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: Technologyguy who wrote (5427)	4/10/1999 11:34:00 AM
From: David Eddy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9818

Technologyguy - These are hard pieces of information that should carry real weight in everyone's considerations of preparedness. What I learn from these data is that Y2K challenges, while they may be tedious or difficult to address, are, in fact, solvable. It's very hard to know to what degree there were or were not problems. It all depends on the specifics of the situation (which we only have in broad generalities). One thing I wondered about, and assume would be extremely difficult to get ahold of is the number of say bogus 1099 documents sent out. Naturally I assume that bad 1099s get sent every year. Was the count worse this year? Here's a single data point that shows how difficult it is to know what it is we're trying to look for. I have a friend who's been a Y2K project manager for 3 years. His primary task wound down mid '98. On the mainframe side 30 of their 90 key systems had to be Y2Kfunctional by 1/1/99. They made that deadline with time to spare. Then he was telling me (very proudly obviously) that they've only had 4 Y2K identified outages (1 hour, 2 at two hours each, & a 5 hour). Certainly that sounds great at first pass... but what's the baseline we're comparing against? Is this the sort of shop that has outages all the time or only once in a blue moon. All he had was the count 'charged' to his project. So... the fact that the ground didn't shake on those predicted-to-be important date is certainly a good sign. But how good simply isn't known yet. - David

To: Technologyguy who wrote (5427)	4/12/1999 10:11:00 AM
From: Technologyguy	Respond to of 9818

Air traffic computers pass Y2K test FAA says air traffic control systems passed public test with no obvious errors. By Tim Dobbyn, Reuters April 11, 1999 9:25 AM PT DENVER -- The Federal Aviation Administration said Sunday that the U.S. air traffic control system passed a major public test to see if it could cope with the Year 2000 computer problem. "We are pretty confident with what we saw tonight," FAA Administrator Jane Garvey told reporters in the early hours of Sunday morning at Denver International Airport. On Saturday night the clocks on backup computers in several air traffic control facilities in Colorado were advanced to just before midnight on Dec. 31 to check that radar, navigation and communications systems will work normally at the end of the year. FAA and airline industry officials taking part in the test said the computers rolled over to 2000 with no obvious errors. Ready for January 1 "The FAA test should reassure the public that the air traffic control system will be ready for the next century," said Tom Browne, Year 2000 manager for the Air Transport Association that represents airlines carrying over 90 percent of U.S. air traffic. zdnet.com