It never even occurred to me that they could be talking about something other than the virtual memory manager. I was hyped to see if there was some new architecture being applied for cross-OS compatibility, novel memory objects, techniques to reduce fragmentation, stuff like that. Now I’m just sad.
I knew what it stood for, but a pet peeve of mine in any form of engineering documentation (or frankly any technical documentation in any field) is not spelling out acronyms/initialisms on their first use; it was drilled into me in my degree; always spell out the first time you use a term on the assumption that the reader doesn't already know what any of it stands for.
I both expect and don't expect this from Microsoft, but it makes me irrationally annoyed and I'm already feeling adversarial when reading something that does this in the first sentence no less.
