All MS said was there is bias & complained about it
and had a few meetings with high officials. Saying & doing this makes them East India Company. If that is the case then companies like Reliance and others are a much bigger threat. Reliance controls the power in Bombay, they increase the prices of electricity at their own will. I personally find that a bigger threat than MS talking to a few executives and making them understand and hence change their decision.
I don't understand one thing after reading quite a lot of the gibber-jabber. If OOXML was such a no-no according to the peers, why did spend their precious time ironing out the faults? Monetary gains or other wise, they spent their time ironing out the faults in the standard and then turn around and say we don't want this to be the standard. Clearly indicates 2 things, 1. their level of loyalty, 2. their respect for their own hard work.
Going further the professor in no simple terms stated that companies like Infy, NASSCOM, Wipro are anti-Indian.
Then further states that MS "was asking the Government of India to forget the well defined process, and override the decision so arrived at". Hmmm, govt. of India and it's forgetfulness of defined processes is well known. Does the prof. mean to say that all decisions taken by the govt. of India are in the bounds of a well defined process, which would mean that everything the govt. has done at any level is absolutely correct and defined. Damn! So much for our anti-Reservation protest.
I do agree with the prof. that no foreign company should 'tell' what is in the nation's interest. But, I feel the same way about an Italian telling what is in the nation's interest.
Towards the end, the prof. very politely compares himself and draws parallels of his acts to the those of the likes of Rani Laxmibai & Tipu Sultan
Who said that only politicians play the the game of symbolism?