KDE and KOffice Rebuke OOXML, GNOME Dithers

Peter writes "Free Software Foundation president Richard Stallman and ITWire have praised KDE and KOffice developers for taking a principled stand against OOXML, while raising serious concerns about the GNOME Foundation's decision to give credibility to Microsoft's broken format. This comes on the heels of GNOME co-founder Miguel de Icaza's depiction of OOXML as a 'superb standard', and GNOME Foundation director Quim Gil's stonewalling of the patent-free Ogg Vorbis / Theora format on behalf of Nokia. Will the GNOME Foundation's indifferent response to Richard Stallman's appeal drive him to throw his weight behind KDE?"

The best way to bring people to open source

is to constantly fight about it amongst ourselves. That'll do the trick.

Re:The best way to bring people to open source

Will the GNOME Foundation's indifferent response to Richard Stallman's appeal drive him to throw his weight behind KDE?

Found out on the next exciting episode of Desktop Drama!

Re:The best way to bring people to open source

You are missing the big point here: open vs. closed standards. OOXML is taking a back-seat to ODF more and more, so MS is trying to screw things up and push OOXML through ECMA, etc. (which is just a rubber-stamp agency), and all the despicable things they did with the ISO trying to get it passed as an ISO standard (which finally failed when their shenanigans were exposed).

If GNOME supports OOXML, this just muddies the waters even more. It's a blatant move by MS (using covertly-paid henchmen) to fracture the open-source community.

We already have multiple national governments adopting the ODF standard (which truly is an open standard); the last thing we need is the stooges at GNOME slowing this process.

Re:The best way to bring people to open source

How you can possibly compare the two on equal terms when one isn't available for you to look at?

Huh? The OOXML standard is available for all to see at Standard ECMA-376: Office Open XML File Formats [ecma-international.org]

Now, arguments can be made that the standard is not defined well enough to be implemented (due to things like "do it like word95 did"), but that's the sort of thing that should be resolved by all interested parties before finalizing.

Re:The best way to bring people to open source

Now, arguments can be made that the standard is not defined well enough to be implemented (due to things like "do it like word95 did"), but that's the sort of thing that should be resolved by all interested parties before finalizing.

That's exactly what I'm talking about. It's not an openly-viewable standard when critical parts of it are closed and secret. I highly doubt this will get resolved; stuff like that is in there precisely because MS wants to maintain their vendor lock-in. How are they going to maintain lock-in if they openly document everything? Besides, these issues were raised many, many months ago when MS tried to get their "standard" accepted as one, and they still haven't done anything about them.

Re:The best way to bring people to open source

No, they haven't. It's rather difficult to independently implement a standard when parts of it are deliberately kept secret.

Re:The best way to bring people to open source

It seems to me that a mature approach would be to simply acknowledge the differences and you what you think the best tool for the job is. And just because the support might be there doesn't mean you will have to use it.

It's not that simple: this is an issue of standards. When you're dealing with standards, and creating and promoting a standard, you're inherently rejecting the idea of letting people decide what the "best tool for the job" is, because you're trying to make them use a specific tool, so that they can interoperate. What good would it do me to make up my own graphics format and editing tools, for instance, if I can't use the resulting images anywhere or send them to anyone? I can use them for myself, of course, but for things like that, it's a lot more useful if I can also exchange them with others, and because it's a popular standard, they have no problem using these files.

There's a big fight right now between ODF and OOXML. People (especially large organizations) are finally seeing the value of open office format standards, and XML-based ones which they can view or edit with tools other than the word processor or spreadsheet which created them. The whole world has been suffering with MS Office's closed, proprietary, binary-only formats for many years now, and they're ready for a change to something more like PDF or JPG, which can be viewed or edited with lots of different, competing tools. (It's also very useful to have an XML-based standard so that information can be easily extracted, such as for web searches. Google could easily spider and index XML-based documents on the web, whereas doing that for MS's proprietary formats isn't so simple.) But MS doesn't want people to switch to an open standard; they'll lose their proprietary lock-in, and consequently many MS Office customers. So they've intentionally confused the issue by making up their own XML-based "standard", OOXML, which isn't open, and basically serves as an XML wrapper for closed, binary data so that competing software still can't be 100% compatible.

Diversity and uniqueness of different open-source projects is a good thing as you say, as people can pick what works the best, but they're not shut out of anything because it's all open (For instance, I use KDE normally, but I can still use GNOME programs because it's all open-source; I'm not locked out of either by choosing one). But that's not what we're talking about here. We're talking about an open standard vs. a closed standard. If the world chooses the closed standard, then we're right back where we were with a decade or more of MS Office dominance, and no other tool being 100% compatible, so we're all forced to use MS Office just to be compatible with everyone else. No thanks.

Re:The best way to bring people to open source

The problem is that what you characterize as "infighting" isn't really. Let me draw an analogy.

