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 : 2000 Date-Change Problem: Scam, Hype, Hoax, Fraud -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Contra Guy who wrote (1017)	12/14/1998 3:27:00 PM
From: Cheeky Kid	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1361

Ben, nice to hear from a programmer fixing the worst thing to hit civilization since that meteor....millions of years ago. I am sure someone will show up and poke holes in your work.

To: Contra Guy who wrote (1017)	12/14/1998 8:55:00 PM
From: Jeff Redman	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1361

Ben: I agree, I am a Sr. programmer/analyst working for a retailer that has groceries and general merchandise, a Supercenter with over 120,000 items in stock. We are now in the process of turning over our last Y2K fixes to production, we deal with many vendors, our top 20 are doing just fine with their Y2K fix. The vendors that are in trouble are those we import some of our general merchandise from in Asia. We have also been meeting with the Utilities that supply us, one of our electric and natural gas suppliers, the largest in Michigan, has several plants that can be run manually (their older plants) they plan on going into this mode before midnight on 1/1/00, just to be safe, but they have been working on the fix for several years now.

To: Contra Guy who wrote (1017)	12/14/1998 11:33:00 PM
From: David Eddy	Respond to of 1361

Ben - Although this may seem intuitive to you, this is simply not true and in fact represents one of the biggest misunderstandings about Y2K. This myth is closely related to another that is also repeated again and again and again: many software development projects are late and cost a lot more than anticipated. That's absolutely true, and I have the scars to prove it. The point is that Y2K does NOT fall into this category. I'm not sure I follow your reasoning here. I totally agree that elimination of 'scope creep' is a major advantage on Y2K efforts. But "just keep it working like it does" isn't that easy...who's to say what is or is not a correct system now? Systems I would work on it was typical for someone to be yelling "Fix it!"...great, so how's it broken? What will it look like when it's fixed? Slippery questions. Lots of these systems have been running under the covers for so long that no one really knows what it is they do. If you're given clear marching orders to sit down & simply plow thru the work, that's fine...but I've seen far too much ongoing quibbling over whether or not Y2K is or is not an issue. I still see a major immovable deadline. And the solution to immovable deadlines is to toss functionality overboard. - David