HP3000-L Archives

September 1999, Week 4

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Fred Metcalf <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Fred Metcalf <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 23 Sep 1999 09:24:35 +0200
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (23 lines)
Simon,
I understood that the only reason for HP's change of mind was a legal
re-definition of Year 2000 compliance. The difference between the old and
new definition was never spelled out. I am convinced your system will be OK,
BUT you will not have any recourse if you pick up a problem.
The auditors of a public owned company will insist that you upgrade and redo
your tests.
Fred Metcalf
Neil Harvey & Associates (Pty) Ltd.
HP 3000 Select Solution Reseller

-----Original Message-----
From: SimonC [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
In December 1998, when HP announce that the Y2K compliant version of MPE/ix
is 5.5 express 4, we upgrade our HP3000 systems to this level and carried
out successful Y2K testing of our applications.

Lately, HP has published in its Y2K Website that the current Y2K compliant
version is 5.5 Express 7 or MPE/iX 6.0.

My question is, do we really have to upgrade to Express 7 or 6.0 for y2K
compliant?

ATOM RSS1 RSS2