Suppose you have a sports team, let's say football (it doesn't matter which type). We have a game between team A and Team B. Team A is pretty decently organized, and works fairly well together. Team B has some problems, however: one player is constantly starting fights with other players on his team, and frequently recruits others on the team to his faction to help in his fights with the other factions. Consequently, the team does very poorly in the competition because they're always "infighting". But then it's discovered that that one fight-starting player is actually being paid, under the table, by Team A just to stir up trouble on his team!!! So is it really infighting? I'd call it "sabotage" instead.

This is exactly what's happening with open-source, specifically with GNOME and Miguel de Icaza. He's really an agent for Microsoft, in some way. It's not clear yet whether he's actually being paid off by them, or if he's just a willing stooge who loves them so much that he's lost his grip on reality. It doesn't matter either way, though, because the effect is the same: it factionalizes open-source and creates problems, helping MS.

Personally, I think open-source projects need to cut him off altogether. When you have gangrene in one of your limbs, you amputate it before it spreads. If GNOME isn't willing to throw him out, then GNU needs to drop support for GNOME, and all other open-source projects do too. They need to stop the cancer before it spreads.

Don't forget the "getting hysterical" part.

Miguel may have been a founder of the GNOME project, but he is not even on the GNOME foundation board anymore. His opinion matters no more than that of anyone else who contributes code to GNOME. Though he has written some excellent software his baffling statements probably with respect to OOXML will not likely be taken seriously.

RMS is worried about compromising on principles of Free software by putting efforts into making software that reads or writes this technically and philosophically nasty format. Since when has AVOIDING interoperability furthered the spread of Free software? Linus has yielded to pragmatism many times in the past (using BitKeeper for example, and being cautious about GPL3) whereas RMS remains steadfastly rigid in his ideals at all levels. RMS' stance is admirable, but look at where the Linux kernel is...then look at how far the HURD has come in comparison. Perhaps some pragmatism isn't always a bad thing?

Now, as far as compromising "principle" with the pragmatic decision to work on making GNOME read the OOXML format, where exactly is this a more serious concern than with countless other interoperability projects? What about the work that went into making NTFS mountable in Linux? What about the Samba project? What about the ability of OpenOffice, KOffice, AbiWord, GNUMeric, etc. to at least partially support Microsoft's legacy binary file formats already? Where do we draw the "principled" line here? Microsoft's "core dump" binary formats, NTFS file system, CIFS and the Active Directory are not proper open standards yet great effort has been made thus far to reverse-engineer and deal with them so as to break down the Microsoft lock-in. How come, all of the sudden, RMS has to chime in about OOXML and now suddenly we should all ignore it on principle?

Perhaps the KDE people should become even more principled and drop all the hooks it has with Samba to browse and be browsed on Microsoft's "network neighbourhood". Perhaps Linux-based OSes should not only all drop GNOME as the default desktop, they should also drop the ability to mount NTFS volumes too. After all, if we're gonna snub OOXML because it's crap and it's closed, then we should be consistent and do the same across the board.

Sigh.

As was extensively explained in various GNOME places recently, Miguel is not GNOME, and has borderline zero impact or influence on GNOME at present (hence the best 'looks-serious' tag the author could find for him was "co-founder"; Woz was the co-founder of Apple, does that mean he's running iPod codec policy?) . Quim Gil is rather more directly involved in GNOME right now, but he also works for Nokia. He also clearly does not set Nokia's corporate policy. Therefore what he's doing on that bug report is reporting a corporate policy that stinks. This is obviously an uncomfortable position for him, but has sod all to do with GNOME.

Re:Sigh.

How can he 'separate the two'?

Nokia obviously does not want to support Vorbis. That's not Quim's decision to make. He can't change reality on the bug report and say "sure, Nokia will support Vorbis tomorrow, everything will be fine and dandy", because it's clearly *not going to happen*. But Nokia's policy is not GNOME's, and what Nokia does really has no implications for what GNOME does.

I really don't understand what you expect Quim to do on this bug report, or why you think it implies anything in particular about *GNOME's* policies, rather than Nokia's.

Old Stallman

Gnu drama.

This 'article' is bullshit flamebait

Gnome does *not* support OOXML becoming a standard. The *only* thing they are doing with it is trying to make sure that *if* and when it becomes a standard that it's good enough and open enough for Free software like Gnome apps to able to implement it. But they are *not* helping to get it passed.

Furthuremore, this crap article praises KDE for backing ODF implying that Gnome isn't. Of course Gnome backs ODF.

Finally, look for Jeff Waugh's comments in the comment section of TFA to see how it really is.

Re:This 'article' is bullshit flamebait

There are so many TFA's. I had assumed by the /. title that the main one was this which I had read earlier:
KDE takes stand on OOXML; Gnome dithers [itwire.com].

