Subject:	Go Down, McIsaac... Was: Don Joe - {explitive deleted}
Date:	1999/08/31
Author:	cory hamasaki <kiyoinc@ibm.XOUT.net>
	Posting History

On Tue, 31 Aug 1999 07:54:28, "Joseph E. McIsaac" <mcisaac1@aol.com> wrote:   > Bob Doyle wrote: > > Joe, > > > > There are lots of NG behavious here that folks may have a problem with, > > yours and mine included, no doubt. You and I, however, can only best affect > > our own behaviour, not others. > > > > In other words, take great care of your glass house. > > My behavior shall only get more focused on the ridiculous predictions of > Hamasaki, Milne, et al as time goes on. This is as it should be.   Rediculous?  OK, I get it.  I expected people to take Y2K seriously, fix the BaseOS and have a good start on the applications by Day 500 (which would have taken a full court press), they didn't as indicated by the contracting rates.   You toss out some fluff about banks "Getting it" and people like Kosky and the clueless press worrying about the medical system.   If you didn't understand GregS' point about PUT 9906-9907.  Here's the executive (simple word) summary.    The fix pack for mainframe operating systems released at the end of August 1999 includes important fixes for Year 2000 problems.  This implies that banks were not Y2K compliant in June 1999.  June comes a few months before August this year.   No amount of "brochures", lapel pins, examiner training, etc. makes up for the fact that the operating system fixes didn't come out until August 1999.   In addition, there is a controversy raging about Microsoft Excel, spreadsheet scanning tools missing date references, and something about hardware realtime clocks, again.   The brochures, lapel pins, and examiner training doesn't address this issue either.   Yes, I enjoy the happy ads from Wachovia, the nice perky lady on the radio telling me that her bank is ready.  Ho-kay, too bad it doesn't jibe with GregS' information on IBM.   I also enjoyed the sermon that the ABA wrote for churches;  I thought about money lenders at the temple.    I liked the part where bankers (the entrenched establishment) associated themselves with the fleeing Moses.   They cautioned that the Y2K-aware (such as Milne, North) are the Pharaoh and his army.   Yes bankers "Get it".  Moses, who ran for the wilderness with his people are the bankers.    Pharaoh who says "keep your money and lifestyle in my slavecamps" is the voice of the Lord:       Go down Moses   Way down in Egypt-land   Tell, Old Pharaoh   to tell my people to keep their money in banks.     Come on JEM, you've made a clean get-away.  They don't hold your leash. Come clean.   And get yourself a fine quality assault rifle before the prices go up any more,  pasta and sauce in jars are on sale this week, stock up.   cory hamasaki http://www.kiyoinc.com/current.html  Yes-yes, I know, it's new WRP time. 

-- a (a@a.a), August 31, 1999

Answers

Is Cory saying that because the OS fixes this month that NO application testing was done by ANYBODY??

I'm confused about this...

-- K. Stevens (kstevens@ It's ALL going away in January.com), August 31, 1999.

"The fix pack for mainframe operating systems released at the end of August 1999 includes important fixes for Year 2000 problems."

Link?

-- mabel (mabel_louise@yahoo.com), August 31, 1999.

K. Stevens

What this means is that the 'banks' and anyone else who claimed to have remediated and tested and verified and double checked for good measure did not do this on their current mainframe platforms because .. THE OPERATING SYSTEM COULD HAVE BROKEN THE APPS. Ergo, they have not REALLY and TRULY finished until they have put these apps on their 'production' systems and run them through completely. Even the testbed systems did not have these OS patches installed.

What this means is, at the minimum, the testing they did is completely invalid. Which means that they are not done and have to redo ALL the testing again to assure the fixes to the apps did not get broken by the recent repairs to the OS.

Which means .. they are not done.

Also 'testing' statisticly will only pick up 85% or so of the errors. So even a 'tested' app will only be truly tested when it is put into production.

This truly is a 'not good' thing.

-- ..- (Dit@Dot.Dash), September 01, 1999.

K,

It very much depends on the specifics of the bugs addressed by the new fixes. Depending on those specifics, (some of) the applications program testing may or may not need redoing. Some operating system bugs may affect many users, some may affect few.

Jerry

-- Jerry B (skeptic76@erols.com), September 01, 1999.