Dear Microsoft,

For years, I have watched and admired you from afar, playing witness to your unshakable dominance of office productivity suites, wept when it seemed the world spoke coldly of Office 2007, and protested with great vehemence against your blisteringly unfair convictions as an evil monopolist. Why does the world misunderstand you? Why does it question your intentions?

I hope that next month, when the International Organization for Standardization reviews the 3,500 technical issues raised regarding your proposed OOXML standard, that beautiful standard it so cruelly rejected last year, justice will prevail and you will go on to succeed in yet another proprietary vendor lock-in.

Deepest affections,

The Burton Group

Ok, so the recent report issued by Burton Group, a research firm specializing network and applications infrastructure technologies, doesn't come right out and profess its love to the Redmond-based software company, but it might as well.

The report reads more like a love letter than a critical study aimed at taking a hard look at whether the Open Document Format realistically stands a chance against Microsoft's everpresent Office Open XML file format. Had it done that, it could've been incredibly interesting.

Instead, the lengthy report, when boiled down, not only disses the long-term relevance of the Open Document Format, but then goes and blames Sun Microsystems for the format's downfall (if and when a downfall is to occur).

"ODF Will Continue, Albeit in a Relatively Minor Role," is the title of one section of the report, where its authors give ODF the equivalent of a golf clap, but eventually conclude that the file format is doomed because of the iron grip currently maintained by Microsoft competitor, Sun.

The report also suggests that if Sun would just back off (and seemingly stop thinking the worst of Microsoft), ODF would be far better off.

"Although Sun could considerably simplify ODF-related processes by yielding full control of both ODF and OpenOffice.org to standards bodies and open-source initiatives, it's probably already too late for such a move to make a significant difference to ODF's trajectory. Sun appears to have placed strategic bets that (1) it could continue to control ODF (through OpenOffice.org), under the auspices of international standards, without thwarting industry support for the standards, and that (2) Microsoft would seek to subvert standards procedures in order to inappropriately gain competitive advantage with OOXML. If Sun implicitly or explicitly placed these bets, it appears to have lost both."

Here's another snippet from the report:

"Microsoft Will Aggressively Compete but Also Play Well with Others on OOXML"

Totally. I believe that statement, about as much as I believe the tooth fairy has just been on sabbatical, and that's why she hasn't picked up all those teeth I've been storing under my pillow since I was eight.

It goes on to say:

"Without a doubt, Microsoft created OOXML in order to expand market opportunities for Microsoft Office, a nontrivial challenge for a product with market share greater than 90% in many areas. Critics have asserted Microsoft will go to extremes to protect its phenomenally profitable Office business, and that's certainly the case in terms of the billions of dollars Microsoft invested in Office 2007 and additional investments it has made in complementary (and complimentary [i.e., free]) services such as Office Live Workspace."

And without a doubt, Microsoft fully intends to keep assert its dominance in the open standards arena as well. Clearly, the software giant sees the Open Document Format as a threat to its standing in the file format market, and it should. Just as it should do everything it can to protect Office, that's its lifeblood, its bread and butter. Microsoft would be crazy to want to share the wealth. It is, after all, a business.

This might be my personal fave though:

"While there have been episodes of over-zealousness in the drive for ratification--for example, Microsoft Sweden's offering marketing contributions to its partners as a way to encourage them to vote for OOXML in the ISO approval process--these appear to be the exception."

Ok. Let's be clear about this. Microsoft was trying to bribe its partners in Sweden to join the Swedish Institute of Standards, in order to cast "yea" votes approving OOXML as a standard. Suspicion was raised when more than 20 newly registered Microsoft partner companies appeared seemingly out of the blue, leading to an unexpected "yes" vote.

Groklaw translated the leak memo that blew Microsoft's cover, which among other things, revealed the software giant's instructions to newly registered partners.

"'[The partner companies] do not need to discuss the technical contents in the specification but should be prepared to offer a few arguments as to why they vote yes - these will be provided by Microsoft,' the company writes. The fee for joining SIS is 15 000 SEK [appx $1200] and the partnership companies will have to cover this themselves, but the software giant offers 'marketing support' and 'additional support in the form of Microsoft resources' to the partners that join and participate in the ballot."

Now I don't want this post to come across as just one big "screw Microsoft" manifesto. Let's face it, the company has done plenty right to be where it is today.

But this report is just straight-up industrial psychology at its finest and detracts from what could be a super-compelling argument.

Definitely check out the report when you get a chance. It's lengthy, but you can skim through the bulk of it. Really, the end of the report is where the meatiest sections can be found.