Jeff Gould
October 3, 2008

Standards, open standards and double standards

In my last post I took Big Blue to task for its announcement that it intends to wage war against Microsoft in the world’s standards bodies. The motivation for this bellicose declaration was IBM’s stinging defeat last Spring in its battle to prevent the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) from ratifying Microsoft’s de facto office document standard (OOXML).

IBM charges that Microsoft won at the ISO only because it packed the national standards organizations that make up the ISO membership with its pals.

But the thing that galls me about IBM’s position – and the reason I wrote my post – is not its goody-two-shoes stance about lobbying. No, it’s the flagrant hypocrisy behind this whole open standards campaign. In a nutshell, Big Blue conspicuously fails to practice what it preaches.

Click to read more...

More articles by Jeff Gould, CEO & Director of Research, Peerstone Research

Search

Want to host a Solution Center on Interop News?
For more information, Click Here.

« IBM Is queried by EU following rival's complaint, people say | Main | Ubuntu Linux takes aim at larger role For itself In the enterprise »
Tuesday
22Apr

Mapping Microsoft Windows Server protocols to patents

By Tom Kemp (Centrify Blog)
In today's blog I am going to go "off topic" and discuss interoperability as it relates to Microsoft's recent announcements re: their "interoperability principals" and analyze how recently published Microsoft protocols map to US patents and US patent applications that are held by Microsoft. You may (or may not) be surprised with some of my analysis at the end of this blog post regarding the percentage of the protocols that are actually covered by US patents and the total number of US patents that are in Windows operating system (client and server) that I was able to deduce based on information published by Microsoft.

http://www.centrify.com/blogs/tomkemp/mapping_patents_to_microsoft_protocols.asp


PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments

There are no comments for this journal entry. To create a new comment, use the form below.

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>