Ben, dont take it personally, but that's the main problem with all you guys living in the Redmond campus location: you tend to forget, that there is a whole planet Earth outside of your fences, and real world is ALWAYS more complicated than the sterile labs that you all have in your minds.

People are forced into this inconvenient situation because of the way you guys think: we (your customers) must explicitly ask stupid-sounding questions like this one: "I see that version X or Y is not on the supportability page, so I have to ask whether version X or Y is supported by your product or not?" Its not that we cannot read or understand written text (some cannot, but hopefully those are the stupid minority..), but just because something is not in the supportability list, for us -mortal people living outside of the Redmond campus- that doesnt AUTOMATICALLY mean that it is not supported. What about mistakes, or missing entries? That wouldnt be a the first occurrence, as the product documents  are usually full of mistakes, missing statements, mambo-jambo-avoiding-direct-answer type of pharagraphs, etc. People in general (yes, that includes some of your MVPs and other evangelists as well) got lost in faith of your company in the recent couple of years of fiasco, so people only believe something, that they see with their own eyes, and not via some obfuscated or convoluted indirect reasoning.

Let me gice you a real world example:

If you see an excel spreadsheet with sh*tloads of columns, most of the cells are filled in, but some rows not all the columns are fileld in (=empty), what do you think first:

a) ahaa, those columns are not filled in because those columns are not applicable to that particular row OR

b) the secretary / HR / the author of the document made a stupid mistake / it was friday afternoon when he updated the filed, and missed some vital info

Most of us will automatically assume option b) and not option a).

I wonder how will the indirect (un)supportability idea work in front of the jury, when somebody will sue MS due to some information not written clearly in the documents. Lawyers prefer the truth that is written down rather than truth that "does not present as supported in the table, so it must only mean unsupported"

This kind of logic caused more headache than it cured.