Doctor John <joh### [at] homecom> wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
> > http://blogs.msdn.com/dmahugh/archive/2009/05/09/1-2-1.aspx
> Ignoring the technical arguments about whether M$ is doing the right
> thing or not (for the record, I believe they're not), I particularly
> like Jomar Silva's comment (fourth one received). In fact I like it so
> much that I'm going to quote it for those who can't be bothered to read
> for themselves:
>
> "If you can't (or don't want) to do that, please stop talking about the
> ODF TC this way, and don't involve TC members with Microsoft business
> decisions (on this episode, yours 'throw mud on everyone' strategy is
> going far from the acceptable limits).
>
> This also raise additional suspicious about your real intention on the
> ODF TC (at least to me)."
>
> As an aside, does anyone know if Doug Mahugh is blogging as part of his
> duties as an employee of M$ or is he writing from a heartfelt belief
> that his employers are right?

He's still right about "This is the state of formula interoperability among ODF
spreadsheets today", despite adding text to numbers being dumb.  And as far as
I can gather, Microsoft is just choosing a side for an underspec, just like
Lotus Symphony or OO.

Post a reply to this message