MS Office is actually a counter example of this. It was much worse than Lotus 1-2-3, Lotus Notes, and WordPerfect. They crushed the competition because of vampiric sales strategies.
Early versions of the individual Microsoft Office products might have lacked some features compared to competitors. Their real innovation was building an integrated suite with consistent user experience. That was tremendously valuable to casual users.
Microsoft certainly did some shitty things in terms of unethical and monopolistic sales practices, but their competitors also made some amazingly stupid strategic errors. In particular WordPerfect was slow to port their product to Windows. And when they finally did, they kept it too similar to the legacy MS-DOS version which was poison for gaining new sales.
Word for Windows was NOT worse than WordPerfect. WordPerfect continued using their primitive inline codes after GUIs were the norm.
Word integrated an entire programming language (WordBasic), with which you could not just create macros, but entire applications complete with dialog boxes. I used WordBasic to add features to Word years before they were offered, such as page numbering that spanned documents.
They crushed the competition, because competition management was quite bad with their decisions, a good example of their bad decisions was sticking to MS-DOS until it was too late.
