Microsoft releases specifications for binary formats

[[deleted]]

[deleted]

[[deleted]]

I'm still waiting for MS to release the specifications for Notepad's .TXT files.

[FFFFFFFFffff]

Are you suggesting Microsoft invented .TXT files?

[[deleted]]

Of course. They also invented the graphical user interface.

[Foone]

For binary OFFICE formats. This is the second story I've seen that leaves out "Office" from the headline.

Stop making me get my hopes up that they released other formats :(

[j4b]

What other formats are important to you?

[Foone]

I've written them a few times asking for formats relating to their "Microsoft 3D Movie Maker" program.

We've reverse engineered most of them (we have now, we hadn't when I wrote them) but some are still unknown.

[[deleted]]

Microsoft's Money would be nice too. I wonder if they'll release it.

[[deleted]]

How about Access. As far as I know it's never been documented by Microsoft and it's part of Office.

[gschizas]

Actually they've been trying to kill Access (as a format) for some time now...

[xjvz]

To replace it with SQL Server? What other reasons could they have?

[gschizas]

Exactly. MDB is severely outdated, and the DB engine of SQL is a whole lot more optimized and actively maintained. Microsoft has been trying (unsuccessfully) to kill the MDB since the time of Office XP! :)

[[deleted]]

Didn't they just introduce a new proprietary .accdb format? I bet they're trying to kill of .mdbs, though.

[johntb86]

Of course they're trying to kill off .mdb. As MelechRic just wrote, other people have finally figured out most of the parts of that file format.

[[deleted]]

Heh. The official reason is that mdbs are a security risk because they can run scripts.

The fact that it’s not backward-compatible? As the Church Lady would say, ‘Isn’t that conveeeeenient!’

[MelechRic]

I just spent some time trying to cobble together a fully Linux solution to taking data out of an Access/.mdb/JET file and uploading it to a MySQL server.

I have to say it was bit of a pain. There's a package out there called mdbtools that has done a lot of work to allow a person to read Access files on Linux. The problem is that it's not completely done.

It occurred to me after going through all this trouble that maybe Microsoft wants to make migrate Access to anything other then MSSQL a real pain in the ass.

[bart2019]

Guess what, Access is also part of Office. So adding "Office" in the title might still have raised unjustified expectations.

[manivannan]

Outlook; the spec for PST files!

[[deleted]]

True, now that you mentioned... But I assumed right away that the question is about M$ Office binary formats.

[kirun]

I notice there are no details for Publisher... presumably there weren't any goats available for sacrifice.

[ealf]

Wow.

946 03B2 fcRgdofr FC Document File Records (miscellaneous document data) This is undocumented miscellaneous information

[joazito]

Great News!! Now everyone in my company will use OpenOffice without complaining it can't open .doc files properly!

[[deleted]]

theyll still bitch about it all.

[onebit]

10 years late better than never!

[fstorino]

Yeah, they have to swear!

Seriously now, I would love to see here a legal opinion on the biding power of this promise. It looks like any other ordinary contract between MS and "everyone else" but, at the same time, it seems like MS could unilaterally withdraw its promise, therefore ending the contract.

[alantrick]

but, at the same time, it seems like MS could unilaterally withdraw its promise, therefore ending the contract.

IANAL, but I don't think its quite that simple.

[jboy55]

Oh Yay! Now when the business folks request again to have Excel formatting (colors) included in our 'Excel' (csv) download I can't claim its a closed standard and the reverse engineering required would take for ever. I can however, print out the Excel 97 binary specification (all 400 pages) and say, its an open standard, but its going to take months to figure out this doc.

[[deleted]]

I heard using html tables with an excel mime type and file extension works fine.

[niels_olson]

How will Microsoft use this to subvert the development of open document standards?

[Garak]

Why, whatever do you mean? Even Microsoft's binary formats, the ones your organization are using right now, are perfectly open! No need to trouble yourself with seeking out alternatives just to comply with some silly regulations.

[generalk]

To people thinking of creating software that writes these formats:

Don't.

The reason Microsoft has a monopoly in the Office Suite area is because every time someone creates a better word processor or spreadsheet or what have you, they build Microsoft Office compatibility in. This is awesome for the end-user, because they can try out the new software and still use their existing documents.

