[MrBuddyCasino]

> political considerations ultimately reversed the decision

Thats a very one-sided portrayal of the situation. There were problems regarding usability, the resulting low user acceptance and issues with external MS Office files due to compatibility bugs.

If anything, funding the project for so long was a symptom of putting ideological and political considerations before user needs.

I find it very weird how even most software developers prefer MBPs with MS Office on them, but some poor souls elsewhere are supposed to do their daily work on a sub-standard platform. I mean we're still joking about the "Year of the Linux Desktop".

[29athrowaway]

The EU asked for the standardization of Microsoft Office file formats, and the "Office Open XML" format (OOXML for short) was created (ECMA-376).

The resulting standard was 6,546 pages long (in comparison, ODF is just 867 pages long), and Microsoft Office was not fully compliant with it, making the entire process a waste of time. 10 years later situation is the same.

It is reasonable to believe that interoperability and standardization were not in the best interest of Microsoft. They have the largest market share and they have not much to win by giving opportunities to competitors.

You can read more here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standardization_of_Office_Open...