Hi Kevin,

I'm in agreement that pre-announcing ALL intended content would make eminent sense. We're all grownups, and if something had to be dropped then I'm sure we could take the news and move along. Especially if the list of features was 'refreshed' from time-to-time.

The current practise does have more than a little to do, I suppose, with MS being able to help out conference organizers with improved attendance. Nothing whets the appetite for a conference more than being a part of some "inside scoop".

cheers


>Garrett,
>
>If you follow that argument to the logical conclusion, then Ken/MS should not say ANYTHING until the beta release. But then why has Ken (well, not Ken specifically, but MS) been publishing information on some of the capabilities of the new report writer, some of the SQL enhancements to get closer to ANSI-92 compliance, etc.?
>
>Are those any 'less' likely to be pulled back during the beta than adding better font/display support for the project manager utility?
>
>Suppose (hypothetically) the beta process reveals enough backward incompatibility that MS decides to 'back off' on certain SQL changes. Again, purely hypothetical...but they'd have to 'back off' published changes that we've seen both on MSDN and the newest issue of FoxTalk 2.0.
>
>Bottom line - they're publishing enough content over the last several months that it really just seems to make more sense to publish everything at one time.
>
>Kevin