But I still stand by my comments. And here, just to cut to the chase, is one of Jeff Waugh's comments from the article linked above:

The GNOME Foundation is not in bed with Microsoft or Novell on this issue. Our statement is very clear about our attitude towards OOXML and our participation in ECMA TC45-M. We're there to ensure that we have sufficient documentation for FLOSS project to implement it. We're not endorsing, contributing to or developing the OOXML specification or its standardisation. (In fact, it has had a positive contribution to my work against OOXML locally...) Whatever happens with ISO, it's important for FLOSS products to implement it such that users have the opportunity to embrace Software Freedom without cutting themselves off from their own documents, or collaboration with their friends and colleagues. We don't have to like OOXML, Microsoft or the Microsoft/Novell deal to implement it, and have an open and pragmatic approach to delivering Software Freedom to as many users as we possibly can. We fiercely compete with Microsoft, and we're not about to give their monopoly a leg up by boycotting their stupid format. We want *MORE* FLOSS users, not fewer. There is a complete valid disagreement about the *perception* of GNOME involvement in TC45-M and how Microsoft might use it (and we'll make it very clear to national bodies and BRM delegates what our position is and why we're involved in the ECMA group), but nothing deserving demonisation of GNOME or suggestions that it has "sold out" to any corporation. That is simply not the case, and it is unnecessarily divisive to suggest so.

grow a pair!

For the love of god, why don't people have balls(women excluded)? I'm getting tired of people bowing down to pressure or being bought out. Doesn't anybody stand up for what they believe in anymore? I mean, way to go KDE. But, Gnome? I mean, as a community aren't we supposed to stand up for the FREE as in FREEDOM we claim that open source is? I mean, this isn't just the Gnome community, I'm talking about the community as a whole. We need to stop OOXML. It's a big bloated piece of crap, shilled out at the last moment simply because MS saw a threat. But this rant isn't even about OOXML alone. Just now Ogg was kicked out of the HTML5 spec due to pressure from Nokia and Apple. I mean, WTF! Ogg was a great choice, good quality, free as in beer, and free as in freedom. The best of both worlds.

Anyways, I'm done talking.

Re:grow a pair!

As an AbiWord developer all I can say is we want to support any format that our users have on their computer.

The work that Jody does helps in this regard.

If the KOffice guys want to not import ooxml then they're making their program less useful to their users.

Martin Sevior

More weight to KDE

Will the GNOME Foundation's indifferent response to Richard Stallman's appeal drive him to throw his weight behind KDE?

With Linus preferring KDE, could Stallman's support put more weight behind KDE? I'm rather surprised that the GNOME Foundation's decision. They could at least have kept their mouths shut instead of praising OOXML, which severely damages their credibility in the GNU world.

Re:More weight to KDE

I'm rather surprised that the GNOME Foundation's decision. They could at least have kept their mouths shut instead of praising OOXML, which severely damages their credibility in the GNU world.

Who is "they"? Who is "them"?

Has an official representative of the GNOME Foundation publicly stated that it is GNOME Foundation policy to praise OOXML? Has the GNOME Foundation, as a group, taken any kind of official position on OOXML (other than "we want the specs for it so we can interoperate with OOXML users")?

Miguel de Icaza, who is not the GNOME Foundation, did call it "a superb standard". The GNOME Foundation did not endorse his comments, but it did release this statment:

http://www.gnome.org/press/releases/ecma-tc45-statement.html [gnome.org]

Here's my favorite quote from the above statement:

While Microsoft should be applauded for releasing information about the Office document formats, their manoeuvres around the standards process demonstrate that they are not pursuing standardisation as a platform for innovation for the entire industry. Indeed, Microsoft continues to behave in the abusive manner of an unreformed, convicted monopolist with no passion for true industry collaboration in the interests of users.

If you have some examples of the GNOME Foundation praising OOXML, be sure to post them here. But at the moment I do not believe your complaints are supported by the facts.

P.S. As for Richard Stallman, he won't be completely satisfied with any desktop environment until he can get one where the whole environment is GPLv3 and there is no proprietary software available. Both GNOME and KDE have proprietary software available.

steveha

RMS and the tinfoil hat

I am reminded of Henry Kissinger's famous quote: "Even a paranoid has some real enemies."

I appreciate RMS and his views. He is a pragmatic alarmist, he is playing the chess game that is computers several moves ahead of most people. That's why so many take his statements with a grain of salt, they don't see he has been "right," consistently, for over two decades, often years before the first real signs begin to show.

GNU/Linux and F/OSS have enemies. It is an undeniable fact. There are people working against us. One need only hop over to groklaw and see the black hand of Microsoft (and greed of course) guiding that whole thing. So, maybe we are paranoid, but even paranoids have real enemies.

I am really starting to believe that GNOME is a trojan horse, or at least some aspects of it. I don't trust Miguel de Icaza, he's either incompetent of a shill and he's potentially dangerous.

Re:RMS and the tinfoil hat

I think this is the best analysis of RMS I've seen on Slashdot. RMS is fighting a principled struggle, it won't necessarily make him popular, but I thank him for doing so. I know when I met him and told him that I admired his work, he made sure to admonish me for not coding myself.

