New computers - any known to be 100% compliant?greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread
Call me clueless, but I'm finally getting a new computer (ditching my 4 year old IBM). Does anyone know for sure of a machine that is 100% compliant?
The owners of the local computers stores are as much in the fog as the general publoc it seems.
Thanks for your suggestions.
-- Bob P (firstname.lastname@example.org), May 28, 1999
* * * 19990528 Friday
There are customers today receiving large deliveries of so-called "Y2K-COMPLIANT" computers that--upon pre-installation testing--AREN'T _ALL_ ( i.e., the _WHOLE LOT_ ) "Y2K-COMPLAINT!" CAVEAT EMPTOR! ...
If you dDO happen to get a "good" computer, be advised of the following astonishing ( for March 1999 ) information from the GartnerGroup ( see item below )...
"... an astounding 81% of vendor software applications still aren't millennium-ready, according to a Gartner Group Inc. report released late last month. ..."
Regards, Bob Mangus
* * *
< http://www.idg.net/idg_frames/english/content.cgi?allowFeedback=false& referer=&outside_source=cnn&url=http%3a%2f%2fwww%2ecomputerworld% 2ecom%2fhome%2fprint%2ensf%2fidgnet% 2f9904129DD6&channel=ie4&doc_id=113925 >
CNNinteractive IDG*net 04/12/99
Gartner study warns most vendor software not OK for Y2K
By Thomas Hoffman
04/12/99 With 263 days to go until the year 2000 ball drops in Times Square, an astounding 81% of vendor software applications still aren't millennium-ready, according to a Gartner Group Inc. report released late last month. Furthermore, testing shows that 6% of vendor software that shipped following year 2000 patches isn't completely compliant.
The 81% noncompliance rate for commercial software packages is better than the 88% figure tallied six months ago, but progress is "not happening fast enough," said Lou Marcoccio, year 2000 research director at the Stamford, Conn.-based research firm.
One of the biggest exposures for corporate customers is the uncertain readiness of Windows 95, said Jeffrey Tarter, editor of "Softletter," a Watertown, Mass.-based industry newsletter. Microsoft Corp. "has been very ambiguous" about whether it has identified and fixed all the millennium bugs in Windows 95, he said.
Of the so-called year 2000-ready packaged applications examined by Cap Gemini America's application renovation center in Tarrytown, N.Y., 10% to 15% still contain an average of four to five millennium bugs per program, said Noah Ross, who runs the center. Cap Gemini reviews the year 2000-readiness of homegrown and packaged software for corporate clients.
The problem for many corporate customers is that to receive a free year 2000-ready version of a vendor's software, customers have to be using the most current version. "Many customers don't, and it's a big problem," Ross said. For example, about one-third of all corporate users are still running Windows 3.1 and haven't upgraded to Windows 95, Windows 97 or Windows 98 applications, Tarter said.
Abe Nader, senior vice president of information systems at Dollar Bank, tackled the problem head-on. The Pittsburgh-based bank had "severe" problems with several vendors whose software was purported to be year 2000-ready but wasn't, he said. For instance, a mainframe- based loan system had to be sent back to the vendor four times before the date problems were finally ironed out. Nader and his staff tested all vendor software themselves and brought in an independent auditor to test the software again. That led Dollar Bank to repeatedly go back to vendors whose software continued to contain millennium bugs and demand that the problems be resolved.
"It's not an issue anymore," Nader said. "We applied hammer-type pressure on the vendors to fix this, and it's taken care of now."
* * *
-- Robert Mangus (email@example.com), May 28, 1999.
-- Bingo1 (firstname.lastname@example.org), May 29, 1999.
Computers are composed of hardware and software, and there are several layers of software, such as the operating system (e.g., Windows 95/98, or Linux), and various applications (word processors, spreadsheets, games, ...). Y2K problems are almost entirely in the software.
So someone can speak of a "computer" (meaning the hardware -- the circuitry inside the case) being 100% compliant, but that says practically nothing. Basically, the only part of the hardware that matters for Y2K is the system clock, and guaranteeing that the clock is compliant means _very little_. Why? Because almost all the Y2k problems occur in the software, where calendar dates are entered and copied and stored and interpreted.
The clock is just _one_ source of calendar dates used by the software. Most of the dates which might be mishandled by non-Y2K-compliant software come from other sources, such as your input into a spreadsheet. Now, I'm not saying you'd enter a date wrong; I'm saying that the software might mishandle a date you entered. You might enter "02/29/2000" for February 29, 2000 (by the way, next year _is_ a leap year), but the software might truncate this to "02/29/00" when storing it or passing it along to other software. Then later on, some software picking up that date may mistakenly "think" it means February 29, 1900, instead of your intended date in year 2000.
