Re:Oh, Adobe... read the copy, then view the source.
by pierreminik on Friday August 19, 2011 @07:19PM
(#2905265)
I'm not preaching morals, I'm taking business. Business' care not for fair software but their investment which is why I used the "somewhat open standard"-wording.
In the history you're clinging to you completely ignore that there was no real alternative. Open standards weren't in a viable state. Furthermore the competition from closed standards have forced open standards to shape up.
This is, however, mostly thanks to people reverse engineering Microsoft's original binary file formats, and MS was not really happy about this to begin with. If they could have prevented it, they would have done so (and they tried). Even the newer OOXML is not entirely documented and prevents free implementations due to patents (which, no matter what Microsoft may claim, is the exact opposite of an open standard).
Also, while this conversion might work fine for simple, small documents (or other files), the more complex and larger your filed become the more impossible it becomes to convert without a major hassle, which brings us back to your misunderstanding of 'vendor-lock'. The terms doesn't necessarily mean that it's impossible to switch to alternatives, but also applies when measures are taken to make it as hard as possible to switch without investing heavily in time and money.
As a side note, I am not attacking MS Office specifically. It's just the best example for showing all that is wrong with closed standards and proprietary file formats.