Subject:	Re: [AUS] R/3 problems still dogging Wine Society
Date:	1999/06/16
Author:	cory hamasaki <kiyoinc@ibm.XOUT.net>
	Posting History

On Wed, 16 Jun 1999 09:37:44, monty@nooky.gov (Montgomery Burns) wrote:   > 16 June, 1999 > > R/3 problems still dogging Wine Society > > By Cass Warneminde > > Business > SYDNEY - Ongoing problems with an SAP R/3 installation appear to have hit > the Australian Wine Society's (AWS) trading figures and its bottom line. > In letter distributed to 55,000 members last week, the AWS said that along > with other competitive issues, "dreadful disappointments with the computer > system" had, in part, led to "a sharp downturn in trading" and > "significant losses" for the company in recent months.   Hey, waaaait-a-minute.  I thought Hoffy said that SAP was the answer, tell me again what the problem is.   Here it is, clear evidence that rollouts fail and firm and confident statements, a winning style, a sincere gaze, and good hair does not influence the computer to produce correct results.  In fact, the marketeers and hypesters are a drag on commerce.   What happens in 200 days (more or less) when all enterprises have Y2K problems.  Yes, that's right, *all* enterprises will have Y2K problems.   Some, BankBoston (until they laid off their IT staff), will be able to identify their problems, fix them, and get back online in oh, 2 or 3 hours.  Most won't.  Some will never come back.   Lookit, the company that is the best prepared for Y2K, absolutely ready, testing complete as of the end of December 199Eight, will have its entire IT staff on site during the rollover.  That's hundreds of programmers, analysts, within a few hundred feet of the computer system with food, drink, and every hotel room within 1/4 mile reserved now.   Strange isn't it.  I know a Fortune 500 corp that's ready to Y2K Rock 'n Roll but they're acting as if they were the DeeCee city government, the FAA, or other clueless, addled, confused, denial-head, loser enterprise. They're done but they're still pressing hard.   Maybe the touch of paranoia was what allowed them to start early, press hard when no one else was working on Y2K, and lock down their contingencies even when (In my estimation) they don't need contingencies.   Lets toss out a wild-ass guess, there is one chance in 10 that they'll take a major Y2K production hit.  Based on this, they've chosen to fund and staff a serious contingency effort.   On the other hand, the companies that started years too late are making flippy motions with hankies, please don't say frightening things, we're not ready now but we'll fix the problems in, oh, 2 or 3 hours.  Please, don't point out that we haven't been able to find and fix our systems in 2 or 3 years.  How rude of you.   I'm sorry people.  This mess has turned out worse than I thought it would.   > Good Thing wine is not mission critical. > > MB   cory hamasaki 198 Days, http://www.kiyoinc.com/current.html   I'll rework some of my recent c.s.y2k ramblings into wrp122.  You freeloaders don't have to hit the website since you've already seen it (this will keep the megabytes / month below the threshold.)   I'm working on the LED and will mail out the kits as soon as I finish a couple other projects, such as replacing the disk in this machine. 

-- a (a@a.a), June 16, 1999

Answers

Well, that's not good. He never thought it was going to turn out great before.

-- Dog Gone (layinglow@rollover.now), June 16, 1999.

Yes, but Cory is

1. Clueless
2. Only in it for the WRP money
3. Just a mainframe clown
4. Hasn't worked on real mainframes lately (ignore 3)
5. Eats too many donuts.

(I'm with Cory)

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), June 16, 1999.

stocking up on wine and more tuna now

Thanks Cory

Bob P

-- Bob P (rpilc99206@aol.com), June 16, 1999.

Last year we were telling friends and family that this year would see two kinds of problems: lookahead problems hitting 1/1/2000, and failures from rushed fixes.

Are you following the Bellingham story? The deepest they got into jargon was to say that a "maintenance program" in the computer was using too much memory, so they rebooted, and it blew out somewhere in the process.

What's that sound like to you? Sounds to me like the reporter is trying to describe a memory leak without really understanding it. Sounds like housekeeping routines in a new (Y2k compliant?) program are buggy, sailed through light testing just fine, failed under real world loads.

Was that what happened? Got me. But if so, this is not "just a typical computer problem, nothing to do with Y2k, don't worry, we're fixing it", this IS the Y2k problem! This is people dying (no debate there), and if this was a quickie Y2k fix, then it's people dying because of Y2k computer problems.

Don't hold your breath waiting for 1/1/2000. We're in it how, so hang on.

-- bw (home@puget.sound), June 16, 1999.

What does he mean: Wine is not mission critical.? I'll have mine in cases please.

