this post was submitted on 26 Oct 2026
259 points (96.4% liked)
Technology
89077 readers
3293 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Great going denmark. /s This should not have been much of a challange. And you failed.
I rather disagree, this was always going to be hard. Microsoft will have put serious pressure on them not to switch, and its pain-in-the-ass proprietary lock-in tactics create a lot of friction in making a transfer. And let's also acknowledge that the average office worker is so much a creature of habit that they can't easily adapt to new software without costly trainings and months of service, and even then many people never fully adapt. I don't love that Denmark is stepping back, but let's not pretend that entrenched technologies and contracts are easy to switch.
My organization is slowly switching away from all Microsoft and other SaaS software, there's never been a better time to switch to open source, ever.
The only reason it's taking long is because we are a small team and don't have the capacity to handle that project full time, so it comes one small incremental step at a time.
A government has the resources to employ the right talent to get the job done, it's either incompetence or interference.
Edit:
It was interference.
The worst is that they are expecting complex formats to "just open" and using those complex formats. It's the EU, such a thing as a modern office format should be standardized the hell through, there should be a format specifically designed for all such places, MSO just shouldn't be a factor. Yet when MS kickbacks are involved, it's fine to use something unfit for the task and call a couple of blank pages (at page breaks, I assume) a fatal flaw. Anyway, text formats are complex, but not that complex, MSO's OOXML is just intentionally left open and with variety of interpretations and with implementation's data structures not important for anything written into the standard and in general it's a scam device and MS should have been fined like 50 billion for publishing it and daring to propose it to official entities and as a standard.
What I don't understand is why can't we use something like XHTML with and and tags and a WYSIWIG editor.
I mean, OK, I've spent a few months playing with prototyping a document format with edits history and comments and it's not as easy as it seems, but applying what worked for me to a content format like described above with links to blobs by hashes, blobs stored in the same zipfile, one could get something usable for many office tasks.
Not even talking about org-mode, you know, existing, with just a bit of extension that could fill the role of many office applications.
I mean, no need to even talk about "fit for the task" and efficiency. 90s' WordPerfect was good enough for the same uses. The complexity of formats is a deliberate way to limit competition by MS and a deliberate excuse to keep getting kickbacks for the organizations in question.
There's just one thing that can be done - to make it mandatory to use software developed by government contract for this specific purpose for all governmental stuff, and make it FOSS, and with a FOSS format, and with specifications simple enough for a student to write an editor.
Anyway. This is all dreams.