OpenDocument Adoption

[dsr-ssma at tao.merseine.nu (dsr-ssma at tao.merseine.nu)]

Mr. Galvin,

The Boston Globe reports that you are against the proposed move
to OpenDocument data formats. I urge you to reconsider this
position as not being in the best interests of the taxpayers of the
Commonwealth.

The cost benefits of Open Source software are by now undeniable;
it seems that you are not so well acquainted with the benefits of
open data formats to the free exchange of information. The Microsoft
monopoly on office software is buttressed by their proprietary data
storage formats. By regularly changing these secrets, they present a
substantial barrier to entry of competitive software producers. This
system prevents access to old data, as Microsoft gradually phases
out support for old formats in their new software revisions.

Consider the costs of transferring information to new formats every
few years, or losing it, versus the usage of open, extensible
formats such as OpenDocument -- or, indeed, the use of paper and
ink. Had this situation obtained a century ago, most of the records
of the twentieth century would now be inaccessible to us, and those
which survived would only exist because, at great expense, each
software upgrade would need to be purchased and used to transmigrate
the information into the new format. Do you want the government of
this Commonwealth to be in permanent servitude to Microsoft?

Organizations change; computers change. Data should not have to change.  
By adopting the OpenDocument standard, Massachusetts takes a position
in favor of market competition, lowered costs of government, and
rejection of monopolies. Better service to the people, at lower costs:
are these not the principles by which you stand?

Yours,

Dan Ritter
Waltham, MA