Where are the fix on failure pros?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

I have a question. I assume that many of the regular posters here are computer professionals. I keep hearing nothing but unconfirmed reports of glitches and an occassional "maybe it's Y2K" type stories from AP etc. Now then, if those of you determined that all is being covered up, that the end is still near, etc., then why aren't we hearing from those that are putting in 20 hour days to fix these problems that are being "fixed on failure". Where are you people? What are you doing? Could it be that you aren't here because a) your too busy to mess with us. b) you just don't see this as worthy of your time because you know it's over, etc. Where are you, what gives?

PLEASE, no one post here and tell me that those doing the Fix On Failure stuff are under serious threat of life and limb if they talk. I don't want to hear about more black helicopter crap.

-- DAVID (tdavidc@arn.net), January 10, 2000

Answers

Those fixing on failure have nothing to gain by reporting it HERE. They are sweating bullets because they don't want to look stupid or lose their customers. Looks like you limited the scope of the answer already anyway and have your mind made up.

-- W (me@home.now), January 10, 2000.

Those fixing on failure have nothing to gain by reporting it HERE. They are sweating bullets because they don't want to look stupid or lose their customers. Looks like you limited the scope of the answer already anyway and have your mind made up.

e-mail:

"Xyz has solved it's Y2K problems. Alan drove the server PC down to Virginia and pounded on the programmer's door. The guy works for himself, out of his house, specializing in software for ["deleted"] services. His mistake was not anticipating problems with a few small third party applications that he integrated into his package.

About 6 other ["deleted"] services (that we know of) had the same problem with his software. He's been awake day and night since the 1st trying to fix things for his customers. Not returning phone calls was an act of pure self-preservation. Alan said that the guy was so shocked to see him when he answered his door that he almost made a puddle. Alan asked, as politely and firmly as possible, that he fix it NOW and call him at his hotel when finished.

Alan is a BIG guy. The server is fixed"

-- W (me@home.now), January 10, 2000.


This is not a good board on which to post questions that challenge the notion that Y2K is a huge issue...

It will annoy most of the reqular posters left.

-- ImSo (happy@prepped.com), January 10, 2000.


* * * 20000110 Monday

DAVID asks: '... {W}hy aren't we hearing from those that are putting in 20 hour days to fix these problems that are being "fixed on failure"'?

Well, David, you see, it's kind of tough to post responses when they're putting in 20 hour FoF workdays!

Don't count "Y2K Chickens" before they're hatched ... Y2K incubation is in the works ...

Regards, Bob Mangus

* * *

-- Robert Mangus (rmangus1@yahoo.com), January 10, 2000.


I guess I could qualify for a "fix-on-failure" person... Honestly, there wasn't much to fix at my company. The mainframers here had a pretty dull rollover weekend, also.

The speculation that companies are "hiding" Y2K glitches from the public may have some merit, actually. If you work in the IS department of a major US company, this shouldn't surprise you, and even if you don't it shouldn't be that surprising or menacing if you just think about it. Why would a company who declared itself Y2K compliant go running to the press with news of an internal Y2K glitch? At the very best it would be embarrassing, at the worst it could mean losing customers to a more discreet competitor.

There are requirements for Y2K disclosures; for example, in the financial industries, companies were required to submit Y2K readiness reports to the SEC on a regular basis. After rollover, there are requirements to report bugs of certain signifigance - bugs that could affect trading or customer data. No financial company is going to risk SEC fines and penalties by hiding bugs that meet those criteria. That would make things much worse than simply reporting the bug.

In other industries also, any Y2K glitches of signifigant importance will not be conceilable. The fact that you're not seeing any in the press doesn't mean there are *none*, it just means that they're so minor that they don't matter and are quickly fixed anyway.

No big mystery, no big cover-up, just business as usual.

-- Bemused (and_amazed@you.people), January 10, 2000.



Moderation questions? read the FAQ