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: Bill Ounce who wrote (4765)	3/18/1999 10:43:00 AM
From: J.L. Turner	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9818

Hi Bill, sounds like Cringely rewrote David Eddy y2ktimebomb.com J.L.T.

To: Bill Ounce who wrote (4765)	3/18/1999 11:30:00 AM
From: flatsville	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 9818

Bill you posted that Cringley wrote: >>>If there is not a 100 percent complete and reliable Y2K fix for Windows NT real soon, things will get ugly. When I asked John what the point of no return was...this was what I was referring to...I just didn't do a very good job of asking the question but got a good response from John nonetheless... Thanks to both of you.

To: Bill Ounce who wrote (4765)	3/18/1999 10:33:00 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9818

Mikeysoft rep said to upgrade to Windoze 2000 to fix Y2K bugs. Hey Bill... don't you know that Microsoft products have no bugs?? They're referred to as "undocumented features"..... <VBG> Great article... although for the life of me, I'm not sure exactly where SP3 has Y2K vulnerabilties of great significance. I'm more worried about the human data entry side where people used 6 digit dates with 8 digit capable software. Regards, Ron