> MS publishes new builds like biweekly through MSDN.
While this is supposed to be true, there hasn't been a new public build in 50-something days. Most of the new information is coming from leaked internal builds.
... as-in posted by some Microsoft Employee under direction of Microsoft Management in a "we don't want to write-up a change doc or support info, nor answer questions about this build, and/or test the waters for a possibly controversial feature without officially claiming the build."
"Leaked", in the same sense as anonymous Government Officials "leak" important news to the press to test waters before the administration officially backs an issue, or big manufacturers "leak" pictures of new products to the press to create buzz before they do an unveiling... one would think the world was made of holes.
Why do we call all these things "leaks" when they so-definitely are not. They are "clickbait", plain and simple.
They have proper release notes of course. Maybe talking about a feature violates some NDA, I'm not sure, but they are not leaked in the sense that the build itself leaked from Microsoft.
You mean public previews, which are meant for end users and press, but the development builds are being released much more often. Latest is less than a week old.
... as-in posted by some Microsoft Employee under direction of Microsoft Management in a "we don't want to write-up a change doc or support info, nor answer questions about this build, and/or test the waters for a possibly controversial feature without officially claiming the build."
"Leaked", in the same sense as anonymous Government Officials "leak" important news to the press to test waters before the administration officially backs an issue, or big manufacturers "leak" pictures of new products to the press to create buzz before they do an unveiling... one would think the world was made of holes.
Why do we call all these things "leaks" when they so-definitely are not. They are "clickbait", plain and simple.