Microsoft Office monopoly of absolute good bad – Microsoft Office, office software – office supplies

Microsoft Office good for 95% of users are using, which can not be satisfied with. However, if the global Office Software Market, leaving only the Microsoft Office, definitely not good. Little one would like to be able to understand the future of the world’s computers can only install Microsoft Office, but there is no other choice, even if it’s another powerful feature, users will also have to be feeling the pain of oppression and exploitation.

In fact, Microsoft has attempted to monopolize the global market position, PC operating system so, Office even more so. In “. Doc”, “. Xls”, “. Ppt” such as the de facto standard document format, Microsoft has developed a new document format “OfficeOpen XML (OOXML)”, doing their best to this format made to international standards, in order to continue to maintain its market dominance.

Originally, Microsoft wanted to ISO fast-track, to the OOXML put on international standards of legitimacy.

Unexpectedly, September 2, 2007, the International Organization for Standardization in the first ballot was not adopted, Microsoft’s dreams shattered, and even the United States abstained in the vote, enough to prove that the purpose of its monopoly unpopular. However, Microsoft’s ambitions alive, is pinning its hopes on March 29 this year, is once again to vote.

Now, OOXML as an international standard has not yet known, but one thing is sure, once Microsoft’s dreams come true, it would be a tragedy for the global software market.

From the software industry perspective, if OOXML as an international standard, Microsoft’s global dominance in desktop operating systems to consolidate.

Market research firm NPD study shows that in the global office software market, Apple’s iWork accounted for 2.7%, Corel’s WordPerfect 1.6%, 95% of Microsoft Office. Experts pointed out that, OOXML obvious platform dependence, some conduct may be achieved in Windows, but Mac, Linux, Unix or other platforms but can not be achieved. This means that, OOXML on the Windows operating system other than exclusion of all competitors can only hope that OOXML disappointed, and the efforts of the EU anti-Windows monopoly is likely to come to naught.

Domestic office software from the fate of view, if OOXML as an international standard, national standard UOF necessarily constitute a fatal threat to China-made office software, Linux operating system and CPU will face disaster made. Since OOXML congenital exclusive nature of domestic software does not meet the format specifications, after a few years, “compatible” Microsoft Office for all the input and efforts will come to naught. More seriously, OOXML will become the information industry of our own plans to achieve the greatest obstacle to national security will pay a heavy price for OOXML. To do this, sorry Ni Guangnan that China should have its own operating system, the development of China’s information industry standing height of view, Microsoft should not vote.

Reason why we oppose the OOXML as an international standard, but also because it is itself an extremely deceptive: First, OOXML dressed in an “open standard” coat, is not open. Domestic Office is compatible with Microsoft Office97, 2000,2003, XP and other formats, but including Microsoft’s OOXML document format, including not only can not run on Linux, not compatible with open document formats ODF. Second, OOXML is given a monopoly to support the standard Office2007, Office2007 not only abandoned the DOC file format, but, not work with Office2007 DOC document to open the past and, therefore, reproduce through all the previous OOXML office document, just an empty Microsoft .

No matter how nice Microsoft said, we do not ignore the fact that no high degree of market monopoly, there would be no today’s Microsoft. Microsoft’s OOXML should be made strong international standards, complete repeat of the old play the old tune new missiles only, that is, the escalating use of format, to achieve complete control of the user, the height of the market monopoly.