It may surprise you to learn that I somehow made it through college and graduate school (including a 350-page thesis) without a computer at all. My typewriter did not have any built-in grammar or "style" rules, and somehow
I survived. The current generation of "scholars" is badly spoiled.
No one is surprised that people in the past were able to type. You are being hostile for no apparent reason.
The comments here suggesting that people now are lazy or spoiled for asking for style features are--frankly--baffling, given that the people asking for those features are also saying things like "I write my own macros". Lazy people do not generally write
their own macros. I think you do not understand the conversation.
The style rules are meaningful for (1) training new scholars quickly and easily--by telling them to let the style rules be their guide--and (2) collaborating with young un-trained scholars who might otherwise insert errors into my documents and (3) correcting
quickly-typed papers that were either dictated or simply written quickly due to time pressures.
Your 350 page thesis was, I am sure, written much more slowly than it would have been if it were written on a word processor that had appropriate features. I want to be as productive as possible, not use archaic tools just because I let a company dictate
my tool set. I can buy a tool from another company.
Also, not everyone who uses Word is an academic. Most are not. Business-people who use Word are not "scholars" and just need the software to work and work well. They do not need to be proud of their grammar.
If I am writing a paper with a young scholar, I need to be able to tell that young scholar to enable style check for various things like "passive voice" so that she can improve her writing skills. And if a collaborator sends me a paper full of style errors,
I need to be able to blame him, and not Word, and try to correct those behaviors...and the software should help me correct those behaviors.
Besides, these were features that previously existed in software that we have been paying for. Both Abiword and OpenOffice have grammar checkers and those are FREE. We are paying for this. It should have more advanced features than free applications. It
should not merely match them. Otherwise, why are we not using the free software?
Newer versions should have better features than old versions. When that is not the case, the rational course of action for users is to either revert to old versions or--better--to use other software that has been advancing over time instead of regressing.
Microsoft is essentially begging for customers to switch to something else.
Meanwhile, Microsoft cannot claim that these features were removed "to save space" if they are also claiming they want to restore these features. That seems irrational, unless they only wanted to save space on the launch of the product, to mislead their
consumers about the true space cost of Word, which is unethical.