Charles-H. Schulz writes about the "Ugliness of it all" and puts the whole debate into a larger perspective. A doomsday scenario. I like Charles' narratives.
Let me outline the following steps in Microsoft’s strategy in regard of standardization. … First, Microsoft will try to kill ODF. They can try to do this at two levels: at the level of the OASIS ODF TC, and at the level of the next iteration of ODF, ODF 1.2 (due sometimes this Fall and later to be brought on to the ISO). You can rest assured that Microsoft will exert pressures on the OASIS ODF committees either by attempting to stuff it, or by pressuring players such as Novell, Patrick Durusau, or even Sun Microsystems. One of them is a puppet of Microsoft, bound by heavy investment of Microsoft disguised as a legal and business partnership agreement (Novell), another one made an odd trip not that far from Redmond and came back with a completely new view on OOXML and ODF (P. Durusau), while another one has a strong legal settlement with Microsoft and may not afford to lose it for obvious business reasons (Sun).
It looks as if IBM, RedHat and Google are really the chapeaux blancs movement, a phrase coined by Updegrove. But let us consider another important leverage: An impressive community of over 88 000 supporters of the petition. A strong movement for open standards. Money can neutralize many players in modern standards warfare but once you raised an army that operates in a decentral manner against you, you are doomed. And I know that Charles and myself would have great fun to watch the next episode of the OOXML vs. ODF saga. One more such victory over ODF would utterly undo them. But Charles chose the doomsday scenario:
And then? Then, as Shakespeare once magnificently wrote, then there shall be silence. At last, silence to win, silence to dominate, silence to influence, silence to pressure, and silence to silence them all.
I appreciate his French humour.