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: JBTFD who wrote (5701)	5/13/1999 1:06:00 PM
From: Christine Traut	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 9818

Mark: Sorry to take a few days to debate this with you - I've been limited to lurking. You ask <For example, how likely is it that there will be a gauranteed y2k compliant personal computer with a minimal software package on the shelves by, say September?...by the end of the year?> I'd be willing to bet a bundle that the only 'guarantee' you will see would be so limited as to be worthless. Compaq, for example, has been guaranteeing their BIOS, but given that you still have to deal with operating system, application software, user and shared data....not such a useful guarantee. I spoke to my college alumni group on Monday. The usual speaker lunches get perhaps 10 people - 40 showed for the Y2K topic! So the Concerned Civilians have it on their radar screen. Everyone was pretty shocked to find out that Microsoft was going to wait until June (when they are scheduled to put up a consumer Y2K Web site) to let them know that they would have to patch all of their software. What is still amazing to me is that very few people know that they should be demanding a Y2K compliant guarantee on their new PCs. Christine

To: JBTFD who wrote (5701)	5/20/1999 7:33:00 AM
From: flatsville	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 9818

Mark--This article seems in line with your recent concerns. Resellers alarmed over Year 2000 patches By MARK HOLLANDS 5may98 RESELLERS are becoming increasingly nervous they are selling computers with motherboards that are not Year 2000 compliant, a leading computer consultant, Patrick Simonis, has said. Mr Simonis, who owns the 10-year-old Queensland consultancy, Simcom Enterprises, said motherboards imported from either Intel or Taiwan-based Asus did not include Y2K-compliant real-time clocks. His claim has been partly supported by the channel platform engineer at Intel, Sean Casey, who said his company had engineered a "work-around that makes our motherboards Year-2000 capable". Mr Simonis said he knew of "at least 10 resellers in Australia and many more of my clients overseas" who were concerned about the real-time clock issue. "Getting information from the manufacturers is difficult," Mr Simonis said. "Companies like Intel are no longer talking about Year 2000 compliance but referring to products being 'Year 2000 capable'. "We are worried that we could be held legally liable for non-compliant machines even though we are doing our best for the customer." Intel's Mr Casey said Intel no longer referred to compliance because "this is the sort of language used in the industry that refers to a standard". "But there is no standard for Year 2000 work," Mr Casey said. "So we talk about being 'Year 2000 capable', and all our motherboards fit that description." Scott McDonald of Queensland-based Technology Trading House recently expressed anxiety about the ramifications of Y2K. He wrote to importer Tech Pacific, asking for clarification. A response from the company's finance and operations manager, T.J. Goddard, said in part: "Should any of our suppliers provide us with a comprehensive assurance ... we will be pleased to pass this assurance on to you." Consultant Mr Simonis said this indicated that "everyone is looking for a way out of this issue. No-one wants to get into legal trouble as a result of a Y2K mistake". Mr Simonis's company has written its own Y2K evaluation software, which analyses a PC's compliance and ranks it at one of five different levels, zero to four. According to the software, called All Clear 2000 Pro, complete compliance consists of the real-time clock, BIOS and DOS all running properly. Mr Simonis said motherboards from Intel and Asus achieved a Level 3 ranking, whereby the clock was "not compliant but the BIOS applies a patch to fix it". He was particularly disappointed with the newly released Intel 400mg motherboard, previously codenamed Nightshade, saying the clock had not been fixed but a solution had been built into the CPU. "Dallas Semiconductors can provide compliant clocks for motherboards for an extra $3 a board, but they're not doing it," Mr Simonis said. "This is unfair to the buyer. You don't know what a computer or server will do through its life. People should be entitled to what they want – Y2K compliance – without any patch-ups. "Many software programs, including Unix, bypass the BIOS and read the real-time clock directly, therefore interpreting the year as 1900. "This quasi-compliant technology, which has inherent latency problems, cannot rectify mission-critical systems such as servers, workstations and standalone PCs that cannot be turned off." Intel's Mr Casey said that while a Dallas real-time clock might reveal all four digits of a century date, most of the software would read only the last two digits. "We have provided hooks within our motherboards for the application to correctly read the BIOS and real-time clock," Mr Casey said. --------------------------------- Did you read that part about Dallas Semiconductors? Only three additional dollars for a compliant clock, but they are not doing it? This is what I was afraid of...This is why I declared a moratorium on purchases of computers.