RE: Can Microsoft ever win?
Your point 2 shows a lack of in-depth knowledge of the isssue... understandable though because it is a piece of Microsoft FUD
ODF is an extensible XML ISO standard - it has the ability to incorporate all ISO standards in order to store extended and meta information about documents.
It's a very flexible container, which microsoft could use to represent ANY document they currently create.
Did you know that between office 2000 and office 2003, the binary format microsoft used to store files didnt change? Macros etc and application capabilities changed somewhat - but Excel 2000 can open a file saved in Excel 2003...
ODF has nothing to do with the capabilities of the application using it.
In fact the rather odd thing is, considering people make this point about ODF somehow being inferior, is that comparing the ISO standards for ODF (v1.2, not actually fully implemented by any application yet - so go ahead MS if you want to) and OOXML - ODF actually contains considerably more functionality and flexibility than OOXML, including a featureset for accessibility for the disabled that OOXML does not even touch on.
Another thing to remember for those with sketchy memories is that Microsoft was on the board developping ODF, and only left when OASIS rejected the submission of material microsoft was retaining the patent on, into a required section of the standard - OASIS instead opted to gain the same functionality using methods that NOBODY held the patent to.
Go actually look at the standard (not the applications implementing only part of the standard, applications that are playing catch-up with regard to featureset with microsoft) - when you find anything that microsoft can implement in their file format, that cannot be represented in ODF then come back and talk to me... until then take the MS FUD with a pinch of salt.
Also, your point 4: They have not done this - the criticism comes from the fact that they have created their own standard... their "standard" xml contains definitions like "Render RTF like Word 95 does" - i'm terribly sorry but this is something ONLY MS could do.... They also define their own way of handling dates, tables and many other things - things there ARE ISO standards for, but MS has defined their own custom, may i add, patented, ways of handling them - that's why the MS "standard" proposal is 4x the length of the average ISO standard (6000 pages)
Microsoft were invited to propose any additions to ODF that they felt needed to improve functionality - instead they proposed their own new standard which does not reference existing international standards.
This is the source of the criticism... it's not a case of "poor old MS can't do anything right!"