet Site

40 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

What happened to the original discussion? And why does everything on neowin end up as polictical crap. When a poitician opens his/her mouth during an election season it's all for political gain, it has nothing to do with what they feel. Ignore all of this political trash and get back to the original discussion. This place makes me sick sometimes.

In the posted statement by Obama I still don't see the reference to ODF. He just said he'll put government data online in "universally accessible formats," and seriously, I wouldn't consider ODF an universally accessible format. Just ask your local businessman what ODF is, he/she'll have no idea.

A universally accessible format is PDF, or DOC/DOCX.

Just ask your local businessman what ODF is, he/she'll have no idea.

What does that have to do with anything? People being uninformed isn't a deal breaker of whether a file format is accessible or not. Maybe you don't mean "accessible" but "well known"? One of these doesn't imply the other.

neither are open pdf is adobe IP and Doc/x is microsoft IP. just because they don't know right at this time won't mean they won't in future, try learning what an open format is.

Digix said,
neither are open pdf is adobe IP and Doc/x is microsoft IP. just because they don't know right at this time won't mean they won't in future, try learning what an open format is.

Actually... PDF is both an open format and standard.

tiagosilva29 said,

You mean, like OOXML?

and yet, that's ok when it's an adobe format, Last I checked MS didn't refuse anyone to implement OOXML though, unlike Adobe.

Jugalator said,

What does that have to do with anything? People being uninformed isn't a deal breaker of whether a file format is accessible or not. Maybe you don't mean "accessible" but "well known"? One of these doesn't imply the other.

accessibility (noun)
1. the quality of being at hand when needed [syn: handiness] [ant: inaccessibility]
2. the attribute of being easy to meet or deal with [syn: approachability] [ant: unapproachability]
from WordNet 2006 (Princeton University)

I'd say the market penetration of ODF readers such as OpenOffice means that ODF doesn't meet 1). The fact that not many people know what ODF is also means that it doesn't meet 2).

In other words, ODF is not "accessible."

Even if everyone insists on hating Microsoft, I still think we should use PDF over ODF, since everyone has Acrobat Reader.

Ledward said,
In other words, ODF is not "accessible."

Even if everyone insists on hating Microsoft, I still think we should use PDF over ODF, since everyone has Acrobat Reader.

Accessble when used with file formats means accessabilty, as in useful by people with vision or hearing imperments.

Right, PDF is the best format for reading, since there are a hlaf dozen PDF readers and/or Adobe's reader for every platform.

It's all a conspiracy! Rockefeller's Trilateral Commission, Council On Foreign Relations, Bilderberg, plus Bohemian Club, are the people who have run the US government.

Youtube and Google Video have everything you need to know about history. Modern media is all owned by big business, and only reports what THEY want YOU to hear.

"The truth sets you free!" Only when the whole corrupt mess of the last 100 years of US Government is exposed will big business stop interfering in the running of "our lives"! The current system in the US is doomed "Amero or not!"

"Last one out of the US, please switch off the lights!" (assuming they are still running! )

or vote Ron Paul

The longer Obama gets media attention, the more clear it becomes: he's a libertarian just like Ron Paul... except Obama doesn't want the rap.

Oh, and didn't the OpenDocument Foundation fold (thus the ODF file format itself)? I thought the ODF Alliance is effectively supporting CDF... or is ODFoundation folding and ODF file format continues???

Nas said,
Oh, and didn't the OpenDocument Foundation fold (thus the ODF file format itself)?

The ODF foundation was not the official organization behind the format. From what I understand it was just two guys. The official name of the format is OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications. OASIS is the official organization. Please check here.

People are funny.

Libertarians tend to be very supportive of Microsoft, because they're big free market capitalist people. They oppose anti-trust laws, and suits against Microsoft as a monopoly.

Most people who, being anti-war, have attached themselves to Ron Paul, have no idea what libertarianism is.

And Ron Paul would get rid of gov't supported health care, Obama wouldn't.

I had the chance to listen to Obama @ Iowa State's campus two months ago. Although IT wasn't a hot button issue then, or probably won't be in his campaign, I think of all the Dems he's closest to having his ducks in a row.

**Shudders at the thought of universal healthcare*** :confused:

kars85 said,
**Shudders at the thought of universal healthcare***

Maybe you'd care to explain this non sequitur? Or at least what it is about universal healthcare that makes you shudder?

Octol said,

Maybe you'd care to explain this non sequitur? Or at least what it is about universal healthcare that makes you shudder?

