Work with OpenDocument to get the necessary features into the next version of ODF while keeping national bodies informed about the status of that effort. In the meanwhile, allow Office to save (with reduced functionality) to ODF in order to fulfill the requirements of existing standards-oriented procurement processes. (Fun fact: They did the latter pretty quickly.)

Here's what they shouldn't have done: Undermine ISO's credibility by ramming a hastily-constructed, not-yet-implemented spec through a fast-track process intended for mature specs by stuffing national bodies. I see no reason to place Microsoft's short term profits over the integrity of international standards bodies, nor do I see one to excuse Microsoft for doing so.

>Work with OpenDocument

Why on earth would they want to do that? Because they hate having money? Because they suddenly decided that opening the market to competition would be more important than the billions they stood to lose?

These standards determine the tools people use to communicate with tax offices and other government institutions. Thanks to their efforts (supported by as much corruption as necessary), Microsoft didn't have to invent a new file format and would let people just use the file format everyone was already using for official business.

Office allows saving as ODF already and has supported it for ages. It was never about supporting open standards. This is all about corporate interests.

I can't think of a single "open" format designed by a large corporation that isn't "open" as a way to make more money.