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 : TAVA Technologies (TAVA-NASDAQ) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: James Strauss who wrote (20396)7/10/1998 11:54:00 AM
From: Rick Bullotta  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 31646
 
Most definitely a farce in a lot of cases...it is almost 100% analogous to ISO9000 certification. You go through the paperwork effort, pay your fee, get your certification. And a week later, all of the employees forget all of these new quality procedures, and "remember" them again right before the next audit.

There are a few rare cases where the certified company actually practices what it preaches, but they are rare. I've always said that things like ISO9000 only guarantee that "if you make crappy product, you will *consistently* make crappy product, with plenty of documentation to prove that it is crap".

ITAA is a joke. There is very little followup, and tends to look only at current practices, not legacy work. And legacy is the issue with Y2K, not new development.



To: James Strauss who wrote (20396)7/10/1998 12:09:00 PM
From: John Howell  Respond to of 31646
 
The best indication of vendor compliance is a willingness to include Y2K compliance language in a contract with a customer. Even more important is the language regarding liability exposure in the event of non-compliance.

A company whose products are not compliant would not open themselves up to litigation by the inclusion of Y2K contract terms like these.