Octol, because they don't understand it. They think taxes will skyrocket and the whole idea of everyone having healthcare is bad for big pharm. Typical Republican nonsense.

I'll tell you what scares me........
The same government that can't find millions of tax cheats
The same government that can't fund social security
The same government that can't buy anything without billions of cost overruns.
You want me to put our healthcare in the hands of the government?

Why in the hell do you think it costs so much in the USA for healthcare now?
Because there is NO COMPETITION in healthcare. Ask anyone how much it costs for them and they will
say something like "I pay a copay of X dollars", no that is just like asking someone how much they make
and they say "I take home x". They still get it wrong. You don't pay 20.00 to see a doctor. You pay a copay,
and your insurance picks up the rest. PPO's are the worst thing that ever happened. Now you can't go from
one doctor to another, you are "locked" into the PPO. Oh you could go to the other one, but it would be an
out of network cost. Between the bureaucrats, slip & fall lawyers, it's a wonder it doesn't cost MORE to be
sick. I've worked around the health care industry for 17 years, working on office equipment. Every time
there is a new government mandate, my business goes WAY up. Take the stupid HIPPA law. My volumes
increased 15-20% just from the paperwork required for this crap.
Take the "national health care" garbage the Clintons wanted to shove down our throats in the 90's, do you
realize (yes there is documentation of it) that if you paid a doctor that wasn't "assigned" to you, to fix whatever
problem you had, you could be held criminally liable? So much for freedom.
The march to socialism in the United States scares the crap out of me. Here we have countless countries struggling
with democracy, and the USA seems to want to toss into the scrap heap of history, an idea that was started in
1776. Sad, those countless thousands of thousands of people who fought in the Revolutionary war, the Civil War,
WW1, WW2, Korea, Viet-Nam, Grenada, Gulf War1, Gulf War2, did they die in vain?
It's sad, I've talked with a bunch of missionaries who have been in some of the biggest hell holes on earth, and
they wish 2/3 of the complainers in the USA, that think the USA is evil, that we are the problem in the world,
would have a chance to travel overseas and see what poverty really looks like. Perhaps we've had it too good
in the USA for so many years, that we have lost sight how good we have it here!
Freedom and TRUE competition is what will save the health care industry, IF we would unshackle it and let it
work the way it is suppose to. I talk to doctors (GP's)daily. They wish they could spend more time with their patients, but, the way the system doesn't work now, they are lucky to spend 15-20 minutes per patient.
Bring up prescription medicine.....why is some of it so damn expensive? Well, the idiots who don't understand,
think the evil pharmaceutical industry is trying to "soak the public". Some of these medicines take years to
develop, years to win approval, then, if millions of people take it, and less than 1% develop some sort of
reaction, or god forbid die, here come the lawyers who will try to bankrupt the industry.
Unless you unshackle the medical industry, and have some meaningful tort reform, it will only get worse.
Even as bad as it can be at times, if our medical industry was so bad, explain why those that can afford to do
so, come to the USA for some procedures? I know of several who live around the Canadian border who
cross all the time, because the wait on the Canadian side is so long.
Putting the government in charge of anything related to health care just scares the crap out of me.


Octol said,

Maybe you'd care to explain this non sequitur? Or at least what it is about universal healthcare that makes you shudder?

naap51stang said,
I'll tell you what scares me........
The same government that can't find millions of tax cheats
The same government that can't fund social security
The same government that can't buy anything without billions of cost overruns.
You want me to put our healthcare in the hands of the government?

