|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
This is true. Additionally, there is the data to worry about that the
program uses and perhaps shares with other programs. And don't forget about
the historical data on backup tapes that is accessed once per year for
government reports. The problem extends to all systems and companies, big &
small. Just consider an EC (electronic commerce)transaction that begins off
of a web page with you entering a 2 digit or 4 digit year expiration date
for your credit card. That transaction goes up through the web server,
maybe also through an application server or two. Data might be saved in a
database like Oracle or IBM's DB2 running on an NT or Unix server or it
might propagate upward to the mainframe. Then perhaps later on, some other
data mining application on the mainframe may take data out of the NT/UNIX
database and merge it into a data warehouse somewhere else. Or someone may
want to run reports.
Here's an example of how convoluted Y2K solutions can get: Some people
looking for shortcuts proposed that data screens displayed to a computer
operator did not have to be dealt with at this time since the operator
should be able to tell what century should be associated with a 2 digit
year. But then someone pointed out that there are programs called screen
scrapers that intercept and read the contents of a data screen and then
process that information. So even if the operator could understand the
date, the auxiliary program intercepting the screen data might not. So now
one of the standard Y2K checkoffs is to make sure that there are no little
screen scraper programs buried somewhere in the system.
There are many, many types of interactions to deal with and many potholes
along the way. The best analogy I can come up is that of an auto assembly
line. If it takes 500 parts being available to make a car and keep the line
running, what happens if say, only 3 are missing? If any of these parts are
something major like a transmission, then the line stops.
So likewise, with all the business interactions that happen every day in and
between companies around the globe, even if most of the companies get their
house in order, there is still a very real possibility that just a few
laggards could really mess up the system for everyone.
Go poke around http://www.year2000.com for a lot more detail on this issue.
JW
abprosys@xxxxxxx <mailto:abprosys@xxxxxxx>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Lawrence Lewis
> Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 1998 1:13 PM
> To: RealTraders Discussion Group
> Subject: RE: MKT - DOW Top
>
>
> Regarding the Y2K problem. "I would simply replace those old computers
> and programing with new". The problem is not the cost of the hardware,
> it's the cost of fixing the software. Software costs, at least as
> measured in cost to produce a final program, have not come down at
> anywhere near the rate of hardware costs. As a manager, I may
> want to fix
> or replace the software, but if the higher ups don't approve my
> request,
> I'm stuck, even if I am the one to eventually take the blame.
> Life ain't
> fair.
>
> Larry Lewis
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "BrentinUtahsDixie" (reply to: brente@xxxxxxxxxxxx)
> [SMTP:brente@xxxxxxxxxxxx (MIME) (actually from:
> owner-realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 1998 1:37 PM
> To: realtraders
> Subject: Re: MKT - DOW Top
>
>
> Regarding a top, it certainly seems that the summer rally as been late
> and
> half hearted. What cause would there be for a MAJOR top now? I can't
> hardly
> believe that the GM strike is enough to cause something. If the bull
> market
> started in July of '82 an anniversary date comes in July every
> year(this
> is
> the 16th) and there have been a number of gyrations in July over the
> years.
>
>
> Not to over play the Y2K mess but something I read said that because of
> departmental guidelines and fiscal years, trouble could begin as
> early as
>
> July of this year. The one thing that I don't understand about Y2K is
> that
> computers are so much cheaper, more powerful and versatile now.
> If I were
> a
> manager and suspected that I had a bug. I would simply replace those old
> computers and programing with new. Wouldn't your job be on the line if
> you
> had known for years about the problem and didn’t do anything? Something
> about Y2k just doesn't jive.
>
> Regards,
>
> Brent
>
>
> ----------
> > From: Dennis L. Conn <dconn@xxxxxxxxx>
> > To: RealTraders Discussion Group <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Subject: Re: MKT - DOW
> > Date: Tuesday, July 14, 1998 10:22 AM
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Unless I'm mistaken (a frequent occurrence lately), I believe Chris
> Carolan
> > also gives July 28 as the date for a major top in the Dow in his book
> The
> > Spiral Calendar. I hadn't really given much credence to lunar cycles,
> but
> > Bob's post has me wondering. I don't know what the COT report is
> regarding
> > short commercial positions in S&P futures, but if it's back up in the
> > stratosphere, I wonder if that would be enough to start a decline that
> > starts a panic - to whatever degree. Since I'm not involved with
> equities, I
> > wonder if someone could comment on all this. I've been led to believe
> that
> > from a technical viewpoint (and to some extent, fundamentally),
> trouble's
> > not far off in spite of the rosy picture that's been painted, but the
> doom
> > and gloom forecasts have been wrong thus far. Does anyone out there
> believe
> > they may now be proven correct? If so or if not, what's your thinking?
> >
> > Just curious,
> >
> > Dennis C.
> > dconn@xxxxxxxxx
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: BobRABCDEF@xxxxxxx <BobRABCDEF@xxxxxxx>
> > To: RealTraders Discussion Group <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Date: Tuesday, July 14, 1998 8:23 AM
> > Subject: MKT - DOW
> >
> >
> > >According to the WinMidas software a DOW top is projected in 14 days
> at
> > 9346.
> > >This value will be adjusted as each days price and volume change until
> > price
> > >and the X coincide.
> > >
> > >BobR
> > >
> >
>
|