<soapbox on>
The problem with KSAM/3000 (CM) and Y2K is not in the operation and
usage of it. The problem is the lawyers are looking for ways to rip off
the people and businesses more by demanding a piece of paper with a
signature is on it for every little tiny bit of information on a
computer. Pun not intended but seems to work.
<soapbox off>

Rich Holloway
Systems Administrator
Providence Health Plans
Phone: (503) 574-7457
Fax: (503) 574-8614
[log in to unmask]

The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my company. They
belong solely to me.

If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough. --
Mario Andretti


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Glenn J. Koster, Sr. [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Thursday, April 22, 1999 6:56 AM
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:      Re: KSAM/3000
>
> Okay, somebody help me out here.
>
> I don't seem to see the problem with KSAM/3000 (CM) and Y2K.  After
> all,
> based on my experience, I have never seen anything in KSAM/3000 that
> was
> truly date sensitive - other than user data.  Also, internally HP has
> several "critical" applications that use KSAM/3000 files - and these
> were not moved to "nm" KSAM during our Y2K remediation.  The reasons
> are
> numerous (including a proprietary non-KSAM read procudure against
> these
> KSAM files).  The fact remains that in our testing, even using future
> dates, we never had a problem with the actual KSAM/3000 files.
>
> Glenn
> --
>  ______________
> |  Navigators  | Under contract to Hewlett-Packard ISG (Greeley, CO)
> |     |)       |
> |     | )      | Glenn J. Koster, Sr.             [log in to unmask]
> |     |  )     | Managed Business Solutions    http://www.mbsnav.com
> |     |   )    | 214 S. College, Suite 201     At HP: (970) 350-5337
> |     |----    | Fort Collins, CO  80524      At MBS: (970) 224-1016
> | ============ |
> | \__________/ |
> |   of Change  | aka:  [log in to unmask]
> |______________| home: http://members.aol.com/MichiTex