Why in the hell do you think it costs so much in the USA for healthcare now?
Because there is NO COMPETITION in healthcare. Ask anyone how much it costs for them and they will
say something like "I pay a copay of X dollars", no that is just like asking someone how much they make
and they say "I take home x". They still get it wrong. You don't pay 20.00 to see a doctor. You pay a copay,
and your insurance picks up the rest. PPO's are the worst thing that ever happened. Now you can't go from
one doctor to another, you are "locked" into the PPO. Oh you could go to the other one, but it would be an
out of network cost. Between the bureaucrats, slip & fall lawyers, it's a wonder it doesn't cost MORE to be
sick. I've worked around the health care industry for 17 years, working on office equipment. Every time
there is a new government mandate, my business goes WAY up. Take the stupid HIPPA law. My volumes
increased 15-20% just from the paperwork required for this crap.
Take the "national health care" garbage the Clintons wanted to shove down our throats in the 90's, do you
realize (yes there is documentation of it) that if you paid a doctor that wasn't "assigned" to you, to fix whatever
problem you had, you could be held criminally liable? So much for freedom.
The march to socialism in the United States scares the crap out of me. Here we have countless countries struggling
with democracy, and the USA seems to want to toss into the scrap heap of history, an idea that was started in
1776. Sad, those countless thousands of thousands of people who fought in the Revolutionary war, the Civil War,
WW1, WW2, Korea, Viet-Nam, Grenada, Gulf War1, Gulf War2, did they die in vain?
It's sad, I've talked with a bunch of missionaries who have been in some of the biggest hell holes on earth, and
they wish 2/3 of the complainers in the USA, that think the USA is evil, that we are the problem in the world,
would have a chance to travel overseas and see what poverty really looks like. Perhaps we've had it too good
in the USA for so many years, that we have lost sight how good we have it here!
Freedom and TRUE competition is what will save the health care industry, IF we would unshackle it and let it
work the way it is suppose to. I talk to doctors (GP's)daily. They wish they could spend more time with their patients, but, the way the system doesn't work now, they are lucky to spend 15-20 minutes per patient.
Bring up prescription medicine.....why is some of it so damn expensive? Well, the idiots who don't understand,
think the evil pharmaceutical industry is trying to "soak the public". Some of these medicines take years to
develop, years to win approval, then, if millions of people take it, and less than 1% develop some sort of
reaction, or god forbid die, here come the lawyers who will try to bankrupt the industry.
Unless you unshackle the medical industry, and have some meaningful tort reform, it will only get worse.
Even as bad as it can be at times, if our medical industry was so bad, explain why those that can afford to do
so, come to the USA for some procedures? I know of several who live around the Canadian border who
cross all the time, because the wait on the Canadian side is so long.
Putting the government in charge of anything related to health care just scares the crap out of me.


Dont you mean HMO? I am pretty sure with HMO's you are locked into one primary doctor and have to go thru alot to change them on the fly. PPOs plans are not that bad, I like having the freedom to see who I want when I want instead of having to get a "referal". All a referal is just another name for we want more copay. Why do I need to pay $25 just to see a specialist when I already know what my problem is. Now some places will still try to make you get a referal if all the specialist and primary care doctors you see are in the same organization. Now I do agree that insurance and prescriptions meds have gotten way out of hand on pricing. If you ask me they need to be strictor on a few things. Test all people for certain things. If you are a smoker then your copay needs to be 5 times as much as a non-smoker because of the fact you are killing yourself. I look at that the same way as a wreckless driver has to pay more for car insurance. If you are a heavy drinker then the copay needs to be higher as well. Eventually people will have to make a choice, continue to kill yourself and not go to the doctor or stop killing yourself so you wont get sick to have to go to the doctor. Either way it will save insurance companies so much money that the savings could be passed on to those who dont smoke or drink heavily.

Mike Frett said,

Octol, because they don't understand it. They think taxes will skyrocket and the whole idea of everyone having healthcare is bad for big pharm. Typical Republican nonsense.

Ha. Oh, you mean the Dems that got elected this year that touted "we're gonna change things"... they have not done one ****ing thing. Name one. Name one thing the democrats have done in almost the year they've controlled congress.

I'd rather pay for health care, than have the gubment have a hand in that, too. I've talked with people from Canada, and they've told be the health care system there sucks. You have to wait MONTHS to see a doctor. I'm sure you know most about "universal health care" than someone who has had to deal with it first hand. Typical Democrat lip service.

I don't want to work anymore, I want everyone here that's for free health care to put 100 US dollars into my bank account every month. Why should you keep your hard earned money? Let's just spread it around. Sound good? Go back to China, you commie.

RAID 0 said,

Ha. Oh, you mean the Dems that got elected this year that touted "we're gonna change things"... they have not done one ****ing thing. Name one. Name one thing the democrats have done in almost the year they've controlled congress.

I'd rather pay for health care, than have the gubment have a hand in that, too. I've talked with people from Canada, and they've told be the health care system there sucks. You have to wait MONTHS to see a doctor. I'm sure you know most about "universal health care" than someone who has had to deal with it first hand. Typical Democrat lip service.

I don't want to work anymore, I want everyone here that's for free health care to put 100 US dollars into my bank account every month. Why should you keep your hard earned money? Let's just spread it around. Sound good? Go back to China, you commie.

It's not easy to change things when you have a pain in the ass president who's been moving our country backwards for a lot of his time in office.

