Try not to be so pessimistic
It gets really hard Shane when the access team thinks that Dataverse is the "savior" and so ignores YEARS of requests to upgrade the VBE and SQL editor and to give us a way to actually secure our intellectual property so Access could be a viable platform for saleable projects and add some new controls that don't depend on abomination data types.
But the seriously depressing part is looking at the marketing material for Office and seeing Access completely missing from products which contain it. Doesn't anyone at MS realize what a great FE Access is for SQL Server? The SQL Server team should be selling Access as a tool for certain kinds of projects. IT departments tend to have backlogs running to years. But judicious use of Access can allow teams to develop smallish applications (the size of the app isn't relevant, it is whether or not it can be built by ONE developer in a reasonable amount of time) with 10% of the resources required to develop using a "real" platform. So, even if the ultimate goal is a "real" application, using Access can capture the moment and what might be a fleeting business opportunity. The Access app can end up as an excellent template for future development and maybe the "real" application will never have to be built. If it turns out to be needed, the user department has an intermediate solution. --- Except that corporate America thinks of Access as a toy because the SQL Server people constantly bash it as they confuse Jet/ACE with Access the RAD tool so they won't even consider it. All my projects at Fortune 500 companies were directly with the user departments and getting access to SQL for the BE was like pulling teeth. On the other hand, IT was always very supportive when a client bought one of the auditing applications my partner and I sold. I guess it was because they knew they weren't going to have to resolve problems with the FE. Access is far and away a superior development platform for LAN applications which is why it doesn't die no matter what MS seems to do. I have a number of clients that run Access apps using Citrix or RD quite successfully. It would be great to just be able to link to WAN based databases the way web apps do but in 20 years of trying, MS hasn't managed to achieve this so RD and Citrix are how my clients survive. They love the flexibility and speed with which I can solve their problems using Access. Many have priced web solutions. Those that spent the money and time were sorry. The most common question from a new client is "yes, but, isn't Access dead?" That's what your marketing team has done for Access. Doesn't matter how hard the Access team works and even what they produce. If your marketing team can't/won't sell the product, potential customers are afraid to give it a shot if they have no previous experience with it.
Maybe, you should ask the MVP community or the folks here and at other forums for suggestions on marketing.
Changing the topic to documentation. I was looking at my old Access 95 and 97 packages because I wanted to review the books that came in the box and found a pretty fancy brochure with a bunch of supporting products and complete applications for sale. That was marketing

It seems that the books I was actually looking for came only with A 2.0 and later with the Developer's toolkit - The Language Reference and the Data Access Reference. I was going to mention them to Jeff and see if he could resurrect them. It would be sooooooooooooo wonderful if there were updated, online versions of these available with a few more different kinds of examples. It would answer all the syntax questions that ever get posted here. I know I'm crazy. I actually read manuals- maybe because I used to edit them as a part time gig for IBM. I far prefer manuals (when they have good examples) than web searches that just keep bringing up wrong answers from forums rather than syntax. Why can't the search prioritize actual MS web syntax (at least with Bing) entries? The nice thing about these manuals in particular is you get to use the TOC to drill down to what you need. That makes them very useful to me but not necessarily to newbees which is why online versions are better because they can allow full text searches.