No, YOUR analogy is the flawed one. In your analogy, buyers of Chevy-compatible transmissions originally purchased from Ford are being denied warranty coverage by a corporation from whom they didn't buy in the first place. Wine users aren't being denied upgrades to Wine, they're being denied support for a product ORIGINALLY PURCHASED FROM MICROSOFT (Office), merely because they also own and run a product with which Microsoft competes (Wine).
The original analogy is correct.
What? This one, from the message to which you replied?
let's say they took your money for the truck, you brought the truck home, it died in your driveway that day, and had to be towed back to the dealer. The dealer says "Oh, the truck's ignition control module was deactivated by the Chevy proximity sensor.
First, nobody claimed Office dies. MS just stops updates. This is much more analogous to denying warranty work -- my analogy -- than to a complete failure of the product, rendering it entirely useless -- his analogy.
Also, the operating system is directly involved with the function of an application like Office, unlike the relationship of one truck to another. Its more like an engine to a transmission. :-)