I think XFCE is about to eat GNOME's lunch. I just tried it again for the first time in several years, and wow has it matured. You can keep using the same GNOME applications and have nice looking GTK, but have an interface that's easy to use, feature rich, fast and it just works better.

Stallman backing KDE is a non-starter

Given that the QT libarary is now dual licensed under the GNU GPL and QPL licenses which ended the controversy over licensing with the FSF, I don't think it's a matter of throwing "his weight" at all.

The folks governing GNOME needs to either decide to be free or not free, and if they chose "not-free" there's nothing to stop one of the rest of us from forking the project, starting a new project, or whatever. So RMS gets nothing from joining the conversation at all. That said, if Richard Stallman or the FSF was to basically slap Novell upside the proverbial corporate head with a "get with the program with Gnome/Ogg/etc." cluestick (communique), I wonder if there would be movement more than if one of us tried to do the same thing...

We can only hope...

Will the GNOME Foundation's indifferent response to Richard Stallman's appeal drive him to throw his weight behind KDE?"

As a long time KDE user, I sincerely hope not.

Totally unsurprising

I guess we all - people who pay attention - knew for a long time that Miguel is Microsoft's shill. People who drink and laugh with people like Ballmer don't deserve much trust, IMO.

Journalese

Will the GNOME Foundation's indifferent response to Richard Stallman's appeal drive him to throw his weight behind KDE?

It's funny how in articles, the politics appears as primary, and policy secondary. Of course the politics is important, but surely the interesting question is that of freedom, rather than Stallman's partisanship?

It amuses me how so much journalism seeks to make the world a smaller place. There are bigger things than personalities.

Do I have the timeline right?

1. KDE was good, but not free (Free? phree?) enough.
2. Gnome was established because we couldn't accept that un-free KDE?
3. KDE fixed its problems and Gnome became Microsoft's bitch
4. ???
5. Profit!!!

Summary is missing the last line:

Tune in next episode as exciting new revelations are unveiled!

RMS quoted

From here [mail-archive.com]

Now look from GNOME/OO.o side: We are interested in implementing it, regardless of it being a standard or not.

Yes, but that doesn't mean we cannot denounce it!

Everyone is getting in a tizzy (RMS included) over this. Read what RMS says above. He's not above supporting OOXML to give users a choice. His point is that KDE has publicly denounced OOXML but Gnome has not. That's all.

FYI, just because you like some stuff that he has done, doesn't mean everything he says is gold. Just a little pet peeve of mine...

Could someone please explain...

... what Miguel de Icaza's obsession with shoving Microsoft technologies in to Gnome?

1. .NET (Mono)
2. OOXML
3. ???

Is it to try and attract Windows developers to the Linux platform? Is it to ease transition from Windows to Linux? Is it to make it easier for Microsoft to threaten the entire community with patent infringement threats..? What is it?

Re:Could someone please explain...

It's because he's pragmatic. You know, not religious. Not a fundamentalist crazy-person.

I like Mono. It lets me write C# on Linux. Does it hurt you? Apparently it must, how I have no idea.

I want to open OOXML documents. Does this hurt you? Got me. You seem to think it does.

Take responsbility

I will say yet again: I hope Miguel de Icaza takes responsibility when Microsoft's stranglehold over the open source software I like grows. Because he sure seems to be infatuated with the company and their products.

the whole thing is rather ironical

considering that GNOME was RMS's baby to start with. Which is something I hold against him. There are many factors which prevent Linux from being widely acceptable, but having GNOME vs KDE business belongs to the major one.

Confusion Part Two

Once upon a time, KDE was lambasted for using the not-Free-enough Qt libraries. There was a project to replace Qt and create a truly free KDE; but in the end, Trolltech released Qt under the GPL. And not the mealy-mouthed LGPL, like the GNOME libraries, which allows use in Caged software; but the full-on, not-sharing-is-stealing GPL. So the leeches still had to pay to use Qt in a Caged application; but if you played fair and wrote Free software, you could use Qt with the blessing of the copyright holders. (This didn't please the Windows fans. Windows users, raised on a diet of "illegally copying the Software is my way of Sticking It to the Man, and if you don't pay me $49 for this crapplication to do something petty that Unix has had since forever that I built with my pirate copy of Visual Studio, I'll turn off saving and bring up nag screens every five minutes", bitched loudly that there was no GPL Qt for Windows -- but the only thing stopping them porting it was the fact that the average Windows user would rather drown in shit than make the effort to swim.)

Now, the "freedom" to write Caged applications is a thorny issue. But I see it like this, and I'm sure RMS does too: in a nation where the ownership of slaves is forbidden, citizens tend to be freer on average than in a nation where the ownership of slaves is permitted. So KDE are actively promoting freedom, by taking a stand against OOXML. Novell and GNOME and Mono are getting rather too cosy in bed with Microsoft for comfort. It's very hard not to think about Microsoft pulling some kind of bait-and-switch operation which would put OSS users in trouble. If this happens, I think it's actually more likely that the Governments of the world would just pass Enabling Acts to annul whatever IP Microsoft are trying to abuse; but that's still a waste of taxpayers' money that doesn't have to happen, and by the time it gets to that stage the damage (in terms of unopenable public and private records) will be severe.

