[loup-vaillant]

Apparently, most of you only value short term convenience (If you did, you would use open format as much as you could, even if it means worse current software). No wonder the world is build on exponential growth and depletion of limited resources.

EDIT: Please someone tells me where I am wrong. I don't care about downmods, but I do care about being corrected, or else I stay wrong.

[rimantas]

  Please someone tells me where I am wrong

1) You assume that using proprietary formats is only short term value. Why do you think it is?

2) You assume, that everyone going with open formats would improve software. Why should it happen, exactly? I honestly tried various versions of OpenOffice at least a dozen of times and gave up. I have no hope it can get rid of that Frankensteiny feel.

And I have no idea, why and how average office worker (who spends most of the time working with those documents) should know the difference between proprietary and open formats and which is which. In most cases format question will boil down to "this is garbled" and "this looks fine".

[loup-vaillant]

(1) It's about freedom. It's the control of your data. The absence of vendor lock-in. We are more vulnerable when we are entrenched in a proprietary model. In the long run, it will be things like cloud computing, semantic analysis of your output, and even outright spying. Things are already pretty bad right now, and will be worse over time if we don't fight that lucrative model.

(2) In the case of popular software, where a popular alternative already exist, I do (although even if I am wrong, (1) is way more important). Also, I suspect you can't use OpenOffice because you are used to word. My brother, who is not so used to Word, actually prefer OpenOffice. It is a bit like 3DsMax vs Blender. I know no one who learned one first and liked the other.

Now, it should be clear why a non-tech person should be able to tell proprietary format from free ones: it is about a very basic, universal concept: freedom. So they'd better learn the necessary technical skills before they lose their freedom.

This has happened before. When most people didn't know how to read, those who did had a tremendous edge. They could access more ideas, and therefore have more choice, more freedom. The printing press magnified this effect, and ultimately lead to the generalization of democracy in the western world. The catch is, you have to learn to read before you benefit that. And until you do, you will have a hard time to see the need.