“the Netherlands has not just mandated ODF but the use of open source software;”

That is not an accurate interpretation of the situation in The Netherlands.
The report is available in English here:
http://www.ez.nl/dsresource?objectid=154648&type=PDF

On ODF it states:
ODF is therefore currently available alongside and in addition to other, already-used, file formats (such as DOC and PDF) and any new future open standards.
(page 15)

On open Source it states:
The development of a strategy [on open source] is a sound basis for encouraging the inclusion of open source software as a serious, permanent alternative to other forms of software.
(page 19)

The government in The Netherlands must support read/write and exchange of documents in ODF. And they have to develop an ICT implementation strategy that includes and allows the use of open source. The use of open source is not mandated, not a requirement, it should be considered as part of a complete ICT implementation strategy.

As for Oliver’s “I work for Microsoft because I think we’re doing some great things as a company,”
Ditto for me.

You seem to be assuming that I think what I think based on who pays my salary, but believe it or not I’m capable of independent thought.

I work for Microsoft because I think we’re doing some great things as a company, if a day comes when I don’t agree I would probably talk about that also, if I found myself in violent disagreement with the company I would probably go find a job elsewhere.

Whichever way, my thoughts (and my posts here) are my own, not Microsoft’s.

I did not in anyway imply that “you work for Microsoft therefore you’re not entitled to speak”; but when the ODF Alliance publish documents, they do so under that name. In other words make it clear that what they report can be coloured by their interests as an organisation. When you post on a personal blog, that connection is not so obvious. I was just suggesting you should make your financial self-interest clearer when presenting spin as facts.

@yk, thanks for raising that particular story, the article that you linked is a really good example of the reporting that we see around this type of policy mandate of late.

The headline suggests that something dramatic is about to happen, but if you read the text it is a very different story.

Few people seem to be reading past the headlines, and I find a few who take the “informative” information from the ODF Alliance as gospel, which it isn’t, in most cases it is only half of the story.

If you can present me with rock solid evidence that contradicts this post then we can talk about it, but we can’t find it. BTW, if I’m going to refresh this post at any point (and I doubt I will, it is a snapshot in time which we believe is accurate) are you going to reciprocate?

I came across this article and noted the enormous number of inaccuracies with surprise. It is difficult to understand how such a large number of inaccuracies could exist in one article as a very small amount of research would uncover them.

So I had to assume you had some sort of significant financial interest in this debate; your commenters to date increased my suspicions. Clicking on “About” confirmed them,

Frankly if you are going to blog on such matters I strongly recommend you open the article with “I work for Microsoft” and “facts will be spun wherever possible.

For the record: anyone who thinks it will cost a lot of money to move to ODF has not done adequate research; the Netherlands has not just mandated ODF but the use of open source software; I could go on, but would instead advise readers to go do their own research on what can only be called “the accuracy of your presentation of the facts”.

However standards setting issues is one thing, the other is government policies, and that is driven by, as you should know, MAMPU.

The Malaysian Administrative Modernisation and Management Planning Unit is moving towards more Open Standards, with ODF being one of them.

http://www.zdnetasia.com/news/software/0,39044164,62030781,00.htm

An update to this blog entry would be appropriate.

Regards.

yk.

http://www.manager-magazin.de/koepfe/unternehmerarchiv/0,2828,261046,00.html

“In August 2007, Germany voted to approve with comments ISO’s adoption of Open XML. Gerd Schürman, Director of the Fraunhofer FOKUS eGovernment Laboratory, favored Germany’s decision: “The standardization process of Open XML as an ISO standard will start now and result in the technological advancement of both standards, Open XML and ODF 1.0.””

This is misleading. Germany is not DIN. The government can take any decision it wants. And the DIN committee was stuffed.

http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/98158

Reading Reed. my colleague Reed Shaffner has started blogging. This should be fun. Reed is the driving…