Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : QUANTUM -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Harold Halpern who wrote (5039)	11/16/1997 2:32:00 PM
From: Dale J.	Respond to of 9124

<<re: Could someone explain and evaluate Paul Wick's statement in the November 10th Barrons: "To accomplish the redundancy of code you need for Year 2000 compliance testing, You end up having to literally double your data-storage requirements">> Harold: I read that article, but I couldn't remember where I read it. Thanks for the reminder. As you probably know, most legacy software interprets two digit dates as refering to 1900. For example 11/15/97 is interpreted to mean Nov 15, 1997. So when we hit the year 2000, 11/15/00 will still be interpreted by legacy software as Nov 15,1900 and not Nov 15, 2000. In other words thats a big problem for banks, IRS, government agencies, and everyone else. The only way to solve this is to revisit all the programming code, make the appropriate modifications and then retest. Since you still need to work in a production environment on a day to day basis, the only way to fully test it is to set up a test environment using an alternate set of storage devices. In other words duplicate the production environment. Also you can be sure, everyone will have to do a absolutely thorough backup on or just before Dec 31, 1999. Thats a lot of backups. Thats a lot of storage. As far as EMC, I don't know enough about them. Dale