SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : 2000 Date-Change Problem: Scam, Hype, Hoax, Fraud

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: tech who wrote (261)10/7/1997 10:53:00 PM
From: Bill Wexler   of 1361
 
<<I truly suggest you get out of your shorts this week. >>

Hmmm. Interesting you should say that.

The Compaq announcement doesn't prove anything. I've seen dozens of similar announcements from many other companies including IBM.

I think many of you misunderstand the point of my thread.

I am not disputing the fact that a computer or a poorly written piece of software can encounter a date boundary condition which may cause an error in certain calculations.

What I'm trying to get at here is why is this date change problem any worse than any other computer boundary condition problem? In fact, I would argue that the hardware requirements of ever-more complex applications - in terms of memory, processor speed, etc. - put a much greater strain on worldwide IT resources in terms of new capital investment than a goofy date-change fix. Why is there such an unbelieveable amount of hype attached to it? Why is 1/1/2000 such a "magic date"...since the exact same century date calculations are performed presently and have also been performed in the past.

Why has a trivial software maintenance issue has become an emotional, techno-religious movement which rivals Scientology in its ability to suck in money and cult status?

There is an article on Peter de Jager's web site which sums up the skeptical point of view fairly well:

year2000.com
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext