Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Discuss Year 2000 Issues -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Hunt who wrote (6880)	7/21/1999 12:08:00 PM
From: Bald Eagle	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9818

<<I guess he is trying to force me to upgrade to Office 2000>> I think you have that one right! You know he needs the money :-)

To: John Hunt who wrote (6880)	7/21/1999 9:39:00 PM
From: John Hunt	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 9818

Safe or Sorry: The "Y2K Problem" and Nuclear Weapons << At 2:25 a.m. on June 3, 1980, warning displays at U.S. nuclear command centers began showing the launch of enemy missiles. Preparations for retaliation against an apparent Soviet attack were quickly instituted: Bomber crews started their engines, Pacific Command's Airborne Command Post took flight, and Minuteman missiles were readied for launch. In the end, it was a short-lived scare. The numbers of missiles shown in the displays didn't make sense-and they kept changing. It was a false alarm. Technicians eventually traced the problem to the random failure of a 46-cent computer chip. Not one, but several nuclear command posts had been affected ... more ... >> << A 25 percent failure rate doesn't seem like much until the possible rippling effect of a single failure is considered. Failing chips can cripple subsystems, which in turn can cause partial or total failure of entire systems. Those impaired systems may cause any or all of the other systems with which they are connected to fail as well - and Pentagon systems interface with an average of 1213 other systems. >> bullatomsci.org Article by The Bulletin Of Atomic Scientists.

To: John Hunt who wrote (6880)	7/21/1999 11:08:00 PM
From: David Eddy	Respond to of 9818

John - I think Mickeysoft has more problems than just a revenue downturn. Eventually, people are going to get very annoyed at this kind of BS. Sorry, Bill Gates, but being half-compliant is a little bit like being half-pregnant. Here's a short little reality awareness test you can conduct... Q#1 - Who's the chairman of Microsoft (no points for knowing this... it just shows you have a pulse). Q#2 - Who's the Chairman of IBM (very few can get this one). Q#3 - By revenue, what is the size of MightySoft? Q#4 - By revenue, what is the size of IBM? I suppose that I should also ask an open-ended essay question too... "Please provide critical analysis on the fact that IBM has 5 times the revenue of MightySoft." I made these observations (http://www.y2ktimebomb.com/Techcorner/DE/de9846.htm) back in November 1998, as soon as I heard MightySoft had renamed Windows NT to Windows 2000.... very, very dumb move. - David