I think you must have meant "read by 1% of computers, written by 1% of computers" instead, since that is about how common this format is.
Mass officials have been quoted as saying PDF files meet the state standards. Please point me to some free software for creating PDF files.
Not to be rude, but you're closing tag fits you to the a T. First, when you use the word FREE how are you using it? To me it looks as if it's free from cost. But I'm sure after I prove it's not free in that sense you'll switch to FREE as in FREEDOM.
It's been proven the so called FREE software actually costs more to install, operate, and maintain. Now this isn't a blanket statement, but more time than not it has been proven right.
So just to get this straight, you'd rather spend money on getting an inferior product in place because it has an open standard interface? Note the policy doesn't say it has to have certain features, so if the only one that can meet the requirement is something that gives you the features of notepad, you'd be fine with that?
To me you go withe the most cost effective solution. Period. You can determine the cost it takes to convert documents to open standards format, so it's an apples to apples comparison. Once again Taxachussettes and the liberals are leading the way for the Anything But Microsoft crowd.
Now for the ironic part of this. The next version of office is going to be an ODF. I bet most on this thread supporting ODF, won't be supporting MS though.