2 Nov
2004
2 Nov
'04
1:48 a.m.
On Mon, Nov 01, 2004 at 05:43:15 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:
What I haven't seen discussed much yet is
'standards' vs. 'open
standards' vs. 'closed standards'.
Windows - closed standard - They apparently know what they are doing
with their architecture. Applications can be written by other
companies that don't have access to the source. Apps work within the
accepted norms of the Windows standard. (Hey - I Didn't say they had
'high' standards...) ;-)
Linux kernel - semi-open standard - The kernel is documented. The code
is open and available to most* people that want to look at it. Changes
are discussed in an open environment but final decisions are made by a
select few.
Java - semi open standard - Much like the Linux kernel many changes
are discussed in the open, but final decisions are made by Sun. (Has
this changed yet?)
IEEE standards (1394, 802.11) - open standard - Discussed in open.
Decisions made by vote of working group members through voting.
Committee rules prohibit 'loading' by individual companies. (At the
discretion of the committee chairman.) Working group participation
open to pretty much anyone willing to attend the meetings.
Thats true, but you could view Linux in the same light, all it takes is to
participate in kernel developement, admittedly it can take some time to
be accepted, but its still open by one view. As a couterpoint, the
joining and travel costs for W3C membership (I'm not familiar with the
IEEE's workings) essentailly put it out of the reach of small companies or
individuals, though it is theoretically open.
- Steve