Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User
Lost your password?
Welcome to ConsortiumInfo.org
Saturday, October 25 2014 @ 10:09 PM CDT
Friday, January 04 2008 @ 06:24 AM CST
Contributed by: Andy Updegrove
This is the fifth chapter in a real-time eBook writing project I launched and explained in late November. Constructive comments, corrections and suggestions are welcome. All product names used below are registered trademarks of their vendors.
Chapter 5: Open Standards
One of the two articles of faith that Eric Kriss and Peter Quinn embraced in drafting their evolving Enterprise Technical Reference Model (ETRM) was this: products built to "open standards" are more desirable than those that aren't. Superficially, the concept made perfect sense – only buy products that you can mix and match. That way, you can take advantage of both price competition as well as a wide selection of alternative products from multiple vendors, each with its own value-adding features. And if things don't work out, well, you're not locked in, and can swap out the loser and shop for a winner.
But did that make as much sense with routers and software as it did with light bulbs and lamps? And in any event, if this was such a great idea, why hadn't their predecessors been demanding open standards-based products for years? Finally, what exactly was that word "open" supposed to mean?
To answer these questions properly requires a brief hop, skip and jump through the history of standards, from their origins up to the present. And that's what this chapter is about.
Friday, December 28 2007 @ 12:07 PM CST
Contributed by: Andy Updegrove
This is the fourth chapter in a real-time eBook writing project I launched and explained in late November. Constructive comments, corrections and suggestions are welcome. All Microsoft product names used below are registered trademarks of Microsoft.
Chapter 4 – Eric Kriss, Peter Quinn and the ETRM
By the end of December 2005, I had been blogging on ODF developments in Massachusetts for about four months, providing interviews, legal analysis and news as it happened. In those early days, not many bloggers were covering the ODF story, and email began to come my way from people that I had never met before, from as far away as Australia, and as near as the State House in Boston. Some began with, "This seems really important – what can I do to help?" Others contained important information that someone wanted to share, and that I was happy to receive.
One such email arrived just before Christmas in 2005. In its entirety, it read:
Enjoy reading your consortiuminfo blog ... keep it up.
Happy New Year,
This was a pleasant and welcome surprise. Until the end of September, Eric Kriss had been the Massachusetts Secretary of Administration and Finance, and therefore Peter Quinn's boss. Together, they had conceived, architected and launched the ambitious IT upgrade roadmap that in due course incorporated ODF into the state's procurement guidelines.
Monday, December 10 2007 @ 07:05 AM CST
Contributed by: Andy Updegrove
This is the third chapter in a real-time eBook writing project I launched and explained in late November. Constructive comments, corrections and suggestions are welcome. All Microsoft product names used below are registered trademarks of Microsoft.
This chapter was revised at 8:30 AM on 12/11/07, most significantly by adding the "Lessons applied" section.
Chapter 3: What a Difference a Decade Can Make
In 1980, Microsoft was a small software vendor that had built its business primarily on downsizing mainframe programming languages to a point where they could be used to program the desktop computers that were then coming to market. The five year old company had total revenues of $7,520,720, and BASIC, its first product, was still its most successful. By comparison, Apple Computer had already reached sales of $100 million, and the same year launched the largest public offering since the Ford Motor Company had itself gone public some twenty-four years before. Microsoft was therefore far smaller than the company that Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak had formed a year after Bill Gates and Paul Allen sold their first product.
Moreover, in the years to come, PC-based word processing products like WordStar, and then WordPerfect, would become far more popular than Microsoft's own first word processing (originally called Multitool Word), providing low-cost alternatives to the proprietary minicomputer based software offerings of vendors like Wang Laboratories. IBM, too, provided a word processing program for the PC called DisplayWriter. That software was based on a similar program that IBM had developed for its mainframe systems customers. More importantly, another program was launched at just the right time to dramatically accelerate the sale of IBM PCs and their clones. That product was the legendary "killer app" of the IBM PC clone market: Lotus 1-2-3, the spreadsheet software upon which Mitch Kapor built the fortunes of his Lotus Development Corporation.
Sunday, December 02 2007 @ 02:07 PM CST
Contributed by: Andy Updegrove
This is the second chapter in a real-time eBook writing project I launched and explained last week. The following is one of a number of stage-setting chapters to follow. Comments, corrections and suggestions gratefully accepted. All Microsoft product names used below are registered trademarks of Microsoft.
Chapter 2 – Products, Innovation and Market Share
Microsoft is the envy of many vendors for the hugely dominant position it enjoys in two key product areas: PC desktop operating systems – the software that enables and controls the core functions of personal computers - and "office productivity software" – the software applications most often utilized by PC users, whether at work or at home, to create documents, slides and spreadsheets and meet other common needs. Microsoft's 90% plus market share in such fundamental products is almost unprecedented in the technical marketplace, and this monopoly position enables it to charge top dollar for such software. It also makes it easy for Microsoft to sell other products and services to the same customers.