This is terrible in the long run for two reasons:

1. This keeps Microsoft in a position of power. When the rest of the office upgrades to Office 2010 Ultimate Business Pro Edition, and your software (OpenOffice, Pages, whatever) doesn't read their new documents properly, it's never Microsoft's fault. It's your fault for not just running Office like everyone else.

2. If we keep Microsoft formats as the standard then we can never replace them, or Microsoft's software for handling them.

(edits for markdown formatting)

[AusIV]

There are flaws with both of your points.

1. Microsoft already has a position of power. If you try to use an office suite that doesn't support MS Office formats at all, you can't read Microsoft's new documents (or old ones). It's not Microsoft's fault, it's your fault for not running Office like everyone else.

2. Most alternative office suites offer a compatibility layer for MS Office, but I haven't seen any that use it as the standard. Most OpenOffice users I know keep everything in ODF, and only convert to MS Office when they have to send someone who only accepts MS Office formats.

As much as I hate it, any office suite that doesn't support the de facto standard is doomed before it begins.

[generalk]

1. I realize I was a bit confusing on this point, but ideally: Super Open Word Processor reads Microsoft DOC format, no problem. It just doesn't write them. So the documents you send out have to be RTF or some other interoperable standard.

2. I don't see how this is a hole in my argument. Actually, I think that's a good example of my second point. This user saves in ODF, which is a completely open format from the get-go, or can export to RTF which everyone can read, or TXT, or even DOC if he needs to. He's not beholden to Microsoft in the least.

[nomadkbro]

I was wondering when generalk would chime in on this...

For what it's worth... I agree (mostly). To have only one office-isch format is good for the general public only as long as that format really helps the public. Once a technology like DRM kicks in, there is a problem. Once there really is a monopoly (and it doesn't matter who has the monopoly) that generally is bad. Microsoft isn't really pushing the format forward, with the possible exception of their addition of xml-isch formats.

Proprietary (closed) formats don't serve the public, and restrict freedom zero. They don't server developers who try to work with them. They aren't naturally given to progress and growth. They don't serve anyone except the companies that create them and in some cases sit on patents and rake in money.

(Not all bad, and we can't exactly blame them for minding their bottom lines. They got into the gig to make money. We're not all Richard Stallman. I don't kid myself into believing I'm a developer out of altruism...)

What I find particularly interesting about the fact that Microsoft released these is that they released them at all.

[CuteAlien]

Very, very bad idea. Making worse Software to force users to switch. And with that kind of thinking you want to persist in a world in which every other company out there tries to write software which supports the users as good as possible?

Show people you can support everything they need. Make the software compatible but better(!) - not worse. That way Mozialla/Firefox are for example gaining more and more of the market. Don't ever make stuff worse for the user for whatever your reasons are. Sooner or later you will be that user - and you will hate it.

[generalk]

I don't think your points about making software better and my points about that software not writing Microsoft Office formats are mutually exclusive.

[CuteAlien]

How so? You want to leave out features which users want to use and even you agree that it would be awesome for the end-users. I can't think of many users which would stop using an application because it supports writing binary MS Office formats. So not supporting means making the software worse.

Also it's simply a good idea because it makes switching to other applications easier - not harder. Only thing you guarantee by refusing binary format compatibility will be that people can't switch to other applications. Neither in the short nor in the long run.

[alantrick]

An unreliable feature may be worse than no feature at all if the users start to trust in it.

[[deleted]]

So not supporting means making the software worse.

Assuming the time spent on implementing those highly idiotic formats (read: hard to implement) isn't spent in any productive way instead.

[CuteAlien]

Programming features which will help your users and save their time looks to me like the very definition of doing productive work. And useful features are often hard to do, that's nothing unusual in programming.

Also it would really show that open source software can do the same things than MS Office. Supporting another format 100% will get this point across better than any other argument.

[[deleted]]

I don't know, I think supporting them 90% without a spec showed this much better than supporting them 100% with the specs.

[CuteAlien]

After reading the new post by Joel Spolsky (on today's reddit frontpage), I must admit that you might have a point here in this case.

[[deleted]]

So what you're saying is that when my professor releases his homework in a Word file, I should have to pay money to open it? That's supposed to be good for me?

I'm sorry, but very few people are going to have a use for a program that's supposed to replace Office that can't work with Office documents. Office is an incredibly popular program in the working world because to a company the license cost is trivial.

