On 30 Jan 1998 23:37:34 -0000, [log in to unmask] wrote:
><< Now when real dates in 99 come along, they get all confused! >>
>
>specifically 09/09/99. This will cause as many headaches as the end of 1999
>accordicng to some analysts.
I don't know about "as many" but it's certainly significant. The main
problems with y2k are not PC-based, but legacy systems that have been
in place tens of years and the source code is lost.
I know someone working for a (well known) home-catalogue company and
they've got terrible problems with batches being terminated with
9/9/99 -- all their systems are written in COBOL...
Best wishes
James
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|