I agree with Joe that being insightful with respect to further improvements
is desirable, and our company wrestled with that issue two years ago as we
planned our Y2K remediations.  However, that luxury soon proved to be
elusive due to the huge scope of the changes required to so many systems,
subsystems, embedded systems, intrastructure, etc.  Budget and manpower
constraints also contributed to the final decision that all remediation
projects would include no further enhancements to assure successful
completion of the highest priority tasks.  For those who have delayed Y2K
efforts, this will most likely be an even more critical decision.  Money
and time are powerful allies.

Lee Gunter          [log in to unmask]




From: Joe Geiser <[log in to unmask]> on 10/23/98 07:40 PM

Please respond to Joe Geiser <[log in to unmask]>


To:   [log in to unmask]
cc:    (bcc: Lee Gunter/BCBSO/TBG)
Subject:  Re: All the problems (was:  Y2K problem)




Bruce,

> Most Y2K conversions will include re-engineering to allow more
> flexibility in the future, so that changes to the SSN, phone number
> format, Dow Jones range and so on require a couple of
> twiddles in a table
> somewhere, plus some report prettification.

(choose this if the above was said in jest)

... and there IS a Santa Claus, right?  <hehehe>

(choose this is the above was said in all seriousness)

If only it were true, however I no more believe that this will occur on a
large scale than having a man land on the moon again anytime soon.
Insightful people will do things like this, but most people won't.  I could
be wrong, but I'd be willing to bet that the only focus is Y2K and nothing
else.

Oh well...

Joe