12.11.07
”This [Microsoft] Abuse is Well Documented and Should be of Major Concern”
It was only days ago that ISO itself was willing to admit failures with Microsoft. Some said that ISO must no longer be seen as a high-status path for certification as a result of that. It’s sad, but this may be true.
As explained just moments ago, Microsoft will try very hard to have its proprietary format seen as “open”. Even if Microsoft’s assimilation grants it an ISO (which would be catastrophic not only to ISO, but to consumer as well), both the ISO and Microsoft should be worried, for trust has been betrayed and a crucial system been provably broken. The press in New Zealand has recognised this also.
3. ISO Loss of Credibility
Related to the previous point. ISO is the organisation that sets international standards on everything from chemicals in clothing to how your web browsers should work. Countries like New Zealand rely on many of these standards as we simply do not have the capacity to come up with our standards for everything. The credibility of ISO is therefore of huge importance to us.
In an attempt to railroad the world into continued use of their products, Microsoft has ridden roughshod over ISO’s processes and protocols. They have abused a process of standardisation that assumes good intent on all parties. This abuse is well documented and should be of major concern.
The article “Stuffing it Up” talks about these issues in gentle way and serves as a good primer.
Industry Motive: To preserve a monopoly and the fight to protect a four-billion-dollar per year cash cow against those who stand for open standards, against those who want to create even playing fields, fair competition, innovation and open access for everyone to benefit.
It’s sad to find that the ISO is caught in the middle of a vicious battle between the consumer and a single wealthy company that never knew ethics and will never behave like a gentleman. █
Highlight: Novell was the first to acknowledge that Microsoft FUD tactics had substance. Novell then used anti-Linux FUD to market itself. 
Highlight: Xandros let Microsoft make patent claims and brag about (paid-for) OOXML support. 
Highlight: Linspire's CEO not only fell into Microsoft arms, but he also assisted the company's attack on GNU/Linux. 
Highlight: Microsoft craves pseudo (proprietary) standards and gets its way using proxies and influence which it buys. 
Highlight: The invasion into the open source world is intended to leave Linux companies neglected, due to financial incentives from Microsoft. 
Analysis: Xen, an open source hypervisor, possibly fell victim to Microsoft's aggressive (and stealthy) acquisition-by-proxy strategy.