I doubt Microsoft will take it seriously enough now, when it's in such an early state.
What matters here is if this `wordcraft` app gets serious widespread use and businesses (which is Microsoft's main revenue source) start using this in favour of MS Word. Then I'd say anything's possible and testing in court whether LLM-vibecoded reverse engineered-apps actually do infringe on IP-rights is something Microsoft would be willing to risk to protect their greater Office 365 subscription revenue. This is one of those actual slipery slope scenarios - first Word, then Powerpoint, then Excel, then maybe even the more niche apps like Visio, or Access or Project.
As it's reverse engineered, I wonder if copyrights even apply? It's likely Microsoft would assert its patent rights.
But firstly why would a business that depends on Word to the point they pay Microsoft for it,want to even move to a vibe-coded alternative anyway? The support you get from Microsoft is very different from an open source app, to the point many Word users wouldn't even know what Github is, let alone even know how to raise an issue there to get help.
The 'threat' this wordcraft project poses, I think is very minimal even in the long run, to Microsoft.
But side note: why even bother reverse engineering Word? The file format is very well specified - I think I've used at least 4 Word alternatives, and once wrote a basic C# app that could read and render most docx files, using the official Office Open XML SDK (https://github.com/dotnet/Open-XML-SDK).
There's tons of documentation on how to parse DOCX files, so of all the apps to reverse engineer this seems to be the most redundant one. Why bother recreating Word? Why not just build a better writing app that just so happens to save its data to docx? Indeed, they probably started with Word because it was probably the easiest to verify considering many other, independent implementations of the DOCX file format exist.
This whole effort seems very 'unthinking' - it's seems to be more of a 'because I can!' type of project rather than a genuine effort to improve the state of things with old-school word processing, which is one of those silently-operating-in-the-background type of jobs that is still very prevalent in a lot of industries, like the legal sector.
I would love to get multiple typing cursors in Word, similar to VSCode and the Ctrl+Alt+Up/Down arrow shortcut, but then if Word doesn't already have it, then this project won't implement it either because it's a mindless, carbon copy. Why bother being just a follower? Why not start adding features Word doesn't have? As someone who has to deal with 1. users of Word and 2. the outputs of Word a lot I don't see this going anywhere unless it starts actually innovating.
What matters here is if this `wordcraft` app gets serious widespread use and businesses (which is Microsoft's main revenue source) start using this in favour of MS Word. Then I'd say anything's possible and testing in court whether LLM-vibecoded reverse engineered-apps actually do infringe on IP-rights is something Microsoft would be willing to risk to protect their greater Office 365 subscription revenue. This is one of those actual slipery slope scenarios - first Word, then Powerpoint, then Excel, then maybe even the more niche apps like Visio, or Access or Project.
As it's reverse engineered, I wonder if copyrights even apply? It's likely Microsoft would assert its patent rights.
But firstly why would a business that depends on Word to the point they pay Microsoft for it,want to even move to a vibe-coded alternative anyway? The support you get from Microsoft is very different from an open source app, to the point many Word users wouldn't even know what Github is, let alone even know how to raise an issue there to get help.
The 'threat' this wordcraft project poses, I think is very minimal even in the long run, to Microsoft.
But side note: why even bother reverse engineering Word? The file format is very well specified - I think I've used at least 4 Word alternatives, and once wrote a basic C# app that could read and render most docx files, using the official Office Open XML SDK (https://github.com/dotnet/Open-XML-SDK).
There's tons of documentation on how to parse DOCX files, so of all the apps to reverse engineer this seems to be the most redundant one. Why bother recreating Word? Why not just build a better writing app that just so happens to save its data to docx? Indeed, they probably started with Word because it was probably the easiest to verify considering many other, independent implementations of the DOCX file format exist.
This whole effort seems very 'unthinking' - it's seems to be more of a 'because I can!' type of project rather than a genuine effort to improve the state of things with old-school word processing, which is one of those silently-operating-in-the-background type of jobs that is still very prevalent in a lot of industries, like the legal sector.
I would love to get multiple typing cursors in Word, similar to VSCode and the Ctrl+Alt+Up/Down arrow shortcut, but then if Word doesn't already have it, then this project won't implement it either because it's a mindless, carbon copy. Why bother being just a follower? Why not start adding features Word doesn't have? As someone who has to deal with 1. users of Word and 2. the outputs of Word a lot I don't see this going anywhere unless it starts actually innovating.