Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

EU Calls For Use of Open Standards

Posted by kdawson on Tue Jun 10, 2008 04:26 PM
from the speaking-truth-to-microsoft dept.
fondacio writes "In a speech that is being reported as taking a swipe at Microsoft, EU Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes has called for businesses and governments to use software based on open standards. While not mentioning Microsoft by name, Ms. Kroes referred to the fact that '[t]he [European] Commission has never before had to issue two periodic penalty payments in a competition case' until this befell Microsoft. The things she told a conference in Brussels will not come as a surprise to Slashdot readers, but it's encouraging to hear the following quotes from someone in her position: 'Where interoperability information is protected as a trade secret, there may be a lot of truth in the saying that the information is valuable because it is secret, rather than being secret because it is valuable... we should only standardize when there are demonstrable benefits, and we should not rush to standardize on a particular technology too early... I fail to see the interest of customers in including proprietary technology in standards when there are no clear and demonstrable benefits over non-proprietary alternatives.'"
+ -
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • ha! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 10 2008, @04:32PM (#23736239)
    Neelie Kroes rules. She makes me proud to be Dutch. That does not happen too often. Soccer be damned.
  • by damburger (981828) on Tuesday June 10 2008, @04:37PM (#23736347)

    Time is clearly the legislatures of the world of old men who think the Internet is a series of tubes and they are being replaced by people who at least slightly more tech savvy.

    • Insightful Troll. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by SanityInAnarchy (655584) <ninja@slaphack.com> on Tuesday June 10 2008, @05:53PM (#23737729) Journal
      Parent might be worded as a troll, but it is also insightful -- it is scary as hell that the people (Ted Stevens) most directly responsible for legislating the future of the Internet are so completely clueless as to the nature of the beast.

      I don't mean that every congressman needs to become an expert on every niche domain of knowledge humans have ever dreamed of -- but at the very least, if you're going to legislate something, learn something about it, or delegate to someone who has.
        • Well, how would you describe it (in layman's terms)?

          Well, I'm frightened by the though that I would have to describe it to Congress in layman's terms -- that implies that they don't already know.

          More importantly, it wasn't just the "series of tubes" comment -- you really need to go find an audio clip, and a transcript, and listen to it. He clearly has no fucking clue what he's talking about.

          Here, let me elaborate:

          Ten movies streaming across that, that Internet, and what happens to your own personal Internet?

          Personal Internet? Mmmkay... Letting that one slide.

          I just the other day got... an Internet was sent by my staff at 10 o'clock in the morning on Friday, I got it yesterday [Tuesday].

          Only four days!

          Why? Because it got tangled up with all these things going on the Internet commercially.

          Ok, I don't care how much YouTube or BitTorrent is slowing stuff down. I'm a

  • Interesting. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jd (1658) <imipak.yahoo@com> on Tuesday June 10 2008, @04:45PM (#23736517) Homepage Journal
    Europe does a lot of stupid things, but it also does some amazingly brilliant things. This speech is brilliant, let's hope the follow-up isn't stupid. It's definitely a jab at Microsoft, but it's also a jab at ISO in the comments about not rushing things. I think Europe is most displeased with what is going on, or at least some senior figures within it. This does need to translate to action. Possibly on more than one front. If the European Courts are presented with evidence that Microsoft hijacked the ISO standards procedure in an effort to "comply" with prior rulings in a dishonest way, I imagine the court would not be pleased. Could it be considered contempt of court to attempt to mislead the court over compliance? Does the EU court system even have such a concept? If not, can/will the judges increase the fines to reflect the seriousness of the situation? Or given Microsoft's continual appeals and non-payment, are there any other penalties they can exact, such as suspending the business license for Microsoft's European branch?
    • by Odder (1288958) on Tuesday June 10 2008, @05:00PM (#23736811)

      No one likes corruption and everyone is fed up with Microsoft. Kroes has done a fine job of expressing some of the world's contempt, but anywhere there's technical competence people are angry about the ISO hijack. South African, Brazilian and Indonesian citizens have all piped up. World wide corruption has produced world wide derision which will be followed by rejection.

    • Or given Microsoft's continual appeals and non-payment, are there any other penalties they can exact, such as suspending the business license for Microsoft's European branch?

      This is wishful thinking on your part. Just wait till the next trade deal is up for negotiation and see if the US president doesn't lean in hard on the Europeans.

