What is a Standard?

A Standard is a published document which sets out the specifications and procedures that are designed to ensure that a material, product, method or service is fit for its purpose and consistently performs in the way it was intended. A standard can be:

An Open Standard - Meaning that the standard is readily available and accessible to all and sundry. The primary obligation is on the part of those wishing to adopt or employ an open standard to adhere to and comply with the specifications contained within.

There is also a general proviso that any further developments of an open standard remain open; usually as an amendment or extension of the original, and that any such work must be clearly stated as being supplemental with full detail of said changes being accompanied with complete and open documentation.

A Proprietary Standard - "In-House" or "owned" by some entity or group of entities to the exclusion of all other parties unless otherwise formally agreed upon as shared (cooperative) or limited usage rights between all entities undertaking to the agreement and all stipulations contained within. There is generally no guarantee of interoperability with proprietary standards from different factions.

A classic example being the two video standards that were backed by different factions: Beta Max and VHS. Each technology had its merits and its proponents. But all in all both standards were totally incompatible with each other. As time went by VHS won and Beta Max disappeared off into the sunset.

Another long standing case of note was; up until recently, the incompatibility of Apple® computers and their Mac® operating system and Intel® x86 architecture CPUs. Because the difference here was so fundamental and the methodology that the CPU employed when addressing data was so crucial the very manner in which bit ordering was approached was so diametrically different between the two systems there would never be a meeting of minds here. That is until Apple® decided to go with their own customised version of the now reliable Linux operating system which had been built up over the years to run on Intel® x86 and compatible CPUs now manufactured only by Intel® themselves and AMD® did we see the change. We also saw the Apple® adds promoting Macs as “With Intel® Inside”.

De Facto Standards - Generally de facto standards are followed as a matter of convenience. There are no truly binding regulations between parties that adopt such a standard. One common interpretation that has and still is used by organisations concerns their right of and to substitution.

For example a manufacturer may for whatever reason be unable to deliver goods as promised then at the manufacturer's discretion they are entitled to substitute the goods or services contracted with goods or services of not less than equal to but usually greater value than those originally contracted for. This is a situation that depends very heavily upon the manufacturer, vendor or supplier; of the said goods or services, desire to maintain good-will (their good reputation) in generally exceptional circumstances.

The overall benefit that a small number of customers get in the short term is off-set by the continued loyalty that those customers and many other customers will place with the manufacturer, vendor or service provider.

Well they did go out of their way when they didn't have to. This is a sentiment that promotes much direct and indirect goodwill between current customers and forms the “track-record” by which many future potential customers will make buying decisions. In the marketing industry this is known as “a lost leader”

De Jure Standards - Only because we have to. Here we have a class of standards which are used purely because of more or less legally binding legislation, contracts or other documents.

More often than not some form of legislation has been enacted that has resulted in a statutory body (the legislature or legislative body (usually appointed by government) that issues these types of “official” standards or decrees with ensuing obligation by all parties to adhere to. Thus they can be viewed as prerequisite for conducting business and/or any other affairs between different entities.

Opt-In Standards - The De Jure standard plus the extra mile. The individual or organisation is required to adhere to some form of De Jure standard but has decided for whatever reasons to adopt as a standard policy stipulations that exceed the De Jure standard.

One area in Australia where this is a common occurrence is in the area of Privacy and Privacy Law which is at the moment very inconsistent across the nation.

With regards to Privacy legislation many industries have adopted the approach to present a common front on the national scale although much of their membership may only be bound by law to do so to varying degrees as prescribed by those elements of the Federal law that are applicable and those of their individual State laws that may also be relevant.

This has created a degree of confusion throughout some industries with the result that their appointed council has recommend that they as an industry adopt a common front and propose an opt-in policy to the Office of the Privacy Commissioner which when ratified will be taken as the status quo for all members of that industry to adopt if they so desire.

