In our October 28 discussion of PDF vs. Open eBook Format, we said: "OEB, though much influenced by Microsoft, is evolving with input from many other companies." True, true, true. In 1998, I personally was at the first Open eBook-related meeting at the National Insitute for Standards and Technology where Steve Stone, Bill Gates' e-book director, introduced the OEB idea to various vendors. Almost immediately I pushed the OEB concept to the E-Book Community List, noting that e-book folks should be open-minded even though the initiative came from Microsoft.
That said, I'm pleased to pass on format guru Dorothea Salo's rather vehement assertion that OEB is far more than Microsoft. In other words, yes, the idea has lived up to my hopes in that respect. Would that I were a format maven and had the resources to track the issue as closely as she has. Dororthea and other volunteers deserve credit for their many hours of work on OEB, a cause, not just a standard.
As grateful as I am, however, I remain grouchy that even after several years of OEB, e-book users still lack a common format at the consumer level. We're still in Beta-vs-VHS Land. Yes, there are technological complexities. But I'm still convinced they can be overcome, especially for the many books that, except for their covers, are text only--without the .jpg-bloat issue. As for the lack of a common consumer format, no, it isn't an evil Microsoft conspiracy. I just wish that the hardworking volunteers would try harder to fill the void. Perhaps their employers need to give them the time.
Meanwhile, as promised, more perspective will eventually come on the format question. Later this year you'll hear from a TeleRead participant with both his own opinions and his own format approach. An official TeleRead position? No, but he's entitled, and who knows--the existence of yet another conversion-related standard just might prod OEB folks into faster action on a common format at the reader level.
Is Microsoft's 