>Hara Ra wrote:
>>
>> Harvey Newstrom:
>> At 12:36 PM 4/9/98 -0400, you wrote:
>
>I thought my ISP had a bad delay time! You're responding to this a
>month later?
>
>> >Windows 95 DATE command rejects years 2000 or later as being "incorrect
>> >date format":
>> ><http://support.microsoft.com/support/downloads/dp3060.asp>
>> >
>> Well, I don't know about the other URLs, but I checked my Windows 95B (OS R2)
>> and was able to change the date to 2005 with no problems.
>
>Correct, which points out another point of confusion. How many people
>know if they have the original Windows 95, or what you have: Windows 95B
>R2, or what version? How many people are going to try one Windows 95
>system, see that it works, and thinks it will work on their Windows 95
>at home?
>
>Another possibility, which I have never voiced until now, is that
>Windows 95 might be easily patched to be Year 2000 compliant. It may be
>that Bill Gates would rather that everyone upgrade to Windows 98 instead
>of getting the upgrades to fix their existing Windows 95.
>--
>Harvey Newstrom <mailto:harv@gate.net> <http://www.gate.net/~harv>
>PGP 5.5 Fingerprint: F746 7A20 EB7D 27BA 80A5 4473 D8E1 6A54 1EB0 56F7
>PGP Public Key available from <ldap://certserver.pgp.com>
>
Free web-based email, Forever, From anywhere!
http://www.mailexcite.com