|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Larry Wright wrote:
> I am quite concerned because the lack of a *timely* Y2k fix for TS4 seems
> as though it will be used to *force* me to upgrade to 2000i. *timely* =
> (like, now, would be good, so I can use the data now available)....
Where do you see it stated in plain unambiguous English in writing - without any
qualifications - that 2000i *is* totally Y2K compliant? If such a statement has
been made - I haven't seen it - and would appreciate someone pointing it out to
me. I too am faced with the problems of getting my systems past 12/31/99 without
a hitch - but I am not willing to spend 10 cents (much less $2000+) on anything
now without such assurances (and messages from Melody don't count - I want it *on
the Omega web site* as part of a Y2K compliance statement and *as part of the
program documentation*). Don't necessarily assume that the devil you don't know
is better than the devil you do know. FWIW - since Omega updated its web site -
its Y2K compliance statement (which basically stated that most of its products
*weren't* Y2K compliant - seems to have disappeared). Robyn
|