By the way, 1900 was not a leap year, so the date February 29, 1900 is invalid. Aren't calendars fun? Despite this, some spreadsheet programs erroneously accept that date as a real one!
So you could have a _machine_ (i.e., the hardware) that is 100% compliant, but be in big Y2K-trouble because your _programs_ (the software) were non-compliant.
It's the programs' compliance that counts.
-- No Spam Please (No_Spam_Please@anon_ymous.com), May 29, 1999.
Bingo...I'll take two please : )
-- Michael Taylor (email@example.com), May 29, 1999.
Well, if you really are starting over, here's what I'ld do:
Make a boot diskette with your favorite Y2K test program on it. Try before you buy.
Have you picked an OS yet? MS still has a few unanswered questions. NT-SP/5 should be compliant, well so was SP/4 and SP/4.1... Win/98? Check the web site for latest info...
Make sure ALL of your applications are Y2K compliant. Check version numbers - x.y.z, and maybe SP levels.
Hope you aren't going to move any DATA from earlier versions. If so, well, good luck, you may be on your own...
Have fun! <:)=
-- Sysman (firstname.lastname@example.org), May 29, 1999.
And...relax. There's plenty of time left to get it done.
(Will it really be June, 1999 next week? Hey, what happened to all those companies that were supposed to be finished in March? Or how about last December? Hey, wait a minute. Where's our full year of testing? Silly me. Why am I worrying about it now? They will take care of it soon.)
-- PNG (email@example.com), May 29, 1999.
Having been told my hardware is good, my plan all along has been reformat my drives and just sit it out until Mid March next year. By that time figure we will all know one way or another what software is good or not and how serious this could be. Realize this is not an option for many but my computer is just for home use. When I should do this I am still tossing around.. Sept 8th or Dec 30 any ideals on this game plan?
-- Carol F (firstname.lastname@example.org), May 29, 1999.
iMac iMac iMac !!!
How can ppl STILL not know the sheer zippy elegant joy of the iMac?
Go for a test drive!
xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx
-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (email@example.com), May 29, 1999.
A better choice, if youre starting over or fresh...
If not, well... good luck! (Just a little while to load)
Or, for a good chuckle...
-- Diane J. Squire (firstname.lastname@example.org), May 29, 1999.
I simply want to reiterate what No Spam Please has stated above - that while hardware should not be ignored, it is the software that runs on your computer that is of primary concern.
Also, when you discover that a piece of software is "non-compliant", you must dig a little deeper and inquire as to the nature of that non-compliancy. For a great many Y2K bugs, the bug may simply not apply to the way you use the software (it might involve a feature that you never intend to use). Or, it may be as simple as a display-only problem that although annoying or inconvient, does not produce incorrect results. Or there may be an easy 'work-around' you can use if you are aware of it.
This is one reason why, after you have inventoried your systems (i.e. the hardware, the software and the dependencies and intercommunication of the various system components), you perform this assessment. You further divide your systems into that which is 'mission critical' (e.g order entry, accounting, etc) and that which is "non-mission-critical" (e.g. screen savers, vacation schedulers, etc.) When time is limited, you focus your efforts on the mission critical side and only upon those portions of your mission critical systems that will result in either system failure or data corruption. Minor display problems must be put on the back burner.
You must also make a judgement call about the software you are using based on what will most certainly be incomplete information from the vendor. Do you belive that the vendor knows and has been forthcoming with the full extent of the Y2K-related bugs within their product? What is the vendor's past track record with respect to responding to critical bugs within the product? Are their releases typically solid or buggy? Do they make good software or just good excuses? In the end, you will not know for certain, you will make your 'best guess' based upon your knowledge of the vendor's past track record.
Most home PC users have very few 'mission-critical' applications. Not so with those who use their home PCs for business.
Forget microwave ovens, VCRs, screen savers and other such distractions. They are not the point.
-- Arnie Rimmer (Arnie_Rimmer@usa.net), May 29, 1999.
maybe you should wait out the 7 months and know if you'll even have power?
-- zoobie (email@example.com), May 29, 1999.
There are VERY FEW (if any at all) Y2K compliant clocks inside NEW computers on the market. FACT!
Check out http://www.pcprofile.com/pcally.htm to find out why. The PC Alliance (all the heavyweight vendors) are selling PC's with BIOS correcting the RTC. For most this is not a problem but for many it will be.
Rob Harmer Adelaide Sth Australia ============================================ Provides a focus on Year 2000 issues affecting desktop PC's, strategies and solutions for Year 2000 business survival! Based in Adelaide, Sth Australia email: firstname.lastname@example.org fax +61 8 8265 1961 REGISTER NOW for a FREE copy of PCPLite at http://www.pcprofile.com =============================================
-- Rob Harmer (email@example.com), September 07, 1999.