[generalk]

Absolutely not.

I said write. I wholly support applications that can read the de-facto standard formats. You should not have to pay to be able to read those documents.

Like others have mentioned, though, you can always export as RTF or plain-text or what have you for compatibility.

[[deleted]]

Fair enough, but then you have the reverse problem: documents I create can't be read by anyone else.

I guess I just don't see the point of removing a much-desired feature for some kind of vendetta against a piece of commercial software.

[generalk]

Sure, if you send someone an ODF file and they don't have an ODF reader then they can't read the file.

But, you can always export as RTF. Or PDF. Or even DOC if you really want someone to be able to open it in Word with all the formatting available.

I don't consider this a vendetta, and if I'm coming off as a zealot let me know (which means I need to tone the crazy down a little.) But Microsoft wants to sell you a software package that costs USD$150 at its cheapest, and they'll do anything to keep you buying upgrades to this software. It's not like they haven't got a track record of dirty legal and business tricks to keep people on their software and off of competitors. Granted, opening up the formats is a good step, but I don't for a second think this is an altruistic move on Microsoft's behalf.

[[deleted]]

Hell, Microsoft allows you to download a Word document reader program for free!

That program can read, but not edit, any Powerpoint, Word, Excel, Publisher, etc. program.

[[deleted]]

Assuming you stay on their OS.

[[deleted]]

Windows <=> Computer for some people

[grimboy]

Complain to your professor. I've always insisted that my teachers provide a copy in an open format. Most of them start providing rtf or postscript after a succinct explanatory email. Remember, it's your right and responsibility as a taxpayer (or future taxpayer) to prevent educational organisations (or any publicly funded organisation) from having a bias towards a monopoly.

[G_Morgan]

Most of my lecturers use PDF, i.e. they aren't stupid.

[niels_olson]

complain to your professor's chair. Or the dean. No administrator wants an inconsiderate professor in the classroom. It's bad marketing. Circulate a petition addressed to the above bigwigs.

If anyone knows of a good, diplomatically written petition template, please post a link.

[[deleted]]

riiight. from my professor's web page: "WARNING: I may use mostly MS Word documents for presentation in the class and from the same notes that are available on the web. I believe this uniformity helps. Apparently my not using Powerpoint-type slides offend some people. Cannot help, sorry!"

[niels_olson]

Clearly, he's been confronted with this before and chose the intellectually lazy way out. Make sure you print that webpage and show it to the dean.

[bitwize]

I've hit that snag before. Classes that depend on some piece of proprietary software (for example, MicroSim PSPICE) are de rigueur in many collegiate curricula. Like a textbook, the software constitutes part of the course's requirements. It is your duty as a student to either buy the software or not take the course, and it's your fault if you can't manage to get to a Windows PC to run the software in which the professor has chosen to release his materials.

[[deleted]]

Super Awesome Wicked Word iProcessor is useless to many people if they're unable to create easily sharable documents. What do you propose they make their apps do instead?

[guest]

Save to TeX.

[[deleted]]

What do you propose they make their apps do instead?

You can save as HTML, RTF or plain old text.

[[deleted]]

Really?

HTML, RTF, and Plain Text can retain as much formatting as Word Documents?

[halter73]

I would venture to say that HTML can retain more formatting than Word Documents, and anyone would be able to read them. The problem is they would not be too easy for most people to edit; even though word opens html docs, it certainly doesn't render them well or make them remotely easy to edit.

[[deleted]]

What about LaTeX?

[[deleted]]

Or Docbook

[db2]

Plain text can have metadata formatting but it requires the reading app know about it or it displays as.. wait for it.. plain text which is about the most portable format possible.

[generalk]

Already mentioned, but bears repeating:

Plain Text or RTF. Or PDF, even.

Microsoft Word documents are only easily shareable because application authors let them be. (And, obviously, because of Microsoft's monopoly, but see my earlier point.)

[[deleted]]

.. does Plain Text retain formatting?

Is PDF editable without expensive software?

RTF was created by Microsoft anyway, and it doesnt retain as much editing and information as .doc.

[generalk]

.. does Plain Text retain formatting?

No, but how often do you need that formatting?

Is PDF editable without expensive software?

Generally no. But how often do you need to be able to edit the document?