      • Europe can also lean in hard on the US...
        The euro is going strong, the Dollar is comparatively weak...
        Who would give in first? The US to benefit Microsoft alone at the expense of the rest of the country, or the EU to benefit the whole of the EU? If really pushed, i think the US would have to back down.
    • Re:Interesting. (Score:5, Informative)

      by Elektroschock (659467) on Tuesday June 10 2008, @05:14PM (#23737083)
      Or given Microsoft's continual appeals and non-payment, are there any other penalties they can exact, such as suspending the business license for Microsoft's European branch?

      Say: It was a real blow with a diplomatic Commissioner who did not mention the elephant in the room. The European political class is pissed by Microsoft's lobbying against open standards and interoperability, its software patents agitation, the OOXML debacle and its disobedient treatment of the Commission. Microsoft has public affairs problems in different parts of the Commission. Lobbying for Microsoft is generally perceived as working for Tobacco lobby groups.

      a) Nelly indirectly endorsed the OFE Open Parliament petition [openparliament.eu] and the Hague Declaration [digistan.org].

      b) Nelly spoke of proprietary vs. non-proprietary standards, a terminology not used by the Commission before.

      c) Nelly recommended Munich and the Netherlands as best practice.

      There is much to learn from other public bodies such as Munich - and I am delighted to have the Mayor of Munich here this morning to tell us about his experience. But Munich is not alone: there is also the German Foreign Ministry [switched to Linux and open standards], and the French Gendarmerie. The Dutch Government and Parliament are also moving towards open standards [ososs.nl].
      d) Munich's Mayor Christian Ude took the floor and explicitely condemned OOXML after her speech and spoke of the 'free software' used in his municipality. Original reason: no extended support for Win NT 4

      e) Ditmar Harhoff, an economist, called for patent reform. Europe would be well advised not to follow the US

      g) Graham Tailor from Open Forum put emphasis on the Freedom to Leave.

      From the speech of the Commissioner [europa.eu]:

      The Commission must do its part. It must not rely on one vendor, it must not accept closed standards, and it must refuse to become locked into a particular technology â" jeopardizing maintenance of full control over the information in its possession.

      This view is born from a hard headed understanding of how markets work â" it is not a call for revolution, but for an intelligent and achievable evolution.

      But there is more to this than ensuring our commercial decisions are taken in full knowledge of their long term effects. There is a democratic issue as well.

      When open alternatives are available, no citizen or company should be forced or encouraged to use a particular company's technology to access government information.

      No citizen or company should be forced or encouraged to choose a closed technology over an open one, through a government having made that choice first.

      These democratic principles are important. And an argument is particularly compelling when it is supported both by democratic principles and by sound economics.

      I know a smart business decision when I see one - choosing open standards is a very smart business decision indeed.
      and:

      Non-proprietary standards avoid the need for licence agreements and royalties. They avoid the need to ask permission if you want to use or develop the technology â" follow-on innovation may be easier. They avoid subjecting the future development of the standard and the technology to the commercial interests of the technology's originator.
      • c) Nelly recommended Munich and the Netherlands as best practice.

        Speaking of which. Does anyone in here knows of **actuall** changes in the usage of software within the Dutch government due to those recommendations?

        I know quite a few people working in ministries in Den Haag, and as far as I hear from them the ministries continue to be a 100% MS deployment.

        Does *anyone* here has first hand experience with actual changes, or at least scheduled plans to introduce any changes?

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          "Strict gun-control, stupid "hate speech" laws"

          Only an american could list those as bad things.... *sigh*...
          • Re:Interesting. (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Creepy Crawler (680178) on Tuesday June 10 2008, @05:17PM (#23737129)
            Hmm. Gun control laws... I thought it was mandatory that every able citizen keep a fully automatic weapon+bullets in Switzerland. But we dont see the violence levels there as we do in America. I wonder if we can attribute that to American Media? (I would, due to Bhutan- look it up on wikipedia).

            Guns/weapons do not make violence. Violence comes from people who act violent. Stopping the majority of this violence will require reviewing the source of the violent actions in people, regardless of preconceptions. Is it from the media? Is it from less religious influence? Is it from single parent households? Is it from the disparity of wealth?

