If anything that speaks more of the success of the current office UI. MS monopolized what people expect from an office productivity suite in the same way they did with an operating system.
To say 2007 is confusing is ironic coming from an apple fan. Office 2007 is revolutionary, changing a product so radically took a lot of guts on the part of MS, and the results speak for themselves: reviewers have hailed it as a paradigm shift in how such software should work.
MS is a victim of it's size and user base. Office is an expensive piece of kit and the current incarnation suits most people just fine (much as is the case with vista) Apple has a different demographic and much smaller base and so has been able to move it's software along quickly.
This is totally off topic, my initial post was just addressing the notion of 'google office' being some kind of apple alternative. I use NeoOffice and like it, if money were no object I'd buy MS Office as its a better product.
The good news for open source is that file formats should become standardized in future allowing seamless interoperability between users. The bad news is that the development of open office is a much bigger undertaking than say that of developing a web browser (mozilla), and it's therefore difficult to envisage Open Office ever being better than the offering of a multi billion dollar monopoly.
Don't forget, an office suite is much more than a word processor.
tv connection, but what would Google have to do with Apple developing a tablet?