Not everyone is as responsible a citizen as you. Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean that they aren't out to get you, and just because you don't understand the importance of having access to Source Code doesn't mean it isn't every bit as big a deal, in its own right, as slavery.

Isn't it ironic?

That back in the day... Gnome was championed for it's openness [slashdot.org] over the "evil" KDE for choosing to using encumbered libraries? (Anyone remember FreeQT? Or RMS Making noise about the whole thing? [linuxtoday.com]) My how things change over time.

Tired of the Nonsense/FUD

I'm getting pretty tired of this ongoing OOXML issue; the FUD surrounding it is astounding. The article on itwire hasn't helped anyone since it's pretty clueless, looking for buzzwords and then reaching bizarre conclusions. Let's get a few facts down here:

• GNOME (and Novell) do not support the standardisation of OOXML. They are both members of the ODF alliance [odfalliance.org], both use it as the default file format, and if it was even remotely realistic to have a decent office product without OOXML support (where the Windows desktop is unfortunately in such an insane over-dominance currently), then they would of course be all for it.
• The implementation of OOXML is all about interoperability. I don't see anyone (wrongly) trashing Samba as a project, and yet its existence and the effort to implement OOXML support is virtually identical in terms of free software.
• You like software freedom and hate the software patent system? Great, so do I. Free implementations of proprietary solutions, though, are a good thing; not a single one of my friends are going to be using Linux if they can't submit their assignments to their lecturers. We need interoperability, to ease the transition for people coming from the proprietary world.
• The KDE/Koffice developers issued a statement [kde.org] basically saying they didn't have the resources or the time to implement OOXML, and suddenly a lot of silly talk gets thrown at GNOME. If I volunteered to implement OOXML support in Koffice I doubt (i) that they would object, and for sure that (ii) any distribution would not include it.
• Even if you dislike Jeff Waugh, it's pretty tough to find a rational basis for criticising him based on the podcast or his approach to the problem other than (i) not getting the GNOME statement [gnome.org] (again, which you really can't fault) out soon enough, or (ii) giving Roy the publicity he wants.
• The itwire article plays Roy as some sort of victim in the podcast talk. That is ridiculous. Unfortunately -- and to the detriment of the FLOSS community -- Roy is an incredibly prolific, poisonous [google.nl] person willing to do or say anything that might cook up some self-publicity, and with an irrational hatred of Novell. And in fact on the contrary, Roy skipped around every question that was directly asked to him; instead opting to just give background on Microsoft's "evil" nature and talking about how bad OOXML is (both of which we palpably know).
• Finally, even if you decide to ignore all the other above facts, please tell me why you're not also staging wide protests against OpenOffice.org or your distribution for including OOXML support, as well.

To save any comments of bias, I'm an ardent KDE aficionado.

perspective

Yeah, de Icaza makes stupid comments about OOXML and Gil's employer has some obsession with proprietary video formats. Neither of those is a big deal to me, in particular since they are so utterly without consequences: Gnome supports ODF anyway, and lack of Ogg support on the N800 affects almost nobody and is, frankly, the least of Nokia's problems.

To me, the biggest problem in the open source world is still those stupid dual-licenses from companies like Troll Tech and Sun. I therefore take a principled stand against KDE: as long as it is based on a dual-licensed toolkit, I consider KDE evil and will not use it.

Open letter to Miguel

Bill's married. It will never work.

KDE and GPLv3

Will the GNOME Foundation's indifferent response to Richard Stallman's appeal drive him to throw his weight behind KDE?

Not likely, unless TrollTech (or somebody who buys them out) releases Qt under a license that's compatible with versions of the GPL greater than 2. As it stands, you can't distribute a GPLv3 KDE app, because Qt is licensed as GPLv2-only (and a proprietary licence, which is useless in this context).

A GNOME is fine too

Sure compared to KDE gnome is minimalist but that is a feature!!

Some, a lot, of us choosed GNOME on our own. Stop saying GNOME users only use it because it is the default desktop or because we want to disagree.

Saying that I have to mention that lately GNOME has been pulling features from under my feet, If they weren't adding features to compensate I would become very pissed about it.

I'm so used to GNOME, and find it so much more comfortable than KDE that it is probable that i'll stick with it for a long time.

On the other hand, KDE 4 is coming...

I read the whole thing

And Gil did not seem to be anti-ogg at all, he merely stated that his employer is very pro-MPEG and as such actively tries to remove chances for non-MPEG codecs.