Microsoft acquired this enviable position in each case through a combination of luck, single-minded determination, obsessive attention to detail, and a willingness to play the game fast and hard – sometimes hard enough to attract the attention of both Federal and state antitrust regulators. Early on, Bill Gates and his team acquired a reputation for bare-knuckle tactics that they sometimes seemed to wear with brash pride. Eventually, these tactics (as well as tales of Gate's internal management style) progressed from industry rumors to the stuff of best sellers, like Hard Drive: Bill Gates and the Making of the Microsoft Empire.
With the emergence of the Web, of course, the opportunity for widely sharing stories, both real (of which there were many) and apocryphal, exploded. Soon Web sites such as Say No to Monopolies: Boycott Microsoft enthusiastically collected and posted tales of alleged technological terror and dirty deeds. More staid collections were posted at sites such as the Wikipedia. The increasing tide of litigation involving Microsoft, launched not only by state and federal regulators but by private parties as well, generated embarrassing documents. Such original sources were not only difficult to deny, but almost impossible to repress in the age of the Web - and of peer to peer file sharing as well.
Moreover, while Bill Gates and his co-founders rarely displayed the creative and innovative flair of contemporaries like Apple's Steve Jobs, neither were they troubled by the type of "not invented here" bias that sometimes led other vendors to pursue unique roads that sometimes led to dead ends.
Sunday, November 25 2007 @ 02:51 PM CST
Contributed by: Andy Updegrove
For some time I've been considering writing a book about what has become a standards war of truly epic proportions. I refer, of course, to the ongoing, ever expanding, still escalating conflict between ODF and OOXML, a battle that is playing out across five continents and in both the halls of government and the marketplace alike. And, needless to say, at countless blogs and news sites all the Web over as well.
Arrayed on one side or the other, either in the forefront of battle or behind the scenes, are most of the major IT vendors of our time. And at the center of the conflict is Microsoft, the most successful software vendor of all time, faced with the first significant challenge ever to ione of its core businesses and profit centers – its flagship Office productivity suite.
Quote of the Day
“[D]o you want to [hand] a 500-page specification...to a light bulb manufacturer, or do you want source code that you can hand to that manufacturer that enables interoperability?
-Linux Foundation Jim Zemlin on why open source software is replacing open standards See all Quotes
Latest NewsITU Plenipotentiary Conference elects Houlin Zhao as next Secretary-GeneralITU.org
October 24, 0214 - The ITU Plenipotentiary Conference roundly endorsed Houlin Zhao of China as its next Secretary-General. Zhao will take office on 1 January 2015 for a term of four years, with the possibility of re-election for one additional four-year term.
The election took place in Busan, Republic of Korea, during the Plenary session of the PP-14 conference this morning. Zhao won the position with 152 votes, with 156 countries present and voting. He contested the position unopposed. Full election results are available here.
Addressing the conference after the vote, Zhao told some 2,000 conference participants from around the world that he would do his best to “fulfil ITU's mission, and, through our close cooperation, ensure ITU delivers services to the global telecommunication and information society at the highest level of excellence."... ...Full Story
Who Open Source is Replacing Open Standards
ComputerWorld.uk October 23, 0214 - ...Here's [Linux Foundation Executive Director Jim] Zemlin's perspective on why the Foundation is becoming involved in so many collaborative industry projects:
"Companies are now as the norm using open source to shed comunity R&D, to do collective innovation, particularly at the infrastructure layer, for almost every aspect of technology, not just Linux - SDN, IOT, network functions virtualisation, cloud computing, etc. What you have seen as a result is this proliferation of organisations who facilitate that development, on a very large professional scale. That's a permanent fixture of how the tech sector operates. We launch a new one of these about every 3 months. Next year we'll have many many more of these type of projects....The largest form of collaboration in the tech industry for 20 years was at standards development organisations - IEEE, ISO, W3C, these things - where in order for companies to interoperate, which was a requirement in tech, they would create a specification, and everyone would implement that. The tech sector is moving on to a world where, in the Internet of things [for example], do you want to have a 500-page specification that you hand to a light bulb manufacturer, or do you want source code that you can hand to that manufacturer that enables interoperability? I think that's a permanent fixture. People have figured out for a particular non-differentiating infrastucture they want to work on that through open source, rather than creating a spec."... ...Full Story
Bitcoin Foundation’s Financial Standards Working Group Underway
Bitcoin News Service October 22, 0214 - In effort to help standardize bitcoin and the bitcoin protocol, the Bitcoin Foundation has announced that the Financial Standard Working Group is well underway, led by Chairperson Beth Moses of Virgin Galactic (and formerly with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration).
The group’s priorities for the fourth quarter of this year into the first quarter of next year will be to apply for ISO 4217. In other words, the group is working to establish and get approval for a bitcoin currency code. They are looking to adopt “XBT”, despite the fact that “BTC” is more commonly used in the community.... ...Full Story
Dutch Parliament urges increase of open source Submitted
EU Joinup October 22, 0214 - The Dutch government must increase its use of open source software, recommends the country's parliament. It wants to make open standards mandatory and use open source when equal to or better than proprietary solutions for all ICT projects over 5 million euro.
