Summary: Microsoft Office's support of PDF is also very poor

THAT same old Microsoft spinner/AstroTurfer, who goes by the name "Ghettoblaster", keeps derailing Wikipedia at a fairly high pace. S/He is constantly editing the article on ODF, insisting on the value of Microsoft's MSODF [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]. Bob Sutor, IBM's Vice President of [GNU/]Linux and OSS, wrote:

Newer versions of Microsoft Office offer PDF support and rather odd partial ODF support...

Oiaohm disagrees with Sutor, stating that Sutor should "Print those darn PDFs [and] compare them to the ones that come out Openoffice. Microsoft really has only partly supported PDF too."

Is this a way of making PDF look bad, thus promoting the use of Microsoft's proprietary XPS for static output? Sounds like a similar strategy to that of promoting OOXML by essentially forking de facto ODF.

To Microsoft, interoperability is truly an enemy. It makes it harder to sell (or charge for) Windows and Office, so the unacceptable condition for semi-interoperability is now software patents, which means competitors must pay Microsoft for the privilege of having a bridge. This cost is being passed to consumers who pay "Microsoft tax" no matter which product they buy. ⬆

“It’s a Simple Matter of [Microsoft’s] Commercial Interests!“

--Microsoft on OOXML