DJ

-- DJ (reality@check.com), June 16, 1999.

"Flippy motions with hankies", Ohhhhhhhh, that one rates right up there with "if all five fingers were flashlights" HAHAAHAHAAHOOOOEEE. Huuuuuu, ok, this really isn't funny. BWWWAAAAAAAAHA

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 16, 1999.

So THAT's where Hoffmeister went - he's over in c.s.y2k telling everyone that SAP went in just fine everywhere and so Y2K is no problemo.

OK, not everywhere. Not at Allied Waste, who recently ash-canned an R/3 deployment after $45M and some "serious problems", nor at Waste Management, Inc., who decided after Phase 1 (and much time and money) that they could live without SAP and cancelled the whole $250M project. Nor at a local company hereabouts, who lost all visibility into their costs and revenues for over 7 months after deploying R/3 and are now trying to dig themselves out of a million-dollar hole (using the usual tools: layoffs, unpaid OT, not paying bills, etc.)

SAP's the answer, what was the question? I sure hope it wasn't "How do I fix my Y2K problems?"

-- Mac (sneak@lurk.hid), June 16, 1999.

Cory has been a 7.0 in russ Kelly's Expert Opinion Poll since last June, it will be interesting to see if he changes his rating this month.

He also updated his "WRP Members Only" section of his website today.

Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), June 16, 1999.

Mac:

You attack the classic straw man. Hoffmeister has said repeatedly that SAP is no panacea, that it can be extremely difficult to modify, so you have to change how you do things to match the SAP method, that installations can be done in less than a year if everything goes smoothly, and it can take forever if you want it to be too heavily customized, and that it's now too late to even think of installing SAP before rollover. It was never intended to be a one-size-fits-all solution.

However, SAP is y2k compliant.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), June 16, 1999.

Hey Flint, next time you see Hoffmeister over on Der Boonkah tell him he missed a great opportunity to pick up GM on the "cheap", $61 and change. Should have another opportunity SOON!!

Your Pal, Ray

PS Somewhere I read you had FLIPPED on y2k, I think they must have meant TRIPPED!!

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), June 16, 1999.

My experience with an SAP change-over ranks up there with standing in a puddle of flaming gasoline. In one case, I had to stand in the fire long enough to reach in and shut off the ignition switch to stop the gas flow on a burning car (my Mustang in fact, which at least made that episode worthwhile). SAP was all pain and no individually discernable goals.

In the SAP case, the pain lasted almost six months as we had to bend out processes to match what SAP would allow us track in a manufacturing activity. Unfortunately, that company was not a "cookie- cutter" operation, but was a highly custom specification, product house.

Three years later and I've never heard what the total costs of changing the processes, manufacturing floor re-arrangements, new inventory management practices and facilities, additional outside vendors and replacements for people who got fed-up and quit cost the company. And then, don't forget to add in the costs of lost business caused by production shortfalls experienced during the changeover related production difficulties.

Suffice to say, there are some of us who think that the company spent or lost two and one-half times what was spent directly with SAP. And since that companies customer base will get hit hard by Y2K and any economic aftermath, why was the money spent on SAP? They could be out of business after Y2K simply because they'll have no customers anyway. They could have saved the money up-front,gone fix-on-failure and been ready when the customer base recovers in eighteen months. And there never would have been such a big hit to profitability (the Holy Grail) in the runup to Y2K.

SAP may be Y2K compliant, but the costs, pain and aggrevation of making your business SAP-compliant might be worse than what Y2K will bring. After all, if you fail in Y2K, you've got company. If you fail because of a failure of an SAP implementation, you're out there along for everyone to see, point at and laugh about.

WW

-- Wildweasel (vtmldm@epix.net), June 16, 1999.

Wine is very definitiely mission critical! And my Doctor (cardeologist) says that I should drink a glass daily for my health (I'm not drinking nearly as much as I should). It is a planned storage item, both some bulk (gallon) and some moderately premium varietals. The bunker will make a good wine celler!

-- Mad Monk (madmonk@hawaiian.net), June 16, 1999.

Mad Monk:

Maybe store some cheeses in that bunker to go with your beverages.

-- Randolph (dinosaur@williams-net.com), June 16, 1999.

And...did you know that SAP/ R3 (the 8th wonder of world in efficient implementation and reliability) is being installed in ships? Yes, it's true. Large container ships plying the world's oceans. "Managed" by SAP/ SP3.

Ahoy! All ahead full.

-- alien (alien@this.planet), June 16, 1999.

