The future lies with FOSS and open standards: we all know that. But how certain is that knowledge? No longer (was it ever?) a US-based strategy for software development, FOSS, especially on the desktop, is now seen by governments throughout the world as answering the needs of cost, efficiency, and public accessibility. It gives users what they want without binding them to a commodity model that limits their freedoms. Coupled with an open standard such as the OpenDocument Format (ODF), free applications like OpenOffice.org or KOffice, which save their files in formats one can read using a variety of free or proprietary applications, should be a preferred, especially in light of the fact that OpenOffice.org is interoperable with Microsoft Office, among others. Yet time and again we have seen governments change their minds (if not always rhetoric) and opt for the same old story. Where do such decisions place FOSS? What logic should govern the FOSS and open-standards communities' responses? To put it another way, What do governments want, and can we provide it--now?This presentation seeks to address (not answer!) some of these questions. My focus is of course OpenOffice.org, which I have led for the last seven years. My interest here lies in discussing the contentious governmental field in which FOSS plays.