I found the following CNN article
of course at Slashdot
but the real question remains: if corporate users of Win95 want Y2K
compliance, do they *have* to upgrade to Win98, or is there a patch in
the works? A year later, it's still unclear, looking at the Microsoft
Once again Tim Byars is right. Customers get what they pay for.
Windows 95 Y2K fix was kept from users
May 3, 1999
Web posted at: 11:28 a.m. EDT (1528 GMT)
by Julia King
(IDG) -- For almost a year, Microsoft Corp. withheld from its 125
million corporate users of Windows 95 the information that a software
patch was in the works to make the desktop operating system fully year
2000-compliant, a Microsoft official confirmed last week.
"I don't want people taking action based on Microsoft thinking about
doing something," said Don Jones, year 2000 product manager at
Microsoft. "Until I'm 100% sure that we're going to provide an update or
fix, I don't want to tell anybody," Jones added. "People will spend
millions of dollars, [implementing strategies based on such
information], and the last thing I want to do is spread fear,
uncertainty and doubt in their minds."
One company now gearing up to spend millions on an upgrade from Windows
95 to 98 -- based at least partly on year 2000 concerns -- is Electronic
Data Systems Corp. Until mid-March, EDS officials believed -- like all
Windows 95 users -- that Microsoft wouldn't make Windows 95 fully year
2000-compliant. At best, they were told, Windows 95 would be "compliant,
with minor issues."
Jones' comments are the latest in a series of clarifications, memos and
statements to emerge from Microsoft since March 29, when Computerworld
ran a front-page story about EDS's about-face plan to migrate
100,000-plus desktops from Windows 95 to 98.
Previously, EDS planned to stick with Windows 95, but it changed course
on Microsoft's advice to the company, according to an internal memo by
former CIO Gary Rudin, who abruptly resigned from EDS on March 31.
But then and now, Microsoft officials insist they never advised EDS or
any other corporate customer to remain on Windows 95 or to upgrade to
Windows 98 for year 2000- readiness reasons.
So why would the CIO of EDS send out a memo saying as much?
"You'll have to ask Gary [Rudin]," Jones said. "It's certainly not our
policy. We do recommend that people go to the latest versions of our
operating system, but not for year 2000 reasons."
Rudin didn't return telephone calls last week.
Also, following the March 29 story about EDS, Microsoft issued an
internal market bulletin to its sales staff to eliminate what it
described as "confusion" generated by the Computerworld story.
Among other things, the bulletin told salespeople that "the
Computerworld article is very misleading," and despite the article's
suggestions, "Microsoft's position on Windows 95 Year 2000 compliance
has not changed."
Yet under a section titled "Facts Regarding... Year 2000 Compliance,"
the company tells its salespeople that "Microsoft is providing a
software update for Windows 95 to resolve the outstanding minor issues."
When questioned by Computerworld reporters, Microsoft officials couldn't
specify any incorrect or misleading information in the March 29 story.
9 men and no babes... what a pathetic, skewed lifestyle of geekdom and
cold pizza. Sign me UP!
-- Rohit Khare