Comments on: ODF Versus OpenXML Linux. GNU. Freedom. Thu, 15 Feb 2018 18:04:15 +0000 hourly 1 By: Aaron Sun, 28 Jan 2007 23:46:07 +0000 ODF has several superior advantages to OpenXML. From The Open Document Fellowship:

1) ODF is vendor-neutral.
2) ODF is an ISO standard.
3) ODF is implemented in 100% more applications than OpenXML.
4) ODF has 5 years in development (versus 1 year for OpenXML).
5) ODF is legible.
6) ODF is a proven technology.
7) ODF is easier to implement.

Speculation about IBM and Lotus Notes is just that: speculation. Sure, IBM would like to see their office suite succeed, and I have nothing against companies making money, but you better have something to back it up. From what it looks to me, Lotus Notes, as well as, Star Office, KOffice,, Workplace, Mobile Office, NeoOffice and many other applications are taking advantage of ODF. IBM isn't the only interested party.

If you want to talk speculation, it looks to me that Microsoft is again trying to corner the market in the Open Document arena, so they can continue to push their proprietary office suite, and keep you locked into them as the sole vendor.

ODF is superior to OpenXML in every way.

By: Jonathan Allen Sun, 28 Jan 2007 23:27:58 +0000 How is OpenXML any more proprietry than ODF?

Considering that ODF was originally "Open Office Document Format" an XML representation of the StarOffice binary format, there doesn't seem to be any difference.

Also, why is IBM fighting so hard against OpenXML becoming an open standard?

My theory is they want to protect Lotus Notes, the only commerical application that plans on supporting ODF but not OpenXML.