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.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : JAWS;A P/E of 2 with 150%/yr Erngs Growth!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tim Czech who wrote (2303)	8/9/1998 10:01:00 PM
From: John Fairbanks	Respond to of 4230

(off topic - PINC) Gosh Tim, I hate to throw a wet blanket on PINC but I'd be REALLY leary about that company... Granted it's juts first glance on my part, but as a Software Engineer who has assisted with my own company's Y2K efforts, PINC smells really bad to me. My problems with it... 1) They seem to oversimplify the Y2K problem a bit too much and make it sound like all you need to do to be safe from Y2K issues is to buy their software -- way untrue. Last I heard, even Windows-95 was not Y2K compliant... 2) They claim to be able to fix the BIOS... well in the new updatebale BIOS that might be possible but many of the BIOS are in ROM and aren't changeable. Granted there are some that are burnable but I sure wouldn't want any company except the company who wrote it to modify it -- especially an automatic modification by a program? Not on my PC. Besides, most of the new BIOS are Y2K compliant anyway. 3) Diagnosing Y2K problems in other people's software without access to the source is a pretty sketchy claim. I'd like to see it. I doubt they can do much to detect problems in the BIOS either. In order to detect Y2K problems in our software we've used a couple of automated tools, but they have been source code analyzers, and quite frankly they've been pretty awful. There have been things they didn't catch, and a whole stack of problems that were reported by it didn't end up being a problem at all. It has taken months of effort to certify our software is compliant... I don't for a minute believe that a spiffy $50 program is going to solve much of anything. Anyway, just an opinion from the trenches... it is possible that they might sell a lot of these things at first, but before long some PC magazine will review it and say it's a total joke -- or that all it can do is say "such and such a software package might have a problem" which isn't going to do anyone any good... ...and then again I could be totally wrong... I'm not about to be so arrogant as to stand up and declare I'm absolutely right and won't be eating these words, but in my professional opinion it's a bunch of bunk and I sure didn't see anything on the web site that would even begin to convince me otherwise.