Gnome issue

The one big problem with Gnome is that it embodies exactly what ordinary folk would imagine when you asked them about the meaning of "computer nerd". The image is that of a clumsy, pimply boy living somewhere in a basement, desperately trying to be anti-establishment. In a way, it wants to be a techno-hippie. Now imagine that the nerd's world was suddenly turned upside down by his views becoming mainstream, at least to a certain degree. By now, it has become kind of common to think and say that Microsoft is the devil, that the whole proprietary software crap should be buried in an unmarked grave, etc.

That's exactly the situation Icaza and his cronies are finding themselves in. They wanted to be rebels, even saviors. One sign of that is the (rather fruitless) experiment that is Gnome. In an attempt to describe it, I arrived at the following:

Gnome is like the intersection of the Apple and Microsoft design teams without the resources or the skills.

Or in other words: Epic fail! You want proof? Until today, Gnome has consistently failed to even grow a usable file selection dialog. I rest my case.

Ironically, denouncing the rest of the "scene" has that way become the logical way to again be different. It's a purely religious reflex: if someone threatens your perceived dominance, it is declared evil. If you think about it, deep in its absolute retardedness, it's kinda cute on that level.

KDE in GNU

I would really like to see KDE or a similar system becoming an official GNU project. It is really awkward to have GNOME in GNU while RMS is recommending them to make an announcement against Microsoft's OOXML. I mean... GNU projects are supposed to be the ones with utmost respect of freedom, openness, etc... what the hell do pseudostandards like OOXML have in free software and especially within GNU projects? Yea, I know it's a historial artefact resulting from the Qt licensing issue... but this is past, isn't it? I personally do have some issues with Qt other than licensing, but I think that GNU could accept KDE or a similar desktop project within its ranks. I think RMS should invite KDE to join the GNU project officially as an alternative to GNOME.

Hopefuly....

....this will give Canonical a reason to put more focus on Kubuntu. Honestly, people behind GNOME has been pulling some stupid moves recently, I remember when GNOME was only for free standards, now all they want to do is just keep backing M$ it seems.

" ... This "users are idiots, and are confused by functionality" mentality of Gnome is a disease ... Please, just tell people to use KDE." -- Linus Torvalds

I'll stand behind OOXML

When MS decides to natively support ODF in MS Office.

Microsoft often talks about dual, equal standards, but it obviously bullshit unless MS Office, with the vast resources behind it, can support the same formats as the relatively resource poor OO.org, or KOffice, or Wordperfect.

I'm certain that the world would drop its objections to OOXML if MS decided to support ODF, without an addon plugin. Instead, by making it an us (ooxml) or them(odf) decision, they've invited hostility.

The shocking thing is the syncophants in the OSS community would eat Microsoft's propaganda/excrement while being slapped in the face.

Why should we support two new formats, when they only support one? Especially since OOXML is not yet used by most organizations; and if it is a real "open" standard, we can implement it "when customers demand it".

There can be only one...

Will the GNOME Foundation's indifferent response to Richard Stallman's appeal drive him to throw his weight behind KDE?"

I sure hope so.

Gnome sucks. Their UI is inconsistent and awkward.

While competition is usually a good thing, in desktop UI, we / GNU-Linux would be way better off with a single standard and KDE is far superior to Gnome.

I have no affiliation with either Gnome or KDE.

KDE vs Gnome/ Ogg Vorbis

Does Stallman weight enough to make a difference?

Re:Miguel de Icaza

No, he is on Novell's payroll.

Novell is on MS's payroll.

Re:Miguel de Icaza

Novell is on MS's payroll.

But the default desktop for SUSE Linux (owned by Novell) is KDE... So GNOME uses de Icaza who promotes Microsoft on Novell's payroll which ships KDE as the default desktop, but Microsoft has an agreement with Novell who has de Icaza on payroll and - Oh no, now I'm dizzy!

Re:Miguel de Icaza

This [slashdot.org] should help. A quick bit of text from Miguel him self from the link on his endorsement of OOXML that the article refers to.

I made that comment on my blog because that reflects my personal opinion. You really need to obsess over something else. And before someone brings up the Microsoft connection, you should know that Novell official policy is to actively endorse ODF and that Novell's position on OOXML is neutral.

So it looks like Novell works on implementing Microsoft stuff but does not officially think you should use it. Miguel thinks that MS does a good job every so often and Linux should work with MS standards.

I don't agree with the good job part but think about it. If MS switches over to OOXML and Linux can support it just as well as Windows who needs Windows? The same logic works with .NET. I am aware that this is easier said then done but it has been done before [wikipedia.org]

Re:Miguel de Icaza

I agree with you that the support for MS Office formats in Linux is flaky, as it the support for MS Office formats in MS Office.

There, fixed that for you.

Re:Does it matter anymore?

Not until KDE 4.1.

Re:Does it matter anymore?

Since all recent popular Linux distributions other than OpenSUSE, PCLinuxOS, Mandriva, MEPIS, Knoppix, Freespire (Linspire) and Slackware, you mean?

GNOME is hardly the default, and trying to assert it as such is incorrect.

