jhild: You posted: I only recall someone calling Internet FX Design in Houston, only to be told that they had no idea about any testing or something to that effect. I don't really recall any calls being made to Merced, other than what I believe to be the exaggerated claims of people calling them up and harassing them as related by Roni to Joe or Pennygod.
That is absolute BS and blatant bashing.
Here is a copy of an e-mail from Internet FX Design in Houston to prove it:
>>From dcliff@ghg.net Tue May 05 14:09:31 1998
>Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 14:10:30 -0500
>From: David Clifford <dcliff@ghgcorp.com>
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.0 [en] (Win95; I)
>To: EDITED by John Chapman
>Subject: Re: cshk and 11th hour
>
>
>Yes we recently evaluated Winlennium from 11th hour software.
>The program is designed to properly identify software in need
>of year 2000 patching, then obtain and install the respective
>patches for those software items via the internet web sites of
>the software manufacturer. Winlennium is still in development,
>the copy we evaluated was an alpha which is a stage of partial
>completion where testing is done to ensure that the completed
>portions of the program function properly and identify areas of
>improvment, in either functionality or interface. I found the
>interface smooth and error free. During evaluation I spoke
>several times to the lead programmers on the project. I made
>a few recommendations for minor changes in the interface layout,
>and discovered that most of them had already been incorporated
>in the version they were working on. As far as functionality
>goes, the program did a fine job of identifying non yr2k compliant
>software items. We tested the program on several different
>machines with various software configurations. We tested under
>Windows 95a, Windows 95b(osr2) and even tried it under
>windows 98 beta build 1721. In Windows 95 everything worked
>properly. Under Windows 98 beta build 1721 the software detect
>sequence worked fine, but the hardware detect failed to
>correctly identify the CPUs. After discussion with 11th hour
>software, we were informed that 11th hour was aware and
>working on it, yet we view this as a minor issue anyway
>because it bears no relevance on the function of the software
>which is designed for windows 95 and the fact that it does its
>job in 98 is a bonus.
>
>I do not know the extent of your knowledge of the intended
>function of Winlennium, so i will define it in a netshell.
>So there is no confusion, Winlennium does NOT directly fix
>yr2k non-compliant software. No software product could possible
>exist to self correct programming of 3rd party software.
>What Winlennium is designed to do is:
>1. Identify software with year 2k complaince issues.
>2. Use the web to locate the proper 2k patch provided by the respective
> software manufacturers for the product.
>
>
>After evaluation and discussion with the programming team
>at 11th hour, we feel that the success or failure of winlennium
>as a marketable product will depend on marketing, advertising,
>and distribution channels. The quality of product, and its
>ability to do its job are not in question in our opinion
>We think it will be a success.
>
>Sincerely,
>David Clifford
>
THIS SHOULD KEEP YOU AND JANICE BUSY CHALLENGING IT |
