[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Here we go again, Part II

To: Dave Faneuf <tklaundry@juno.com>, boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org
Subject: Re: Here we go again, Part II
From: Pete Kemp <kempp@bethel.k12.ct.us>
Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2000 18:47:53 -0500
In-Reply-To: <20000102.184042.4286.1.tklaundry@juno.com>
References: <200001020529.AAA20010@world.std.com>
Sender: owner-boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org

At 06:35 PM 1/2/00 -0500, you wrote:

>I have two 486's that I do not use very often at all that run windows
>3.1, all I did was change the date to 12/31/95 and they rolled over
>nicely.  Even some programs that I was confident would crash did not, at
>least nothing yet.  .
>
>Dave Faneuf
>
>On Sun, 2 Jan 2000 00:23:10 -0500 "A. Joseph Ross" <lawyer@world.std.com>

Hi Dave,
Just how did the computer figure out to go from 1995 to 2000?
Pete

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Here we go again, Part II
  - From: Dave Faneuf <tklaundry@juno.com>

References:
- Re: Here we go again, Part II
  - From: "A. Joseph Ross" <lawyer@world.std.com>
- Re: Here we go again, Part II
  - From: Dave Faneuf <tklaundry@juno.com>

Prev by Date: Re: Here we go again, Part II
Next by Date: Jonathan Karas???
Previous by thread: Re: Here we go again, Part II
Next by thread: Re: Here we go again, Part II
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread