i can not give out too much info. i have my own butt and clearance to protect. i am a former system administrator on a mil command. i was removed from this position for some political reasons in the command, but not the issue here. one of the duties of my job was testing for y2k compliance and reporting to the group commander... this was one year ago. i reported 40% y2k compliance on the systems i was responsible for (essentially anything p133 and down was non y2k compliant). then about 6 months after that, i received what i was told was a software patch for y2k compliance. i knew immediately that the manner it worked in did not give y2k compliance. the minimum req'd to provide that is is an bios flash (eprom burn of bios info). this was a software patch that does it's thing in a windows environment... bios flashes must be done in dos. i called the group commander and explained that the manner that this prog worked simply tricks the test, but does not give compliance. i was told, "shut the f**k up, it passes the test. it is compliant." that was about 5 months ago. there have been some computer upgrades in the last 5 months. i can not give current y2k readiness status, that would get me in leavenworth. but i can say that based on the way that they have been scrambling around on the easy fixes (small desktop computers), how do you think they are faring on the larger scale mainframes, which are more difficult to fix and much more costly to do so on?

-- un important (ManInUniform@alocalbase.com), December 19, 1999

Answers

Brings back old memories. Yep, it sounds like the military I used to know.

-- Ed (ed@lizzardranch.com), December 19, 1999.

Should have skipped posting the message and just the tag :

UNIMPORTANT

-- hamster (hamster@mycage.com), December 19, 1999.

Thank You unimportant for posting. Your message just re-affirms my opinion of people working for goverment agencies. And I have worked with with several over the years.

-- Long TimeLurker (123rf@jkkyh.com), December 19, 1999.

OK So let me get this right. This "Man In Uniform" who tests computers for Y2K compliance can't figure out how to use the shift key when He posts here? Come on. I smell a 13 year old having fun.

As my favorite ol' booze hound used to say: "Go away kid, ya' bother me!"

-- Sure You Are (GetaLife@Kid.com), December 19, 1999.

Maybe he ain't got no thumbs.

-- (tsk@tsk.tsk), December 19, 1999.

Hey Sure You Are: Speaking of "can't figure out how to use the shift key", were you refering to "He" in the divine sense, or were you just ignoring your own advice

-- speakeasy (speak4@yourself.com), December 19, 1999.

In response to GetaLife, I am quite capable of using capitalization. I am also capable of articulating sentances, correct grammer and punctuation. A skill you seem to lack. Lack of capitalization is a bad habit I developed by wasting too much time in chat rooms, where typing speed is of the essence. If you choose not to believe what I say, that is your option. To ignore someone based on something so simple as failure to capitalize is nihilistic (look it up, i know webster is just twitching on your shelf) to such a degree as to be downright ignorant... Again, your option... It is every mans right to pursue happiness in this country. If being a cantankerous old fart fits that bill for you, so be it. I wish you the best of luck in your pursuit. But don't be so short sighted as to judge my age by my capitalization, and I will not interpret your capitalization of the word "He" when referring to me as distorted reverence 8^). To all others on this board, I appologize for this outburst. It is Just moderately disturbing to a veteran of a foreign war to be referred to as "a 13 year old having fun".

-- unimportant (ManInUniform@alocalbase.com), December 20, 1999.