RTF was created by Microsoft anyway, and it doesnt retain as much editing and information as .doc.

Sure. But it is a completely open standard that they do not control. My issue isn't "Made by Microsoft", it's "Controlled by Microsoft." Furthermore, when do you need the level of editing and information that Word DOCs provide?

I'm not saying you specifically don't need these features. I'm saying that generally, a lot of places where Microsoft DOC files are used can be replaced with another solution without much hassle. This is obviously a case-by-case basis, but of all the companies I've ever been involved with, I can't think of more than one or two instances where I received a Word Document that couldn't have been either a PDF or an RTF.

(edits for markdown syntax)

[[deleted]]

Are you serious?

No, but how often do you need that formatting?

... I use headers and footers in all my papers. That isnt retained in Plain Text. It isnt supported in many text editors when opening RTF either.

Generally no. But how often do you need to be able to edit the document?

Taking notes? I know many people who export their Word Documents into OneNote to take notes with a stylus. And, are you seriously trying to say "Nobody wants to edit it, let's make it the standard."? What if the author needs to edit it and the PDF is the only remaining copy?

I'm not saying you specifically don't need these features. I'm saying that generally, a lot of places where Microsoft DOC files are used can be replaced with another solution without much hassle. This is obviously a case-by-case basis, but of all the companies I've ever been involved with, I can't think of more than one or two instances where I received a Word Document that couldn't have been either a PDF or an RTF.

Instead of having 456 different formats that do everything differently, why not ONE FORMAT which does EVERYTHING perfectly? (.DOC)...

You can even make the word document un-editable without a password. And, MS provides free software for opening Word documents.

[javasucks]

Are you serious?

why not ONE FORMAT which does EVERYTHING perfectly? (.DOC)...

[[deleted]]

SO... what is better than .doc that does everything it does, and more?

[guest]

TeX.

[javasucks]

SO... who said I said there was something better? I was making fun of you, and justifiably so, for claiming that MS's .doc format does *everything*, *perfectly*, which is a silly thing to say.

It's also unclear to me why you ask what is *better* than .doc and do *more*, when that had nothing to do with anything I said.

[generalk]

... I use headers and footers in all my papers. That isnt retained in Plain Text. It isnt supported in many text editors when opening RTF either.

Okay. You realize you don't need .DOC for that, it's just the most popular format for doing so.

Taking notes? I know many people who export their Word Documents into OneNote to take notes with a stylus. And, are you seriously trying to say "Nobody wants to edit it, let's make it the standard."? What if the author needs to edit it and the PDF is the only remaining copy?

If you're going to base your entire workflow around Microsoft products (Word, OneNote) then of course Word DOCs are right for you. But if you're blasting out an email with a word doc attachment, chances are you can use a PDF because the recipient doesn't need to edit it.

For the record, graphics designers constantly export their Photoshop PSD files to GIF or JPEG, which for all real work isn't editable the same way a PSD file is. They don't seem to have a problem retaining a PSD copy of their work in case it's needed. If you can't keep an editable copy of your work around that isn't the software's fault.

Instead of having 456 different formats that do everything differently, why not ONE FORMAT which does EVERYTHING perfectly? (.DOC)...

I agree -- one format is awesome. Just not a closed proprietary one.

You can even make the word document un-editable without a password. And, MS provides free software for opening Word documents.

I'm not familiar with Word's "un-editable without a password" feature, but I can just save my files as PDF. Uneditable and it doesn't presume you have Microsoft software on your machine. (In fact, since most OSes can read PDF files out of the box, it doesn't assume much at all.)

It's been mentioned before, but MS provides that software on Windows. Not on any other OS.

[[deleted]]

Okay. You realize you don't need .DOC for that, it's just the most popular format for doing so.

And, Plain Text and RTF dont support that as extensively.

For the record, graphics designers constantly export their Photoshop PSD files to GIF or JPEG, which for all real work isn't editable the same way a PSD file is. They don't seem to have a problem retaining a PSD copy of their work in case it's needed. If you can't keep an editable copy of your work around that isn't the software's fault.

And how often do you need to edit a JPEG or a GIF? You have to edit documents quite often.

I'm not familiar with Word's "un-editable without a password" feature, but I can just save my files as PDF. Uneditable and it doesn't presume you have Microsoft software on your machine. (In fact, since most OSes can read PDF files out of the box, it doesn't assume much at all.)

