An attack on paypal --> secure UI for browsers

[Jamie Lawrence]

On Sat, 14 Jun 2003, Sunder wrote:

> Oh get over it.  There are other formats.  You ever heard of
> XML?  HTML? RTF?

Yes, as a matter of fact. RTF is an MS format, BTW. They do change it
sometimes, breaking various attempts at interoperability. They don't do
it much; it seems like something they forget to break much of the time.

> If the day comes where MS Office DRM only works with MS Office DRM, how
> many people will switch to it?  If your company is willing to switch to
> it, then they'll give you a PC with it on it.  If they don't, then they
> can't expect you to interact with them via such formats and can't require
> you to do so.
> 
> You sound like someone's holding a gun to your head and requiring you to
> have MS Office.

No, there's no gun to anyone's head. However, as part of negotiating my 
current contract (I'm a partner in a small software development
company), we recieved lots of MS Word/Excel docs. When you're
negotiating new business, saying "erm, I don't do windows. Can you give
me something else" is a bit of a show stopper. By comparison, if you're
selling someone a car, are you going to stop them mid-sale and ask that
they please haggle in Euros? (And in case you're curious, our project 
is entirely open source driven.)

> Microsoft is not the DMV.  You don't need to use their software.

For that matter, one can drive without a license.

I see your distinction, however it is very difficult to do business
without MS software. I'm typing this on a Linux-running laptop, which is
my primary user-level machine, and in order to do business, have to run
Crossover. (And I do own my MS Office license.) All of my proposals are
written in plain text and sometimes, done in Postgres when I need
spreadsheet-like behavior. They have to be rendered in Word format for
client consumption. (Open source spreadsheets still suck, in my
opinion.)

> And no, I will never be part of your problem because the documents I will
> create for non work use will be made with Open Office or will be plain
> text, html, or xml files.

That's a rather fine point to put on it. There isn't much difference
between work and non-work for me. Rather, there is, but nonwork choices
directly impact my work choices.

You seem to offload a lot of your choices onto your company.

> If I'm required to use a DRM'ed Office for work, then fine, my company
> owns those documents anyway and they can do whatever the fuck they like
> with them either way.   It doesn't matter to me at all -- it's their call,
> it's their company, it's their documents.

Just workin' for the man, eh?

> Either way, how much a revolt do you think there will be if Microsoft
> decides to lock down their tools (such as word) to the point where they
> can no longer export to HTML, plain text, RTF should the author wish 
> it to do so and provides whatever passphrases or ID's needed to unlock
> the document and export it out?

Honestly, this is supposition, entirely unsupported by anything other
than my intuition about how companies I've worked for in the past 
behave. Feel free to ignore. 

I think they'll lap it up. Along with expensive and annoying licensing
terms, companies get no-forward emails and expiring spreadsheets. Think
about what Enron would have done with that. Hell, I suspect MS
probably evaluated what they did wrong in the antitrust trial in order
to avoid similar outcomes in the future. There's a market there.
 
> Who would buy such a dog of a product?  Do you think businesses are so
> stupid that they'd put up with a product that jails them in?  Get real
> son, you're howling at the moon!

Um. Who owns the market in "desktop productivity software"?

> You want to make a difference?  Go ahead, wipe every bit of Microsoft
> wares off all your machines and burn the CD's you've installed them
> from.  Go all open source and show others the right way.  At least I'd
> have some respect for you for voting with your wallet and practicing what
> you preach.
> 
> Right now all you're doing is bitching that you're forced to buy and use
> Microsoft Office.  I say that's bullshit, and you know it.


I use MS software for interoperability testing (much like I use
Quickbooks, some Oracle wares, etc.), and for client communication.
Everything else in my company is open source. Everything we deploy is
open source, unless the client asks for something else. They typically
pay for that choice, not only because I'm frequently not familiar with
the software they choose, but also because it's a bitch to work with
(anyone else ever have to deal with Adobe Distiller under unix?)

It isn't bullshit that to operate as a business entity, one needs MS
software. I can certainly dick around with my personal website and write
my memoirs without it, and 98% of what I do for a living is MS free,
getting business without it (read aloud as "public interfaces")
is nearly impossible. Perhaps you can ignore that, becuase you're just
working for the man, and it isn't your fault that you write MS Word
docs.

DRM is going to be another cost. I'll have to have a real MS box on
hand again, and the problem will be how it worms in to other parts of
the business, diverting me from my favored platform.

You can say you're not forced to use it. You're also not forced to
do anything but swear at other people in public.

-j



-- 
Jamie Lawrence                                        jal at jal.org
"In my little way, I'm sneakily helping people understand a bit more
about the sort of people God likes."
   - Larry Wall.