-Spenser

Doesn't really matter does it.

MS Office is still by far the best office suite, and even when it has ODF support, it'll support OOXML better, being that it's designed for MS office, and MS has farmore experience with what is required for a document format than the relative newcomers of OOo and ODF.

Both formats will probably exist together, and why shouldn't they, why do we need only one document standard.

HawkMan said,
MS has farmore experience with what is required for a document format than the relative newcomers of OOo and ODF.

Maybe a better question is, what is Microsoft's problem with ODF? The spec is done, it doesn't seem to have any problems, and those that may turn up will be promptly fixed for free. What reason does Microsoft have to come along and sabotage it with OOXML?

exactly how are they sabotaging it ? again WHY can't we have two formats ?

I don't see anyone complainign about creating second or tertiary formats when the alternative format is a on microsoft format, but as soon as microsofts makes something to compete and on overall improve quality of all formats in the arena, then it's bad...


As for why MS can't use ODF. why should they. They have a fromat and it's been in design for a long time. they have the experience of workign on office formats longer than any other active office suite/document developers. they know what is needed and they know how to best optimize it for their suite.

In addition as Office grows and they add features, they'll need to add features to the format, MS doesn't want to be held down by the slow routines of a "work for free" body to accept their additions to the standard. In addition, they don't want a third party to be telling them what they can and canon do with office documents made in their own suite.

HawkMan said,
and even when it has ODF support, it'll support OOXML better, being that it's designed for MS office,

Office2007 does not produce valid OOXML documents

HawkMan said,
and MS has farmore experience with what is required for a document format than the relative newcomers of OOo and ODF.

StarOffice started in 1984 and MS Office started in 1989 (Mac).

HawkMan said,
and why shouldn't they, why do we need only one document standard?

Interoperability is essential: ”The ability of two or more systems or components to exchange information and to use the information that has been exchanged.” – IEEE

Open Standards are always better than achieving lock-in (yeah, just in case you didn't read the 6k pages of the specs that's what it is, designed by default): More standards mean less competition!

HawkMan said,
exactly how are they sabotaging it ? again WHY can't we have two formats ?

I don't see anyone complainign about creating second or tertiary formats when the alternative format is a on microsoft format, but as soon as microsofts makes something to compete and on overall improve quality of all formats in the arena, then it's bad...


As for why MS can't use ODF. why should they. They have a fromat and it's been in design for a long time. they have the experience of workign on office formats longer than any other active office suite/document developers. they know what is needed and they know how to best optimize it for their suite.

In addition as Office grows and they add features, they'll need to add features to the format, MS doesn't want to be held down by the slow routines of a "work for free" body to accept their additions to the standard. In addition, they don't want a third party to be telling them what they can and canon do with office documents made in their own suite.


tiagosilva29 said,
Office2007 does not produce valid OOXML documents

Oh that's funny, probably 99% of the web isn't valid HTML/XML/whatever, but we still get by. Even if the documents produced are "invalid" as you say (though I haven't seen any substantiation of that claim), it wouldn't be rocket science for MS to fix their XML generation.

You're just nit-picking without actually bringing forward valid points as to why ODF is "better".

tiagosilva29 said,
StarOffice started in 1984 and MS Office started in 1989 (Mac).

If you can name one (common, not from the 0.01% of the population who is tech-minded) person who uses StarOffice full-time (or OpenOffice, for that matter) then I'll give you a prize. I, for one, can't.
Office 2007 is so much more popular (and better, while we're at it) than OpenOffice.

tiagosilva29 said,
Open Standards are always better than achieving lock-in (yeah, just in case you didn't read the 6k pages of the specs that's what it is, designed by default): More standards mean less competition!

OOXML > ODF not because ODF is a bad standard, but because it has almost 0 market penetration. I've NEVER seen a document in ODF, EVER. Put simply, no one cares about ODF.

Uhm... a level 90 archtroll, who just arose from a 10 years sleep. Sounds challenging, but it really isn't.
Tell you what, go update yourself, and post your conclusions.
But I amicably advise you: if you keep posting ****, I will humiliate you beyond repair.

Post Scriptum: The group I'm with thanks the ridiculous amounts of humor that your post brought in the labs.

So your only real argument was to tell me to shut up using pretty graphics.

that shows the maturity and knowledge of the majority of ODF supporters in a nutshell.


as for you humilitating anyone, the only ones you can humilitate is you and your group by posting further, you have nop arguments, you haven't even countered my arguments, you just tried to walk around them so you didn't have to aswer them.

