Iowa: Good news and bad news : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

The good news is that Iowa is finally releasing some information about its Y2K status. Specifically see:

The bad news is that the information provided is essentially worthless. You tell me what you think. They had a conference. The governer wrote a letter. Now they've got a web site. Sheesh. Pay particular attention to what they say about embedded systems, testing, integration, outsourced services, contingency planning and finally community preparedness.

About the only positive thing I have to say is that they seem to endorse independent verification and validation.

By the way, if anyone ever finds "Appendix A" on the site, please let me know. It's supposed to have additional detail but I can't seem to find it - maybe it's just me...

Frankly, as it stands, it's not even as good as most (really bad) SEC 10-Qs. If this was what the big 3 month long wait was for, this state is in deep, deep kim chee. I was hoping/praying for better.


-- Arnie Rimmer (, November 30, 1998


Arnie the site even looks like an "institutional" type developed it. Sorry.

-- Diane J. Squire (, November 30, 1998.

I miss the blinking "under construction" light.

First week in December is their next deadline for "embedded chips costing". Think they'll make it?

-- Robert A. Cook, P.E. (Kennesaw, GA) (, November 30, 1998.


Am I correct in assuming that you meant to point out that nothing at all was said about embedded systems, etc?

-- Steve Hartsman (, December 01, 1998.

Steve: Yes, that was my general drift. Well, actually, they did address embedded systems...sort of. They've completed an inventory. I guess they are working on assessment. I sure hope remediation isn't needed. Maybe Iowa will get luckier than those other 'alarmist' states...

Any guesses as to when we will hear "Gee, looks like this is gonna cost a bit more than we figured..."?

The chart was a real side splitter. Proof positive they're 'ahead of schedule'. I can see our local paper's take on it now "Iowa Ahead Of Schedule on Y2K Problem"

I guess what I was hoping for was some real information. I just can't believe it took them 3 months to produce this sorry document. My point is that, if they had been treating this very seriously for a long time, if they had done their homework, if they had fully understood the breadth and scope of the issues involved and if they had good truly goods news to report, don't you think they would have taken just a bit more pride in presenting real progess to the public? Don't you think this document is a reflection of their real progess?

Has anybody found "Appendix A" yet? It must exist somewhere. I'm reminded of the story "The Little Prince" where the man was asked by the Prince to draw a sheep. Each drawing was woefully inadequet so finally the man drew a box and gave it to the Prince saying "This is just a box, the sheep you want is inside the box". The Little Prince was delighted. Unfortunately, I am not.

I guess I was happier with the blinking under-construction sign. Better to keep quiet and let people wonder if you're clueless than to set up a web site and remove all doubt.


"This is just a website, the information you want is in Appendix A"

-- Arnie Rimmer (, December 01, 1998.

While I can't speak for the Iowa state government...I can say this sounds quite similar to your good neighbor to the West. We've been working on "y2k" since '94, and used the same firm (CTA) as Iowa. Our conversion will be ending this month and testing begins in January. If you think Iowa's web page is lacking...take a look at ours. But just because there's little info there doesn't mean we're taking it lightly. We've been quite serious for several years. Even though Steve hates the limelight see the following:

-- R (, December 01, 1998.

So "R,"

Does that mean you are working east or west of Iowa?

Can't figure out your directions there.

-- Robert A. Cook, P.E. (Kennesaw, GA) (, December 01, 1998.

Is it in Appendix A where I can get more detailed info on Iowa's martial law plans using their National Guard?

-- Jack (, December 01, 1998.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