Because the benefits of compliance are more economical than failing to do so these opt-in standards have a very high adherence rate within each industry (in most cases over 95% participation and compliance).

One reason; that has been given, for this high acceptance level is that in most instances it is believed that in due course; as each State produces its own more complicating legislation, the battle-field of compliance will become ever muddier. With this in mind; by adopting a higher than currently expected level of standard, the industry has every reason to presume; that over time, legislators will take the easy road and simply legislate that which is already current common practice.

There will be very little in the way of power lobby groups to voice difference and so the duly elected will be able to publically pat themselves on the back, lap up the kudos and that will be that.

Opt-Out Standards - Any excuse not to live up to expectations will do. Buyer beware is the rule here.

If an industry has an opt-In standard that it recommends that its members adopt and the vast majority do (usually over 95% compliance with industry formulated Opt-In standards that have been developed with due consultation and open debate from membership is the norm) be vary wary of those individuals or organisations that are unwilling to heed the wishes of their peers.

There is usually a good reason; so ask. You may find that there are legitimate reasons for the opt-out but more often than not you will find; that especially in the case of individuals, if the reason given for the individual's decision to opt-out presents you with an uneasy frame of mind then follow the old adage “if in doubt leave out”. Don't do business with them. It's far better to be safe than sorry (ripped-off).

What is in a Standard?

Never forget that a standard is a written document of considerable depth and detail and is freely available from the organisation or body charged with its formulation, maintenance and upkeep as well as its evolution. Standards will detail such elements and specifications about that which they are defining the standard for and so can be expected to describe to considerable detail such characteristics as:

• Style, form, format, content, presentation, medium etc. in very much the same way as content for publication or transmission via publically accessible media has standards by which TV and radio stations have regulatory conditions to which they must adhere
• Materials physical characteristics, electrical and electronic specifications and characteristics, composition, performance parameters, colour-coding etc
• Internationally agreed standards
• Prescribed, recognized and abided by terms and conditions
• Standards relating to products and services may detail enforceable terms, conditions, parameters, specifications, properties, styles, form factors, formatting, presentation and manner etc
• Other standards will cover such things as intellectual property and intellectual property rights
• Patents are a type of standard that has been around for a considerable time now. Yes there are problems associated with the patents system and many changes have been made over the years in response to issues that have arisen.
• Legally binding standards are also another area of great contention today
• Advertising standards and advertising practices standards according to many lobbyists just simply don't go far enough

These and many other attributes of just exactly what makes a standard will be the subject for part three of this series about Standards, Standardisation and Policies. So stay tuned and I'll see you soon.

For those of you that are like me that spent $300+ on docking systems for the iPod Video can understand how I feel. I have lost so much money because apple decides they want to act like Microsoft. Apple has obviously changed in the last few months/years.

As we all know Microsoft is a Money centered company that will do anything for money (Windows Validation is a prime example). They would go as far as releasing crappy software just to get the profits (Windows ME). So how is Apple acting like this?

Profits

Well the fact that they would add locks to certain features so that you have to buy their products. Can anyone say Microsoft? Locking The TV out feature makes you buy their products to unlock it. Thus increasing their profit off of something they already sold you. This also makes certain people (me) lose hundreds of dollars on something they bought for a previous iPod.

Second Thoughts

I used to always look at Apple as a company of innovation and of quality products that the consumer would enjoy. These days I'm just not so sure. So before you go kick a lot of money for the iPod Classic remembers what I have said. If you have a situation like mine it might just be better to stick with your good old iPod Video.

With the agreement there has come an end to the five lawsuits that both companies had to deal with. In May 2006, Creative started a legal fight with Apple because of the violation of a new patent. Apple reacted with a complaint against Creative, on which the International Trade Council started an investigation at the iPod-manufacturer. Although all lawsuits have been closed with the agreement, the investigation of the ITC however is not yet closed, so it’s still possible that this story hasn’t ended yet for Apple.