            And Hate speech, according to whom? Should we not allow vitriol that some people spout be public, for surely intelligent people would realize it for what it is? I mean, we in the USA have the KKK, who hates blacks and Catholics. Fair enough. We even allow them to demonstrate *peacefully*, even though everybody knows what they say is just wrong on all points. We view that they have a point, even if horridly invalid.

            Determining "Hate Speech" is just like "Obscenity Laws". Ill know it when I see it.
            • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

              Switzerland is not part of the European Union.
              • The original post said the following:

                "Europe does a lot of stupid things,..."

                What you said does not invalidate my statements, as Switzerland IS in Europe (the last I checked). They just havent entered in the EU.
                • When you speak of Europe as an entity, you clearly are talking about the European Union. Europe the continent is just a bunch of countries with no unified voice or actions.
          • Only an american could list those as bad things.... *sigh*...

            Strict gun control is hitting the target when you shoot. As for gun violence, all Europe has to do is look in Europe, specifically Switzerland. All able bodied males are required to have a firearm yet crimes used with firearms are lower than in the US, where most "able bodied" males don't have firearms. It's not availability of firearms, it's more the culture; whereas Switzerland has a culture of peace, and money, the US has one of "the Wild

          • "Strict gun-control, stupid "hate speech" laws"

            Only an american could list those as bad things.... *sigh*...

            Declaring those to be problems with the EU is fairly idiotic, since those are by no means uniform in the EU. That said, it is easy to take issue with both of them.

            The best studies of gun control indicate strict gun control laws tend to result in a very slight overall increase in murder and other violent crime (which is what is the normal justification for such laws). Anyone who does their research will see this issue has been well researched at this point in both cause and effect studies and correlations

            • What about japan? They have extremely strict gun laws, as far as i remember, and very low rates of violent crime compared to other countries.
              • What about japan? They have extremely strict gun laws, as far as i remember, and very low rates of violent crime compared to other countries.

                Yup. There are also countries with very high gun ownership rates like Norway, that have incredibly low rates of violent crime. That's why I said strict gun control laws tend to produce a very slight increase in violent crime. There are other factors that correlate very strongly with rates of violent crime, however, and where these are different you'll see drastically different rates regardless of gun control laws. The primary one is wealth disparity, which is why socialized healthcare funded with a tax on

          • Strict gun control & Hate Speech laws *ARE* bad things. If you can't see why, you are too far wrapped in the warm and fuzzy feel good of these do-nothing-but-make-you-a-victim laws. Otherwise you might have taken a look at the world around you and noticed how dangerous and cruel it actually is. Then at least you would be better prepared. Look at the world around you and decide if you'd rather have the option to defend your own life with your own tools, or wait for the police to come, clean up your
        • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

          Strict gun-control, stupid "hate speech" laws, raiding an entire ISP to find TPB and shutting all of the sites down, and censorship just to name a few.

          Europe is not a single country, my friend. A lot of countries allow "hate speech" to an extend. Here in Denmark for instance, any kind of organisation, except if they publicly encourage to violence. Which makes perfect sense to me.

          The strict gun-control is just something people want. So that is not stupid at all. Different laws for different people.

          The ISP case was not a European event either, it was a national event. And censorship is a lot lessen in Europe than it in most of the world, including

  • should Microsoft decide to step straight into the fist as it's flying, that's their right. but then don't come whining about being decked by a girl.
      • The Commission must do its part. It must not rely on one vendor, it must not accept closed standards, and it must refuse to become locked into a particular technology - jeopardizing maintenance of full control over the information in its possession. When open alternatives are available, no citizen or company should be forced or encouraged to use a particular company's technology to access government information. No citizen or company should be forced or encouraged to choose a closed technology over an open

            • Richard Stallman (Score:4, Insightful)

              Many of us benefit from his contributions, and I am grateful for that, but RMS is also a crack-pot and his statements must be taken with a grain of salt.

              It is interesting how most people today point at political and religious fanactics and all agree that fanaticism is never good, while many here worship at the feet of a fanatic.

              I'm all for advocating freedom, open source, and open standards. I also believe that these causes are best fought by level-headed folk. Acting like a crack-pot only makes the whole cause look bad.

              Search your feelings Skywalker, you know it to be true.
              • Many of us benefit from his contributions, and I am grateful for that, but RMS is also a crack-pot and his statements must be taken with a grain of salt. It is interesting how most people today point at political and religious fanactics and all agree that fanaticism is never good, while many here worship at the feet of a fanatic.

