While Rob as usual is a bit extreme about his views, in general there is skepticism about the standardization efforts. Having watched Single Unix specs evolve over the years, I think it didn’t bring real value to customers. Even after being compliant to the standards, you typically need another services engagement with another vendor(or the same vendor may give it free) to migrate to the same OS that has been certified by the standard bodies. It was also supposed to be a marketing ploy, which never worked. Finally, the real standard that evolved was linux, which also has some of the issues of vendor dependency but to a lesser extent.

Also many vendors who runs the DMTF/CIM standards, still do not provide standards based instrumentation so that other vendors’ consoles can consume it. You still need a console from the same vendor. Some of them do trumpet the standards card to their customers that makes what Rob mentions about misuse of theses standards a real issue.

The other real problem is of standard bodies to keep pace with the evolution of new technology in the same domain. While it is a tough act for standard body or forum to do that because new technologies originate with one of those vendors and having every other vendor to agree to their specification to make it a standard can be really challenging. Also many of those attempts create very complex specifications trying to merge different specifications or API.

So IMO, it is natural for people to be skeptical about standards and I guess it is not just CMBDf(of which I know very little). I remain skeptical in general of these standards because I am not convinced it adds customer value.