Open Standards

I've been playing with calendar software/services. It started with a nifty application called Rainlendar, which allowed me to enter my friend's birthdays as well as any pending tasks. Some time later Google launched its calendar service and I moved my schedules onto their server. Although Microsoft's MSN (or Live or whatever you want to call it) and Yahoo also have calendars built into their email services, I never use them. Google allows me to share my calendars in iCal format which can be read by many programs and online services. Microsoft only lets you export to Outlook, which I hate so much it's not installed on my computer. I don't think you can share Yahoo's calendar.

As more and more services like PageFlakes and NetVibes come online, my insistence on using open standards paid off. I can now incorporate my calendars into these "personal portals" which would have been impossible had I stuck with MS or Yahoo.

The lesson here is that sticking to open standards is good because your data is not confined to the original service provider. If a competitor comes up with a better way of working with the data, you can take your data and defect to the superior service. In short, it gives you the consumer more choices.

Which explains why I still don't see myself buying an Apple product, despite their superior functionality and aesthetic design. The iPod forces you to upload songs with iTunes and you can't buy songs from anyone else except iTunes Music Store (unless it's from eMusic, which has no DRM). The iPhone forces you to use their nominated mobile provider, AT&T, and you must unlock the phone with your iTunes account. Sure there are ways around these restrictions, but the fact that Apple consistently create their products around closed systems shows their unwillingness to work with competing products. I have no intention to deal with companies that restrict my choices.

So there you go: open good, closed bad. Alternatively, Google good (usually), Apple bad.