There was also the plethora of undocumented Windows API's the Office programs were using that weren't available to anybody else. That was one of the thrusts of the antitrust lawsuit leveled against Microsoft. The best thing coming out of that was Microsoft's $150 million investment into Apple in an attempt to convince the government that they had competition and weren't a monopoly. Apple had 2% of the marketshare at the time - some competitor!

Also, there was the bundling and OEM backroom deals.

That was mostly (exclusively?) Windows, though, not Office.

It was Office + Works, and other strategic assets.

I do not believe any bundling or OEM deals were material factors in Office's success beyond the fact that exactly those deals helped establish and preserve WINDOWS' hegemony.

Ok. I do belive it. You have that entirely backwards. The Windows monopoly was leverage they used to push out competing applications. From the DOJ's proposed finding of fact (https://www.justice.gov/atr/us-v-microsoft-proposed-findings...)

"208.3. Microsoft's unresponsiveness and its actions to delay the Windows 95 license negotiations with IBM followed soon after IBM announced that it was seeking to acquire Lotus Development Corp., a direct competitor of Microsoft in messaging and office suite software, among other products.

IBM announced on June 5, 1995 a hostile takeover attempt of Lotus. On June 11, IBM and Lotus reached an agreement for IBM to acquire Lotus. IBM completed the acquisition on approximately July 5, 1995. Norris, 6/7/99am, at 35:9 - 36:12. Among other products, Lotus offered Lotus Notes, an e-mail product, and Lotus SmartSuite, an office productivity suite, that competed with Microsoft's software. Norris, 6/7/99am, at 35:21 - 36:5."

"Microsoft repeatedly penalized IBM for competing against Microsoft

Microsoft withheld a Windows 95 license from IBM until 15 minutes before the product's launch because of IBM's preloading of competing products Microsoft conditioned access to critical marketing support, and other terms and conditions for Windows provided to other OEMs, on IBM's not preloading competing products with the PCs it shipped Microsoft sought to condition substantial MDA price reductions on IBM's ceasing to support competing products

Search for "quicktime" for more joy.

But all that is still small change compared to the deals forcing OEMs to bundle a license for Windows with every PC sold.

Other than Office, sure? (Office is has long been one of their main cash cows. Is part of why they wanted to keep it on Mac, which is pointedly not Windows). It's also irrelevant. The point was that they used the pricing of Windows (which the OEMs) and withholding information about Windows to force OEMs to bundle Office/Works instead of competitors.

That they did it is clear. Whether they did it for simple profit (Office/Works) or to further enhance the moat around Windows (Java, QuickTime). They did it using Windows as both carrot and stick, to gain compliance. Because OEMs had no other choice.