Ubuntu and Fedora use GNOME, but Fedora ships with KDE, and for the Ubuntu crowd there's Kubuntu...

Re:Does it matter anymore?

really? This Kubuntu of mine doesn't look very GNOMEy.

Re:Does it matter anymore?

Since all recent popular Linux distributions uses Gnome by default, does this really matter anymore?

The only new linux distribution to default to Gnome and exclude KDE in recent years has been Ubuntu. The overwhelming speed at which Ubuntu has grown (I'm posting from Gnome/Ubuntu now) has largely been down to the development team going the extra mile to develop a truely user-friendly interface.

However, as with all open source projects, alternatives are available - Kubuntu, for example, or simply 'apt-get install kde'. Personally I have both installed and highly value the competition and choice between them.

So yes, it does matter - it is trivially easy for individual users to switch to another desktop. All the apps they have got used to will still work (I use mostly KDE apps). The decision for the developers may take more consideration, but the users will continue to use what each feels is most appropriate. If one drifts away from being truly free, the effects will ripple back upstream.

Re:Does it matter anymore?

However, as with all open source projects, alternatives are available - Kubuntu, for example, or simply 'apt-get install kde'.

For those interested, the way to get proper KDE support on a standard Ubuntu install is "sudo apt-get install kubuntu-desktop". This will include not only KDE, but also the standard Kubuntu applications and artwork.

Re:Does it matter anymore?

By recent popular do you mean "Ubuntu"?

Re:Does it matter anymore?

Since all recent popular Linux distributions uses Gnome by default

Say what?

Re:Does it matter anymore?

IMHO, they use GNOME by default in the vain hope that commercial software developers will have easier time releasing closed-source binaries for their distros (which is quite disgusting, of course). You need to buy a QT commercial license to do that stuff (at least the payments are used to support QT development). Anyway - few people _do_ that stuff. And I think that's basically the only reason GNOME is by default.

As for "all" popular distros, the word "commercial" is missing. Or at least "commerce-oriented" (and, yes, yes, Ubuntu is one of these). PCLinuxOS, Mepis are very popular and nice KDE-based distros. PCLinuxOS is particular, I find it has a healthy, free, even "scene"-like attitude to it.

Re:Does it matter anymore?

Since all recent popular Linux distributions uses Gnome by default, does this really matter anymore?

Kubuntu

Re:Idiots

Gosh. You guys are a bunch of angry morons. Life isn't about taking your ball and going home. It's about doing deals to gently move the status quo over to your side. Taking your ball and going home isn't going to actually SOLVE anything.

As far as I can see, the ODF ball is being given to everyone, including Microsoft. Except Microsoft doesn't want to play, which is normal.

They want everyone to adopt to using their ooxml ball, but they keep giving it as a flat ball to everyone and only they can pump it up. Not sure what Microsoft wants, but they're not exactly playing with anyone.

Re:Tune In Next Week

This is exactly the sort of thing the GNU/Linux, F/OSS people need to be careful of. These are serious matters, and this joker wants to ad-hominem RMS in an attempt to minimize the impact of his statements. Note, no refutation of fact, merely insults, childish ones at that.

Yea, maybe RMS's appearance is, lacking a better phrase, unorthodox, but his words and actions are the issues here. Stop being a child and focus on the subject, or is it your job to distract from the subject?

Re:Does it matter anymore?

'By default' doesn't mean that Gnome is always used: at work we use RHE3, but a majority of users use KDE, not Gnome..

Re:Does it matter anymore?

By recent popular you pretty much mean Ubuntu, right? I think Gnome is chosen mostly because there's fairly little standardization compared to KDE and so easier to differentiate and add value. I've tried KDE on Debian, Kunbuntu and SUSE and KDE is pretty much all the same. KDE releases become vastly more important than distro releases. While everyone talks of KDE being more like Windows, in terms of consistancy KDE with their k* apps are more like OSX with their i* apps while Gnome is the windowsish one. Run KDE/Konq/KOffice vs Gnome/Firefox/OpenOffice and you'll know what I mean.

Besides, I thinl both are stronger for it, with something as intangible choice is good and there's nothing preventing them from stealing good ideas from each other. What corporations find as a downside is that Qt requires a licensing free for closed source, but I didn't see anything closed-source on Gnome I'd want yet so it's an empty threat. KDE is still plenty popular with users - I'm surprised it's held up so well waiting for KDE4. If KDE4 can deliver through on the functionality they've promised and at the same time expand their market to Windows, I see only sunshine not dark clouds in KDEs future.

Re:Does it matter anymore?

Since all recent popular Linux distributions uses Gnome by default, does this really matter anymore?

The relevant question(s) here is: "Since a handful of supposedly enterprise desktop distributions have defaulted to Gnome for a while, has this actually made any difference whatsoever to anyone using free desktops at all? If this is the case, why does anyone even talk about KDE anymore?"