HawkMan said,
So your only real argument was to tell me to shut up using pretty graphics.

that shows the maturity and knowledge of the majority of ODF supporters in a nutshell.


as for you humilitating anyone, the only ones you can humilitate is you and your group by posting further, you have nop arguments, you haven't even countered my arguments, you just tried to walk around them so you didn't have to aswer them.

High-class morons who doesn't even bother to get informed, specially after countless main page thread about OD/OOXML, deserve to be shut up with fancy graphics.

It's funny that you speak about knowledge because you and your friends seems to know ****, and keep spreading FUD.
Despite being told in every of this god forsaken threads, you come back and make a fool out of yourselves, again, and again. The arguments are still there.

By the way: a search engine is a very powerful tool. If you and your peers we're stupid enough to educate yourselves, this matter wouldn't exist.

But no... you keep making pathetic observations. Entire governments, schools, companies, universities, individuals change to ODF, and yet nobody uses it, according to you.

You don't have arguments, you have ****. After all this time, you didn't even bothered to read the specification. What are you? Switzerland? Is your wife a family lawyer too?

You're trying to believe that Microsoft is capable of providing an truly open standard (hint: CIFS's trap), when it's just not possible. Wake up and smell the coffee. That's not going to happen.

And yeah, if you're saying that having two standards is a good thing... you're idiots. Plain an simple.
Interoperability depends of open standards that require vigilance against abuse, and need maintenance and active work; that leads to free competition. Microsoft does not provided an open standard, they're doubling the efforts of a standardization, that they wish to control (implementable standards).

Jesus ****ing Christ! nop and loop *******.

tiagosilva29 said,
insults and no arguments

Well with that manyinsults instead of a proper argument, I think it's ime for a report.
well luckily for you there is no report function on the coments.

but hey, once you actually get a real rguments and not just throwing insults at people that don't agree with you, fel free to post more, you're entertaining.

HawkMan said,

Well with that manyinsults instead of a proper argument, I think it's ime for a report.
well luckily for you there is no report function on the coments.

but hey, once you actually get a real rguments and not just throwing insults at people that don't agree with you, fel free to post more, you're entertaining.

Report at will, that would be interesting.
You'll get a moderator to check tenths threads of your ODF bashing and FUD, and all the ODF arguments that were posted before. If you can't see them, then you're blinded by ignorance.

tiagosilva29 said,

Report at will, that would be interesting.
You'll get a moderator to check tenths threads of your ODF bashing and FUD, and all the ODF arguments that were posted before. If you can't see them, then you're blinded by ignorance.

You seem to be confusing Bashign with arguing.

So let me clear it up, what you do is bashing, not posting arguments, not doign anything but sayign how crap the other product is without giving any reasona nd tellign any one that disagrees with you in the slightest that they're idiots. It also goes by the name of flaming. And the only known cure is to grow up.

tiagosilva29 said,
Uhm... a level 90 archtroll, who just arose from a 10 years sleep. Sounds challenging, but it really isn't.
Tell you what, go update yourself, and post your conclusions.
But I amicably advise you: if you keep posting ****, I will humiliate you beyond repair.

Post Scriptum: The group I'm with thanks the ridiculous amounts of humor that your post brought in the labs.


Oh, I see. You have no argument, no counter, no nothing.

Only threats.

I'm glad you found my post amusing.

Ledward said,
If you can name one (common, not from the 0.01% of the population who is tech-minded) person who uses StarOffice full-time (or OpenOffice, for that matter) then I'll give you a prize. I, for one, can't.
Office 2007 is so much more popular (and better, while we're at it) than OpenOffice.

I can. I have about a dozen firends and family who use nothing but OOo at home (even some at work, where I'm in the IT staff, as an alternative to piracy). It fits their needs.

They are students, secretaries, clergy, teachers, etc.

OOXML > ODF not because ODF is a bad standard, but because it has almost 0 market penetration. I've NEVER seen a document in ODF, EVER. Put simply, no one cares about ODF.

I have never encountered anyone using OOXML who didn't do it by accident. ODF? Try the EU. (I live in the USA BTW). Some journals and newspapers have even banned the use of OOXML, although they didn't neccessarily give up the old MS Office formats.

What obscure format do Google Docs and other smaller office suites support? ODF. Not one (so far) supports OOXML.

The real winner: the old MS Office formats because that's what everyon's used to