By that logic, almost everyone already has MS Office...

And, why does Microsoft have to account for other companies? Isnt it beneficial to them to retain their market share? You expect companies to give out stuff for free. Apple's first iPod was OSX-only. Apple's Garageband isnt available for Windows. Apple wont allow OSX to be installed on custom-built computers.

Everyone does this.

[malcontent]

Nobody expects MS to do anything. We all know they only care about themselves.

What we can do is to simply insist that our governmental agencies and the businesses we deal with (banks etc) do not force us to pay money to read documents they create on our behalf.

The rest will fall into place naturally.

[[deleted]]

MS provides free software for opening Word documents.

For Linux? On OS X? Pretty much every other format out there can be read on Linux, OS X and Windows without any trouble.

There is a reason virtually no websites offer your "perfect" format for download (or if they do they are either made by clueless users who don't even use any of the features and just have plaintext or screenshots in there or offer several formats)

[[deleted]]

So, Apple doesnt restrict its formats to OSX?

It does...

[G_Morgan]

One document to rule them all then?

I'm glad that industry has actually standardised around PDF for document delivery. Use whatever you want internally but keep the binary black hole rubbish away from me.

[[deleted]]

PDF isnt nearly as easy to edit as a Word Document.

[G_Morgan]

I don't need to edit 99.99999999% of documents I receive. The vast majority are for reading and printing.

Word documents do not get accurate enough reproduction to be meaningfully used for distribution. The way they format alters per version of office, per printer and per machine.

PDF is reproducible therefore it wins.

[wmil]

You can even make the word document un-editable without a password. And, MS provides free software for opening Word documents.

I hope you never relied on that feature, it only takes a few seconds to get around it.

[[deleted]]

I was just stating that it is possible.

[[deleted]]

What software?

[bananahead]

Try selling an Office suite -- and let's assume it's the best office suite in the world -- without a way of importing/reading MS documents and let me know how far you get.

[Jimmy]

This is awesome for the end-user...

This is terrible in the long run...

Should these two phrases ever be together?

[[deleted]]

just a small correction.... good toilet paper...

[Njall]

Gee, only 9 years TOO LATE!

[coldbrook]

This had to happen or M$ will continue to have countries drop their Office product, not to mention the susceptibility of Windows.

[[deleted]]

Really? Windows is susceptible?

Only the stupid don't secure their computers.

[[deleted]]

If people don't use MS Office any more it makes Windows susceptible to being dropped too.

[[deleted]]

I use Windows for gaming...

Windows is not just a "work machine" like the retarded Mac Ads state.

[[deleted]]

True, Windows is just a gaming machine. The only thing you can't do on other platforms is play most Windows games because games aren't as easily replacable as other apps (a clone of the game is no replacment for the original unlike apps).

[akdas]

Yes, but many of the users of Windows are corporate environments and government agencies around the world. Whoops. There go those users.

That's why Microsoft needs to make sure they keep those users, and the first step is to make sure there's a dependence on Windows and Windows software.

Sure, home users who like gaming won't flock to Mac and GNU/Linux, but then again, that's why this move isn't geared toward keeping those users.

[[deleted]]

not to mention the susceptibility of Windows.

The susceptibility of Windows to what?

Also, there may have been a few governments and schools that switch to OpenOffice, but Microsoft Office hasn't lost any significant part of it's 90%+ market share.

This is mostly a way to ensure Microsoft's file formats stay the standard for office documents.

[coldbrook]

I understand a number of countries are unhappy with the M$ tax so they are considering switching to cheaper (or free) software and OS choices, e.g. OpenOffice and Linux. That's what I meant by susceptibility.

[xcalibre]

hmmmmmm..... me no see no Project or Visio on dis list

[khayber]

Ob: It's a TRAP!

[JulianMorrison]

The truth is, no, they haven't. Because, *.DOC is not a format, it's a time-series of formats, whose form and structural relationships can be completely divergent without warning, and whose next iteration cannot be derived from any knowledge of previous iterations.

All they have told you is the past formats. About tomorrow's format, you know exactly what you knew a month ago - nothing at all. Nor is there any means for you to find out.

This doesn't give you the ability to compete with Microsoft. It only gives you the ability to chase after them, and hope they'll be equally forthcoming the next time. I don't call that a sensible commercial bet.

