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 : Discuss Year 2000 Issues -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Paul van Wijk who wrote (1945)	6/1/1998 8:59:00 PM
From: scott ross	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9818

Paul, I think you're mixing up the message: > Can you explain why GM raised their Y2k-budget from $50 mil. to $500 mil I am describing my experiences with embedded devices (as a developer). I have worked on many, many different kinds of these systems, ranging from PLCs, to CNCs, to process controllers, general firmware, etc. Of these systems, only a small percentage carry around the date. Of the systems that use a date, most do so only for display purposes and not for calculation. It is my opinion that a device that does not read the year field for purposes of calculation should function no differently on 1/1/2000 than on 1/1/1998. GM's budget notwithstanding (and I'm not talking at all about IT systems here, just embedded systems), it doesn't change the fact that this is my experience as a developer who has dealt with a fairly diverse range of embedded processing systems. And many of these systems, in fact, are either the same or similar to that which GM uses. > Could you give me an estimate on the percentage of companies Again, I'm relating my experiences. I suspect that if a department is tasked with checking Y2K compliance of embedded devices they will assume (as they should) worst-case and attempt to verify all devices will function. It is also worth noting that an IT department tasked with working in this area has - in general - little to no experience with firmware devices and embedded systems. Therefore, they have very little experience or knowledge with which to approach the issue. > Could you give me one single explanation why you do believe Yes. Management is assuming worst-case (again, as they should)... because management does not know enough about the technology which they've purchased or built (too many MBAs, not enough CS and EEs!). > Have you ever tried to imagine how difficult it is to coordinate Again, that's not what my message was about. I am relating my real world experiences with these systems. Cheers!