The government must enforce compliance with its existing policy on open source software and open standards, the parliament recommends in its final report on failures of government ICT projects. Enforcing the ‘comply or explain’ policy is to become a task for a new agency, overseeing all government ICT projects....The parliament wants the government to report the savings it realises by using open source. This is to become part of the annual business reports of the government.... ...Full Story
W3C Launches Web Payments Initiative
W3C.org October 21, 0214 - W3C announced today a new Web Payments Initiative to integrate
payments seamlessly into the Open Web Platform. W3C calls upon
all industry stakeholders –banks, credit card companies,
governments, mobile network operators, payment solution
providers, technology companies, retailers, and content
creators– to join the new Payments Interest Group and leverage
the unique ability of the Web to bridge ecosystem diversity and
reach users everywhere, on any device. The result will be new
business opportunities, an improved user experience for online
transactions, reduced fraud, and increased interoperability
among traditional solutions and future payment innovations.... ...Full Story
China Celebrates "World Standards Day"
USITO.org Weekly October 21, 0214 - Last week, the General Administration of Quality, Supervision, Inspection & Quarantine (AQSIQ) andStandards Administration of China (SAC) co-hosted a conference to mark World Standards Day, embracing the theme of "Standards Level the Playing Field, Standards Construct Unified Market Rules."
At the conference, SAC announced three immediate standardization reform measures:
- Promote information disclosure of mandatory standards
- Initiate pilots on enterprise standards self-declaration disclosure system
- Expedite systemic reform of code allocation to organizations
Mr. Tian Shihong, Director-General of the SAC, highlighted three key medium and long-term goals:
- Efficient management of mandatory standards
- Development of consortia standards
- Improving participation in international standardization work... ...Full Story
ANSI Seeks Input on the Possible Revision of ISO/IEC Guides on the Adoption of International Standards and Deliverables
ANSI Weekly News October 17, 0214 - The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Technical Management Board (TMB) is seeking respondents for a survey connected with the possible revision of two ISO/International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) Guides providing information on the adoption of International Standards and deliverables. As the U.S. member body to ISO, the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) invites interested parties to respond to a brief ISO survey on this matter.
The two guides are ISO/IEC Guide 21-1, Regional or national adoption of International Standards and other International Deliverables – Part 1: Adoption of International Standards, and ISO/IEC Guide 21-2, Regional or national adoption of International Standards and other International Deliverables – Part 2: Adoption of International Deliverables other than International Standards. The results of the survey will be used, in conjunction with similar surveys taking place in thirteen other ISO TMB member nations, to inform the TMB’s decision-making process regarding the potential revision of the guides, which were last updated in 2005. Further consultation with the IEC regarding the revision is expected following the end of the survey period.
Stakeholders are asked to complete the survey form, available online, and submit it to Steven Cornish, ANSI senior director for international policy, at email@example.com by close of business on Friday, November 7, 2014. ...Full Story
HIMSS seeks specific guidance from NIST on cybersecurity framework
Susan D. Hall
FierceHealthIT October 16, 0214 - The healthcare industry needs the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to get specific about how to implement its cybersecurity framework, HIMSS writes in a letter to NIST Acting Director Willie E. May....In the letter to May, HIMSS said healthcare entities have long been focused on HIPAA compliance, yet compliance does not equal security....It also asks for specific guidance on what an ideal "target state" would be for a healthcare organization and standard metrics or tools to measure progress toward that goal. In addition, both privacy risk management and information security risk management should be addressed.... ...Full Story
AQSIQ and SAC Push for Reform of Enterprise Standards Management
USITO.org Weekly October 16, 0214 - On September 30th, officials from regional quality supervision bureaus and the Standardization Administration of China (SAC) convened in Chongqing to discuss a new system of self-declaration of compliance for commercial product standards....Tian reiterated Premier Li Keqiang's objectives of "completing the national standards system, pushing forward the reform of mandatory standards, and improving the effectiveness, progressiveness and adaptability of standards, inspection and testing." Self-declaration of compliance for commercial product standards is seen as an important step in deepening the reform of the standardization regime, Tian said....Implementation of the new system will take place gradually, with an initial series of pilot initiatives. ...Full Story
Can We Talk: Creating a Common Language for Cybersecurity
Emergency Management October 15, 0214 - As hacking attempts become more complex, governments continue to improve their cybersecurity presence through sophisticated firewalls and expanded procedures. But while high-profile data breaches have focused more state and municipal attention on cyberintrusions, a decidedly old-school problem continues to plague efforts to beef up security — communication.
With a variety of security options available, public-sector agencies often are deploying tools and using strategies that utilize different terminology and principles. These differences can lead to frustration when trying to compare cybersecurity programs and address the latest digital threats across agencies or jurisdictions. Without a standardized language, it’s difficult to gauge how strong another organization’s cybersecurity is.... ...Full Story