Isn't it true to say that Y2K is already not a non-event?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Electric Utilities and Y2K : One Thread

Y2K has already disrupted the normal flow of work at utilities and agencies. Some "contained" computer failures have already been occurring for some time now, have they not?

-- Anonymous, February 08, 1999

Answers

My opinion? Yes, some computer programming failures related to the Year 2000 have already occurred and been contained. No, we can't say that Y2K is already a non-event. After February 29, 2000, if all the date related computer failures are still "contained" with no appreciable impact on business, governments, or individuals, THEN we can say Y2K was a non-event -- but not before.

-- Anonymous, February 08, 1999

Bonnie -- I think the grammar was a bit confusing. The author wants to say that Y2K is already an event. But your point is certainly correct.

-- Anonymous, February 08, 1999

I should have asked: "Hasn't Y2K already become an event in the utility industry?"

After thinking about it more, I think that perhaps, to utility customers, it hasn't been one (yet). It has, however, been an event to the employees of those companies.

-- Anonymous, February 08, 1999


I would say yes, Y2k *has* already become an event for the industry, for three reasons:

1) There have been date related failures and snafu's already (no show stoppers; isolated incidents)

2) Electric companies are putting a *lot* of money into Y2k fixes, and ultimately, either stockholders or consumers will pay the freight

3) Dealing with Y2k is inevitably diverting already thin resources away from other IT and control system modernization efforts, as well as other upgrades necessary to put companies in a competitive position in a deregulated electricity market.

-- Anonymous, February 08, 1999


ACH! My bad. I was in a hurry and didn't read *carefully* when I made my first post. My apologies, folks! However, if at first you don't succeed, try, try again:

Besides the other good comments re why Y2K is already an "event", there have been customer problems such as the mega billing foul-ups at ComEd in Chicago. (See the older thread on this site, "Any information on Com Ed (Chicago)?) Granted, these problems stemmed from the implementation of a new billing system to replace the old one, and some purists would insist problems with new system implementations are not Y2K related. That may be true for some implementations, but many of these new systems are being put in because the old ones have Year 2000 problems and it's more cost effective to replace the system than to fix it. As I see it, if Y2K is the prime motivator for installing a new system, then customer problems with the new system are Y2K related.

One of the grocery stores I shop at cancelled all their customer's magnetized check-cashing cards on January 31, with no notice that I was aware of. I found out a couple of days ago when I went to the store. They have tables set up just inside the entrance of the store with employees there to help customers fill out the new forms for the new system. Lots of confusion and customer grumbling, especially since the new check-cashing cards won't be "activated" for a couple of weeks. The employees I asked would neither confirm nor deny that the new system was because of Y2K - nor did they give any other reason for the sudden changes. Considering the closed mouths, and the recent articles about the fiscal year beginning for retailers after Jan.31 of this year (with possible Y2K glitches appearing) it does make you wonder if putting two and two together is reasonable....Or am I too sensitive to the entire Y2K issue and seeing 2000 motivations when I shouldn't be?

-- Anonymous, February 08, 1999



Moderation questions? read the FAQ