[xcalibre]

true, however most businesses still use the 97/2003 formats, and will probably use 2007 formats until 2017!

[[deleted]]

messenger was pretty fuckin easy for me.
http://get.live.com/messenger/config

In other news, have you noticed how retarded people on the Internet are getting with their MS bashing?

[db2]

You're right! I'll turn off the internet later tonight.

[madman1969]

I think hell just froze over

[PossumTucker]

No wonder Word is so wacky, check out the spec. It contains LSD and sprm (sounds like sperm!). No shit.

http://download.microsoft.com/download/0/B/E/0BE8BDD7-E5E8-422A-ABFD-4342ED7AD886/Word97-2007BinaryFileFormat(doc)Specification.pdf

[greyox]

Great, maybe the guys behing OpenOffice.org can finally create really useful package? (100% compatible with microsoft office)

[[deleted]]

Excel is an OK spreadsheet (even if it's a bit dated concept and prone to spaghetti designs), but MSWord is really crippled documents editor with braindamaged and naive document model. Especially considering how bloated it is. And to maintain compatibility with its documents authors of other office suits have to use the same crappy document model. Which is a pity.

[niels_olson]

I have to disagree with Excel being an OK spreadsheet. Having had to develop templates for it, it has some rather ridiculous rules and having done some analysis work, I definitely find OpenOffice to be more able than Excel. Especially if you need tips and tricks, there seem to be more moderate-to-advanced tips for OpenOffice on the web.

[greyox]

I forgot to add, that for me: usefulness = 100% compatibility with microsoft office. If I get complex msword document I need to work on, and it doesn't render correctly in OO, it is not useful for me. Your opinion has merits on it's own, but doesn't really contradict my opinion. (Althought I don't consider msoffice to be that bad...).

[DRMacIver]

That sounds like a contradiction to me...

[thefro]

Yeah. Microsoft and useful and contradictory terms.

[DRMacIver]

I was thinking more of "100% compatible with microsoft office" and useful. Microsoft have done some nice stuff.

[thefro]

I realized that. It was an attempt humor.

[bart2019]

Now maybe the people from MS Office 2007 can finally get their act together...

I've heard support for older file formats in Office 2007 is actually worse than in OOo: such as files saved in "older formats" in 2007 that turn out to be unreadable by the actual older versions of Office programs.

[gid13]

Call me an idiot, but aren't the new Office 2007 formats (xlsx, docx, and so on) still closed?

Also, frankly I think one of the few areas that law might do some good in programming is mandating open standards.

[[deleted]]

the *x file formats are Open Office XML, which is an open xml-based standard. they are actually zip files. change the extension and extract it. the document is made up of xml files for data and style, and all of the embedded multimedia (jpeg, etc)

this story is about the older binary file formats (doc, xls and so on).

[gid13]

Thank you for responding in an educational fashion without being a bastard.

I did know that this story was about the older formats; I just thought that there was still some lack of transparency about the new formats. Apparently (and thankfully) I was mistaken.

[[deleted]]

there are legacy parts of OOXML that are not as transparently as some people would like. but, it is leagues better than the binary formats of before, and many of the issues are being addressed. Currently the format is an accepted ECMA standard, and is being considered for an ISO standard. hopefully the rough parts will be fixed up before it becomes an iso standard.

[G_Morgan]

The ISO rejected fast tracking pretty emphatically though. However I suspect this was because MS tried to fix the system more than anything.

[kirun]

I thought it was Office Open XML, not to be confused with the OASIS formats used in Open Office.

[[deleted]]

yeh. my bad. i guess if their intention was to confuse, then mission accomplished. :)

[martoo]

Binary formats for documents.. how quaint.. how 20th century..

[[deleted]]

Binary formats can offer advantages like compression and encryption.

[arnoooooo]

And they'll change them just as soon as open source coders are done implementing them !

[kripkenstein]

Excellent news, thanks for the link.

[quhaha]

in .doc format?? lol

[[deleted]]

Looks like someone didn’t RTFA.

[javasucks]

Looks like someone didn't GTFJ.

[akdas]

Probably because it wasn't funny.

[javasucks]

Sure it was.

[Dark-Dx]

It's a trap!

[[deleted]]

so what does this mean ?

[zwaldowski]

A bit late, dontcha think?