That is amazing. Google wrote this in their analysis of OpenXML: (https://forums.scc.ca/forums/scc/dispatch.cgi/public/showFile/100294/d20070705225348/No/objections%20by%20Google.pdf) ----- "Although OOXML may formally comply with Ecma, it was clearly not designed with an “open” spirit. Comparing the current with the future situation, interoperability is likely to become more difficult instead of easier. The implementation of a fully compatible ODF importer (the current efforts regarding .doc and .xls) is not an easy task, but it is dwarfed by the implementation of a fully compatible OOXML importer, which we estimate to take something between 50 – 500 person years, or even longer. Therefore, although it is theoretically possible to generate an OOXML document, this document will probably only use a very small subset of the standard. In sum, OOXML can be compared to Microsoft giving access to a labyrinth to which it alone owns a map; moreover, certain tunnels within this labyrinth are not accessible without a key that only Microsoft has, and that third parties would need to replicate first. (And, in doing so, these third parties would not know whether they would violate any rights that exposes them to litigation)." -----
It is sort of sad Google would reverse course and act against their own interests. Also, I wonder why they didn't help to port LibreOffice rather than buying QuickOffice. The current Android efforts in LibreOffice are less than one person I believe. Imagine what Google could have done with 5-10, let alone buying the proprietary QuickOffice which employed 400 people. (http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2018361838_apustecgoogleofficeapps1stldwritethru.html) I suspect part of their decision was that they didn't want to take a risk on "LibreOffice", but it does seem they have too much money. -Keith On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 1:38 PM, Zeki Bildirici <z...@ozgurlukicin.com> wrote: > Hi, > > As you know Google currently is not supporting Open Document Format > native in its services. Today i saw this article > http://www.muktware.com/4529/why-google-killing-open-document-formats#.UTYr7U44lHE.twitter > and remembered this issue. > > This article explains the situation quite well. I don't know the > reason why Google does not support ODF, maybe it was discussed here > before. But i think we may try to push Google to support ODF. > > I don't think there is a reasonable explanation for ignoring ODF and > supporting MS Office formats and forcing people to convert their ODF > to Google Docs format. > > Btw for comparasion, -yes not Skydrive of course- Yandex company with > growing popularity in Turkey and Russia supports ODF in its Disk > service. It may be an example for good aproach to ODF. > > What do you think about Google's positioning for ODF? Can we manage to > force/attract Google to support ODF? I've mentioned and asked > htps://twitter.com/cdibona about this matter but no replies yet > > Best regards, > Zeki > > > - http://support.google.com/drive/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=2423485 > > -- > Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+h...@global.libreoffice.org > Problems? > http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ > Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette > List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/ > All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+h...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
