 these products into our product suites. But it goes even further than that. It is a major criteria that we use in determining our acquisition targets. If there's a really gangbusters capability out there in a marketplace that was built solely independently without any consideration of how it's going to interact with other products, that is a less desirable acquisition target for us, because this is going to cost us more to make it work in our product suite and to make it work with the way our customers want it to work. So open standards are good for customers. Open standards are good for business unless the business is threatened by open. And I guess that's about what I have to say about why would, as Vice President Crowe said, some people say, well, you can't talk about open. You can't use the word open. We aren't sure what it is. Well, that's true. When you get to the far extreme, what is open from a standard-setting point of view? Is the formal standards process open where you have to be a member of a national body or a national committee to get to the table? And in general, you have to purchase the documents. Is that open? Well, I mean, that's the way the systems evolve over the years, but is that open? Well, it's open in that it represents, by whatever mechanism the country's set up, it recognizes their community that they want to send to the table. Small countries have the same vote as big countries. Small markets have the same vote as big markets. That's open. How about W3C? That was actually used as an example. I'm on the advisory board at W3C. I'm very supportive of W3C, but W3C is a benevolent monarchy. Decisions at W3C are not made by any collegial vote. They are made by the director, Tim Berners-Lee. Now, because we trust Tim Berners-Lee and because he has his whole life done what's right for the world, we see W3C as a really good place to work. But is that open? Well, again, if you're at the open end of the continuum, you can debate that. But I'll tell you this. While you may want to debate the open end of the continuum, you damn well know what's closed. A product that can only be provided by a single vendor. A specification that describes a product that comes from a single place. Something that is developed in a closet without inviting all interested parties and all stakeholders is closed. We know what closed is, and those that are benefited by open know what closed is, and those that are closed know that open is not in their interest. Okay.