Opinion: This dispute won't make the software giant pursue greater format openness, but growing competition from lower-cost alternatives in developing economies might.As part of the debate that has followed Massachusetts' state
CIO Peter Quinn's edict that all state documents be stored in an "open" format as of January 2007, I posed some questions to Microsoft. I've also continued to receive reader e-mail, mostly from people who support "open" everything and seem to hate all things Microsoft.
For those just joining us, the Massachusetts CIO wants to move the state to OpenDocument and Adobe PDF as the only approved formats for document storage. I think such a course is fraught with peril and have said so in two columns, one introducing the issue and the other responding to angry e-mail from OpenDocument proponents.
In response to my questions and the columns I've written, I received this e-mail from Alan Yates, general manager of information worker business strategy at Microsoft, in Redmond, Wash. Here's what Yates had to say:
"I read your columns with interest, and can imagine that there are strong views from your readers on the Massachusetts proposal to promote the OpenDocument format, both pro and con. I would just like to reinforce with you and your readers Microsoft's commitment to both excellent software and to the goals of the Massachusetts CIO proposal.
"We share the proposal's goals for data interoperability across government agencies and for assuring proper storage and maintenance of all public records. We agree that standards-based XML should be used for these purposes. We are working with governments all over the world to achieve these high level goals. But we don't believe the proposed mandate for a single document format is the best solution for achieving these goals. Product competition, with open methods for achieving interoperability is likely to do a better job.
"With Office 2003 we took a major step to enable this through XML-centered file formats, with royalty free specs that anyone can download. This approach has been evaluated by the EU as well as the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, who have said (as recently as a month or so ago) that it meets their needs for openness. And that is also feedback we have heard from customers and partners around the world. The new Microsoft Office Open XML formats in the next version of Office, code named Microsoft Office 12, were created using existing industry standards for XML and ZIP data. There should be no barriers for customers, for users, for developers, for competitors or anyone else to use them when they are ready, or any time thereafter.
"So we were a bit surprised to see the Secretary and CIO's sudden change of direction on this with their radical proposal to make the OpenDocument format the exclusive, mandatory document technology for executive agencies.
"Frankly, there is no finished product today that yet supports the new OpenDocument file format, so the question is first a bit premature. Sun, IBM and other companies have collaborated on this, but the core OpenOffice product favored by this proposal has been delayed for most of this year. But for us, the key reason we haven't thought about adopting OpenDocument is that it's not something we're hearing requests for from customers; customers and partners have universally told us that our approach to using W3C standard XML and a royalty free license met their needs for openness. Developers can and are writing conversion tools that enable interoperability with other products, even if, as in the OpenOffice case, they are not converting for all the Office document capabilities.
Read the full story on eweek.com: Microsoft Exec Weighs In on Massachusetts Flap
Web Design 
