|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
At 5:57 PM -0400 7/16/98, Timothy Morge wrote:
>Your possible explanation about early releases of TS ver 5.0 not being
>year 2000 compliant makes some sense, I guess...in a haphazard design
>sense [which I could now imagine Omega using]. However, if it isn't that
>difficult for them to 'compartmentalize' their design and research
>products, it should be pretty darn easy to take about 75 percent of their
>code staff and put them on finishing a year 2000 patch right now. I mean,
>they no longer have to worry about releasing version 5 on time...it was
>initially planned to be released last quarter at the latest.
I suspect the real reason that the Y2K 4.0 patch will follow the release of
5.0 is that there will not be a Y2K "patch". Such "patches" are too
expensive to build and test and have no revenue impact (no direct
return-on-investment). Even if the code changes to 4.0 are minor
(unlikely), the testing is still a major effort. And how many of you will
volunteer to beta test a Y2K patch on your critical data. Not me.
What usually happens in such cases is that all 4.0 users will get a
"crippled" version of 5.0 with certain 5.0 features there but disabled. It
is very easy to build software such that certain features are disabled. So
I would bet that 4.0 customers will either upgrade to 5.0 for a fee, or get
a crippled version for free. In any case, we will be using 5.0 code whether
we want to or not. 3.5 customers are probably out of luck.
Just a guess but highly likely based upon my experience.
Wouldn't it be nice if Omega would tell it's customers what the plans are?
I guess that is asking to much.
Bob Fulks
|