OpenDoc Object-Oriented Technology

July 1994

For about a year now, Apple, IBM, WordPerfect, Novell, and Borland have been trying to get attention for a standard for compound documents that they refer to as OpenDoc. This Object-oriented technology is the chief competition to Microsoft's OLE 2.0 as a way of constructing automatically updatable documents from elements selected from multiple applications.

The best way to compare the two technologies is to see a demonstration of OLE and a demonstration of OpenDoc, side by side. IBM would love to have you do that, because it shows off OpenDoc's best side (see below).

Features	OpenDoc	OLE
Editing in Place	Yes	No; Double Click to Open Application
Multiple Simultaneous Live Windows	Yes	No; One at a Time
Shape of Windows	Any	Rectangle Only
Overlapping Live Windows	Yes	No

Think of it this way: OpenDoc is real OO technology that can be created by enhancing existing applications. This means, a developer who owns a successful, but monolithic (all in one piece) application can get to OO in easy steps by using OpenDoc technology to sub-class his existing code into moderate-size objects. Applications need to become components which means they need to be modular, with no global variables. All of their inputs have to come from OpenDoc API's. When the developer is finished, the remaining code involves only boundary changes and he has a subclass XMP part.

But the best news for developers is that any OpenDoc application is automatically an OLE application. This is very important because it's unlikely that mainstream developers can pass up the powerful economic need to be compatible to Microsoft and OLE, even if OpenDoc gave them a better product -- and developers might not have the resources to do yet another version of every product. But if the OpenDoc development effort gives them both OpenDoc and OLE applications as a result of a single effort, it's a lot more interesting.

OpenDoc backers (now really IBM, Apple, and Novell -- WordPerfect is part of Novell and Borland is busy elsewhere) need to add others, especially big players like Lotus, if they're going to successfully compete with Microsoft's well-publicized OLE standard. They'll also need to convince customers that this is the standard and do it before Microsoft convinces those same customers that they can get adequate results with less trouble or the game will be over.

Customers, as we all know, don't buy technology -- be it operating systems or object oriented compound document integration standards. They buy solutions and benefits. OpenDoc has to convince the market quickly and well that OpenDoc offers better benefits and more solutions, so that the standard is set in their favor. Less acceptably for OpenDoc's backers, but more likely, as has happened before, the market can make room for more than one standard.

OpenDoc's CI Labs, a non-profit organization which oversees the well-being of OpenDoc activities and developers, released the OpenDoc SDK on June 1. About 12,000 copies have currently been shipped by all partners. It is in controlled release until the August/September time frame.

Already, the existence of CI Labs to oversee OpenDoc activities, and certify that applications meet the OpenDoc compatibility standard, has proven valuable. Customers and ISV's are complaining that no analogous function -- within Microsoft or independently -- exists for OLE. This leaves the testing of OLE products for compatibility to the customers -- or to informal channels such as PC publishers' test laboratories. Microsoft claims it will not participate in certifying third party software for OLE compatibility, but if this became a market competitiveness issue, we'd guess they might change their minds or -- more likely -- help an independent testing bureau get started (with a generous donation, or perhaps just the promise of Microsoft's own business).

Meanwhile, it's up to customers to develop an opinion. Look at OLE 2.0 and Open Doc and decide your preference. Express that preference to colleagues and software vendors. In software, you only get what you want if you tell the developers what that is.

Comments or Questions: Send Email to opinions@wohl.com

Home/ Search / 2005 Articles / Issue Archive / Free Newsletter

Entire contents © 1994 by Amy D. Wohl. All rights reserved. Reproduction of this publication in any form without prior written permission is forbidden.