Re:Idiots

It is a sucky standard. Who cares? Not me. I'd sure rather it work than everybody cry about it.

I'd rather people focus the energy on stuff that makes our software stronger and more appealing, rather than trying to implement ill-defined 'open' specs. Mono on linux, for example, is a travesty to me.

Admitting it?

Isn't that statement essentially an admission that KDE purposely linked GPL licensed code to the older, proprietary Qt code (thus violating copyright law)? In that case, yes, the original copyright holder can revoke their privileges under GPL 2. This is one of the things that was changed in GPL 3.

Re:Admitting it?

yes, KDE purposefully linked GPL licensed code to QPLv1 code. however, it was THEIR code which means that they were fully within their rights to do so. anyone building apps on top of those libs implicitly agreed as well.

linking someone else's code would be an issue, and in the 2 cases where that happened it was rectified as soon as it was brought up; it's also useful to note that those 2 cases were small code fragments, not significant bodies of work, and as such certainly not evidence of a willfull plot or some such thing. they were oversights, and corrected in a timely manner without fuss.

and this was what, getting to be 10 years ago now? today we have nice clean GPL'd (or "better") code on every platform we support. let's find some new issues to grind over. =)

Re:Does it matter anymore?

If KDE4 delivers half of what it promises this could very well be what tips things in favour for KDE. Gnome has not developed much in recent releases and is in some areas stagnated (nautilus, gnome-panel and for eg. the stupid register idiocy). Dont get me wrong, i like gnome but miquel and his bending over for Microsoft, mono and Gnomes spineless aproach to MS is driving me towards ANY other desktop.

Re:Idiots

???

Life isn't _usually_ about taking your ball and going home.

Every once in a while, however, you meet a predator/bully who cannot be challenged via _any_ means except a war to the death. You do not beat diseases by negotiating with bacteria. You do not eliminate rats by trying to train them away from dumpsters. You cannot negotiate with an irrational tyrant expect positive results.

We've already been through the standards process for a document format. There's an ISO standard for documents: ODF. Anything that does not build on ODF is a subversion of that process. Worse, Microsoft's methods are extremely slimy.

You cannot beat Microsoft on the playing field, since MS has the money to insure there aren't any fair playing fields. That's why _we_, the angry morons, need to try and balance the field the other way.

Re:KOFFICE?

given that KOffice uses ODF natively, providing good evidence that ODF is not simply a one-project/company proprietary format being dressed up as a standard, yes it is important. it's a very compelling argument in favour of ODF that has been used quite a bit in the push towards ODF standardization; it's not uncommon to see ODF stalls at tech events showing OpenOffice one one computer and KOffice on another displaying the same document. more examples of ODF usage are appearing every day now, of course =)

and yes, a good number of people do use KOffice. certainly not as many people as use OpenOffice, but to the users of KOffice knowing that they are working with apps that use an interoperable format is indeed pretty important to them.

Re:Idiots

Life isn't about taking your ball and going home. It's about doing deals to gently move the status quo over to your side. Taking your ball and going home isn't going to actually SOLVE anything.

You've been beaten silly by the school bully every day for 4 years. The principal knows what's happening - he even issued a formal statement that the bully was using his size to illegally control every kind on the playground - but no one does anything about it.

Your options are:

1. Take your ball and go home,
2. Organize the other kids to whoop the crap out of the bully once and for all, or
3. Be extra-nice to the bully and hope that next time he'll pick on someone else.

Your way just gets you another beating. After a while you have to say that enough's enough.

Re:OMG... Stallman is against MS? No Way!!!

ISO/IEC 26300 would like a word with you outside.

Re:Miguel de Icaza

Yeah, in the sense that Microsoft is doing everything it can to impede Linux on the desktop, we will be going through Microsoft to get to where we're going.

Re:Idiots

But that's the beauty of Open Source. The community wrote this software. Us. We don't have to compromise for shit, because this is software that everyone can use, and hack, for free.

Microsoft has proven time and again that if you give them slack, they'll hang you with it. So, fuck them. They've held up the state of computing for long enough. We now have free and open software that would have been the envy of many proprietary vendors only a few years ago. And this software isn't going to go away. Adobe can't make GIMP's version bumps produce incompatible formats. Apple can't make CentOS look for license keys and refuse to run. Microsoft can't make us embrace, extend, and extinguish an RFC. It's time we've left them behind. If they want to play in the new ball game, fine. But they'll have to play by our rules.

Calling names doesn't help, either.

Re:Idiots

[Life is] about doing deals to gently move the status quo over to your side.

The hell it is.

Re:sounds like Novell is running the show now

Of course, now there's a GNU project that's purposely linking QT's GPL2 code to their now-GPL3 application (Gnash), which has the same legal issues...

Re:sounds like Novell is running the show now

KDE never linked QT to their code. QT was dynamic the end user did the linking. Debian had questions about whether they could legally redistribute KDE and QT there was never any question whether KDE could legally distribute its own code.