WHAT IS SAP R/3? OK SO I'M NOT SO SMART I'M ON AOL. OK.. JUST WANT TO PARTICIPATE

-- DAVE (DAVE13154@AOL.COM), June 16, 1999.

I've mentioned this a few times but I'll mention it again; PSE&G (a MAJOR utiity in the NorthEast) has a VERY agressive SAP installation schedule (7 major systems in under 18 months). Everywhere they mention Y2K in their 10-Q reports they point to SAP and say "SAP is Y2K compliant therefore we will be". They may or may not be able to keep the lights on, but will they still be in business on 4/1/00??

-TECH32-

-- TECH32 (TECH32@NOMAIL.COM), June 16, 1999.

Well, we'll see if Cory plays hit and run on c.s.y2k, or actually responds.

In the meantime, all the experts here ought to run out an tell all these companies just what a huge mistake they've made. (partial list)

-- Hoffmeister (hoff_meister@my-deja.com), June 16, 1999.

Mad Monk: you can get the major health benefit from wine (the flavonoids) by simply drinking 3x as much purple grape juice. Buy the juice at Wal-Mart and skip the wine (more $ for your other preps). Also, the clear plastic containers the juice comes in can handle freeze expansion without rupturing.

www.y2ksafeminnesota.com

-- MinnesotaSmith (y2ksafeminnesota@hotmail.com), June 16, 1999.

Wait Hoff...don't sell your plummeting SAP stock yet. Cory didn't say SAP sucks, just that it's not everything to everybody. Especially when they're down to the wire on y2k remediation, which is a fact that even you do not dispute. The gist of his post is that SAP is not a silver bullet, schedules continue to slip, and the consequences are being underestimated.

-- a (a@a.a), June 16, 1999.

No, 'a', Cory tends to setup these straw-men. But like I said, I responded over on c.s.y2k.

And you're right, of course. SAP at this point is not a Y2k solution. But it has been a Y2k solution for a very large number of companies; especially large corps, which Cory continually harps about. That has been my point all along.

As for SAP stock, don't really follow it. But FYI, sometime this year will probably be a very good time to buy. There is a huge backlog of upgrade projects that will be kicking off around March next year.

-- Hoffmeister (hoff_meister@my-deja.com), June 16, 1999.

A good time to buy? Hmmm. I don't see how. When this bubble bursts, and the global economy tanks after 2000, it'll be 10 years before the market returns to these stratospheric heights. That's if the financial infrastructure is back in place by then.

-- a (a@a.a), June 16, 1999.

Hey hoff,

Please call Rockwell Collins Avionics and ask then what is wrong with the SAP they installed in Australia? Installed in April I believe and nothing has worked correctly since? Y2k compliant doesn't mean a thing if it doesn't work in the first place. Give them a call. Now I am not a SAP expect but something is seriously wrong down under.

-- y2k dave (xsdaa111@hotmail.com), June 17, 1999.

Hoff-

I never said SAP didn't work. I said that it historically has a VERY poor track record concerning installations. I know a few companies that have gone YEARS beyond their initial installation schedule and there are many more who have just given up. Once it's running SAP can be really nice, it's just getting there that can kill you...

-TECH32-

-- TECH32 (TECH32@NOMAIL.COM), June 17, 1999.

Agree with most posters: SAP is nightmare, because they want you to think/operate exactly as they do. It really is utterly Germanic. Kind of "whatever doesn't kill you makes you stronger." Hoff is right: no way SAP for rollover at this time. In fact, you probably needed to get started in Jan, 1998 to have a shot at it. IMO.

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), June 17, 1999.

My husband says pretty much the same thing as Wildweasel. The (global) company he works for is still "converting."

-- Gayla Dunbar (privacy@please.com), June 17, 1999.

One of my clients works for a BIG N consulting firm has been in the same client for 3 years doing a SAP implementation. (S) He says they'll be done "real soon now" and has been saying that for a year and a half. The project team, last time I asked was up to 100+.

H(is)er team is a mere 25 and they are just working on a couple MINOR systems (A/R I think).

Chuck, who drives SAP Implementation Experts around a bit.

-- Chuck, a night driver (rienzoo@en.com), June 17, 1999.

Hoff, Flint -

I stand (actually, sit) corrected: I engaged in "straw man" argumentation and over-simplified Hoff's stance re SAP. I do however stand by my statements re the real costs and documented adverse impacts of its deployment.

Do I understand you to say companies which now base their "Y2K compliance" on a planned deployment of SAP (with all its attendant pitfalls) may be at risk?

-- Mac (sneak@lurk.hid), June 17, 1999.