                I have no trouble admitting stallman is a fanatic. But when he started writing free software, you had to be crazy to think you could have a whole free software ecosystem.. build tools, kernel, libraries...

                Sometimes change doesn't happen without a fanatic getting it all started...

              • Wow, dude! Did RMS hit you or something? Or are you a ninja?
              • by moreati (119629) <.alex. .at. .moreati.org.uk.> on Tuesday June 10 2008, @07:18PM (#23738995) Homepage
                I have to take issue with you there on a couple of points. Stallman is a fanatic and he has entered crack pot country before. I happen to think he's right much of the time.

                I take issue with:

                It is interesting how most people today point at political and religious fanactics and all agree that fanaticism is never good, while many here worship at the feet of a fanatic.


                1. Equating Stallman's fanaticism for free software, with the popular view of religious fanaticism is nothing but trolling. He isn't violent and he doesn't threaten bombings or beheading.
                2. Fanaticism in the sense that Stallman portrays it is a good thing.
                3. Demonstrably some people disagree with 'fanaticism is never good'. The fanatics quite like the idea for a start. Non-violent fanatics are a good thing, if only to remind us where we could do better/go further toward a goal.

                Alex.
                • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

                  Not all fanatics are violent, but fanaticism is often unhealthy behavior. Fanaticism is often illogical. For instance, even when Jack Thompson has a point (little kids likely shouldn't be playing GTA) he can't really get credit for being correct because his logic is faulty. He has said that kids playing video games are "Manchurian Candidates ready to kill us all".

                  Fanaticism certainly doesn't win you brownie points when it comes to diplomacy. I thought we learned this lesson with Bush.

                  You insist that his
              • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

                RMS is also a crack-pot and his statements must be taken with a grain of salt.
                Indeed, I rather suspect he's another one of Twitter's sockpuppets. The man is everywhere!
      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        Off-topic and no offense, but why did you repost one of the links in the summary?
        • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

          To reply to himself with one of his sockpuppets, Odder.

          And he probably got confused, he posted the same thing [slashdot.org] to a Firehose submission and didn't read the one that actually made it to the front page.

          When you're in a desperate rush to stock up on karma and shill your own posts you tend to make those mistakes, I guess.

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            Off topic again. No problem. I wanted to give you a chance to explain before the trolls came in. I don't see eye-to-eye with you on a lot of things but flaming people doesn't really contribute anything to the discussion.
      • Nice that they provide a doc [europa.eu] version (instead of a odf version). But at least pdf and html are open.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        I'm not sure how Microsoft is destroying peoples' careers. I mean, I'm a .Net developer and get offers for Java, C++, etc positions, so I can't imagine how Microsoft could kill someones' career unless they do not keep up with the latest technologies.

        Advertisements aren't squandering money either. It one way you generate public knowledge and interest in your product, which translates into sales. And I'm not sure that I'd put advertising in the same breath as corruption unless your advertisement strategy i
        • Well I'm a LAMP developer and have never touched .NET but get offers for VB and .NET positions all the time too. So what's your point?? Recruiters are morons.
          • by Rycross (836649) on Tuesday June 10 2008, @09:02PM (#23740705)
            I wouldn't call a recruiter that recruits programmers for languages they're not experienced in morons. Maybe they're one of the few recruiters who realizes that a good developer can learn new technologies. And thats my point.

            No technology lasts forever in its current state. Even the Linux now is different from the Linux 10 years ago. Good developers and admins keep learning and adapt. Bad ones don't. If you cannot work in the IT industry because the technology you learned is no longer used, then you destroyed your own career, not anyone else. You're responsible for making yourself marketable.
        • Ask the people who worked on DRDOS, Lotus, Word Perfect, OS/2, Netscape, BeOS and so on about careers and keeping up with the latest technologies.

          Advertising annoys the people targeted and has done Microsoft less good than product would. I consider that a waste.

        • Simple...

          It's no longer possible to write a commercial desktop or server OS and expect to turn a profit from it... BeOS was great, but it wasn't compatible with microsoft and ultimately doomed.
          Open source is barely competing, despite the obvious price advantage.

          Similarly, you can't write a commercial office suite, just look at wordperfect, once the dominant player, now pretty screwed...

          Novell faced a similar fate...

