I had an unpleasant experience today.

I ran into an old friend at a book store. He informed me that he is in charge of the Y2K matters for his employer, a hospital. He said that they are on schedule, and will have everything completed next month for those pieces of equipment which they will keep past 1/1/2000. He said all equipment ten years old will be trashed, with no attempt made to fix them.

Anyway, a customer overheard the conversation and started berating me for being "an alarmist". I didn't want to get into a debate with a total stranger I would never see again who was a jerk, so I just let him say his piece and move on.

He said that he works for AT&T, and that they and all other major U.S. companies have for the most part abandoned attempts to fix their existing computers because it is too late. They are all, according to this guy, buying new computers to replace the old.

It seems to me that if this is true, the manufacturers of mainframes would be maxed out on their production. If so, I haven't read anything about it. Does anyone know about this?

-- GA Russell (garussell@russellga.com), March 06, 1999

Answers

I don't know about nationwide sales but at least two major banks here in Upstate SC announced in their statement stuffers that they had purchased new mainframes. One was American Federal and the other was First Citizens. Liberty Mutual Life that is headquartered here also announced their purchase of same. This all took place around the latter part of December. AmFed said theirs was around 8 million, the rest didn't announce cost. 'Tip of the Iceberg' maybe?

-- Lobo (Hiding@woods.com), March 06, 1999.

Hi GA. IBM mainframes have been Y2K compliant for at least a few years now (one of the other pros here may know the exact date), but the real problem is user written software. Just moving programs to compliant hardware doesn't fix the problem. You've still got to dig in and find, fix and test programs that have a date problem. <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), March 06, 1999.

Hi GA. Sysman is correct, as usual.

Isn't it amazing how dense the DGIs can be? My wife works for a level I trauma center and she says they are getting the same song-and- dance from their "Y2K project manager". Privately, they have arranged a four-day retreat for all manager-level personnel to discuss and implement their "contingency plan".

I am beginning to think that most "project managers" are non- technical administrative hacks who don't have a clue about the real problem, but who are good at "managing" the situation.

It will be interesting to see how they "manage" when TSHTF.

Sorry you were verbally assaulted today. Some folks will just never get it. Just go about your preparations and take care of your own people.

SysBuilder

-- Sysbuilder (Y2KOldgeek@aol.com), March 06, 1999.

Thanks for your comments.

I suppose the short answer to such accusations of alarmism is, "I'll believe a company is prepared when it is willing to say so, and not before. If a company's management is unwilling to commit itself, I don't trust rumors of compliance."

It seems to me that those of us who demand evidence are being accused of unreasonableness. Hey, show me the money.

-- GA Russell (garussell@russellga.com), March 07, 1999.