But you're not the target they're catering to, then.
The net loss of business productivity for staying static versus the net loss of casual use caused by being dynamic in their design is what drives these changes. You may not like it as a casual user, and I'm sure Microsoft would like to keep you "in the fold" as a casual user, but the numbers say that if they maintain a dominant presence as a corporate productivity tool - that is where the larger market and profits are for this particular software segment.
I think in the past it followed that by maintaining market dominance in business, education and casual use followed for the sake of interoperability and familiarity. Today we're seeing more casual Office Suite alternatives on all platforms that are far less expensive and meet almost all of the needs of less professional users while still maintaining a high degree of interoperability with MS Office. Microsoft will probably continue to lose portions of that secondary segment of Office user. It is kind of a weird paradox, because Microsoft Works has always been around and is roundly rejected - although it meets or exceeds the capabilities of most other Office alternatives. People will either buy a version of the Office suite because Microsoft is important to them, or balk at the price of Office and go straight to a non-Microsoft alternative for some reason. Maybe because Office is such a de-facto standard that people forget that Microsoft has a less powerful solution also. It comes down to Office being seen as an "all or nothing" option.
Contributr 