          It's come to the stage that commercial competition with microsoft simply isn't viable... The only way to compete is very slowly through open source, leveraging the lack of cost and advantages of distributed development. Even then, the process of winning market share over from microsoft is far too slow to make a business selling competing software.
          • "It's no longer possible to write a commercial desktop or server OS and expect to turn a profit from it."

            Funny, a few years ago Apple was left for dead, developed a new OS, and is gaining market share as they're selling it.

            Similarly, you can't write a commercial office suite, just look at wordperfect, once the dominant player, now pretty screwed.

            Corel still sells Wordperfect and makes a profit doing so, but their market share is pathetic. If Sun, IBM, Corel, etc. got together and worked on a kick-ass offic
          • It's come to the stage that commercial competition with microsoft simply isn't viable...
            I don't suppose Google or Sony has got the memo? Or Apple, for that matter?
          • by Creepy Crawler (680178) on Tuesday June 10 2008, @05:07PM (#23736947)
            Unix and C has been with us since the beginning. Anybody who didnt realize that fact shouldn't be in computers, period.

            C will cannibalize any prior language on any platform (from stamps to supers). After that, Unix will not be long to follow, due to simple methods of controlling hardware/software.

            Also, the MacOS is dead. Dead through and through. Unix and Windows are the only 2 choices. Just so happens that a company used the FreeBSD base and added a snazzy GUI.

            Even since that, guess what is next to die? Microsoft. Why? OSS people need only make the 90% solution, because that "90% @ free" is better than "100% @ big_money" according to many many people. When people realize that one doent need a 200$ operating system to take care of most tasks, they will switch. Acer, Dell, IBM, Asus, and the rest of the gang will make sure of that.
            • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

              "OSS people need only make the 90% solution, because that "90% @ free" is better than "100% @ big_money" according to many many people.When people realize that one doent need a 200$ operating system to take care of most tasks, they will switch. Acer, Dell, IBM, Asus, and the rest of the gang will make sure of that."
              From my experience, it is a sad fact that people won't realise this - however much you try to suggest that there's no point paying £200 for an office suite when they only use the bi
            • If OSX is dead then why is it gaining market share [google.com]?

              When people realize that one doent need a 200$ operating system to take care of most tasks, they will switch.

              Does that explain why people are switching to Macs? Leopard costs $130, a family pack of for 5 Macs cost $200, while the 10 client license for OSX Server cost $500 and for unlimited clients it's $1000.

              Acer, Dell, IBM, Asus, and the rest of the gang will make sure of that.

              Yea, Micheal Dell has said he'd love to be able to sale Dells with OS

              • ---You must understand that for business it isn't strictly the one off cost of a product that is an issue.

                I've seen your types here before. It's the "Real total ROI" game. There's plenty of places to see why you're wrong. You can do that research.

                ---A bigger issue that companies pay for is the support and the management of their software. Also the case of buying in large amounts especially for government allows for even cheaper cost per unit.

                This is the common excuse MS and likes use to develop a cost for f
          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            Well, if FOSS wipes out some other technology, should I complain that FOSS is destroying my career? [slashdot.org] Or should I be responsible for keeping my own skills marketable? Me, I figured "Hey I should learn some of this Linux stuff" so I installed Ubuntu on a spare machine and made a personal server. If Linux wiped out Windows tomorrow, I'm confident I'd be able to find a new job.
      • by Elektroschock (659467) on Tuesday June 10 2008, @05:25PM (#23737285)
        The statement about monetary incentives is wrong because what the Commission just expects compliance with its rulings. Usually companies do comply. The competition authority acts similarly to a court. Competitors file a complaint, then the Commission rules, then the convicted monopolist complies. This is the way is works. Microsoft broken the rules and refused to comply, it delayed the process, bullied the Commission, lobbied aggressively, even let foreign nations intervene on their behalf.

        The penalties are just for non-compliance, the difficulties of the myriads of Microsoft lobby outfits to "understand" what the Commission wants. When Microsoft sued the Commission it won just another enemy. Microsoft acted like a bully, bought politicians, harassed the Commission. This made so many people fed up. Parliament members file parliament questions on Microsoft. Lobbying for Microsoft got a pretty bad smell if you care about your career in public affairs.
    • Guy, tone down the drugs and seek help. Schizophrenia is your enemy. Help is available. See a doctor, or use a better text generator.