Y2K

Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports
83

You won’t have any trouble convincing me healthcare is dysfunctional and vulnerable to foolish and wasteful spending with minimal return. Everyone wants a piece of a large and disorganized pie, with little concern for whether or not the money is well-spent.

I offer their Y2K initiatives as a proof-case for foolishly-spent money… :wink:

“**Y2K: the budget-eating bug takes over. **
Survey shows healthcare organizations are delaying other information system improvements.”
Y2K: the budget-eating bug takes over. Survey shows healthcare organizations are delaying other information system improvements - PubMed e.g. but of course you don’t need cites from me if you followed the problem.

Thanks for the reminder of just what a dysfunctional industry it is. You are absolutely correct and it does belong here as an example, so thanks for pointing it out. I guess I am curious as to why you might think your comment bolsters your argument. Pointing out that the buyer is an idiot is not much of a way to make a case that the product being sold is sound…

84

I would tend to agree that the nuclear part was nonsense, and the notion of planes crashing because of their onboard computers was equally nonsensical.

But I can easily imagine a scenario where some part of the air traffic control system would get mixed up and lose track of a few planes. This would probably not result in crashes, but maybe a few near misses…

85

Y2K problems sprang up all over the place. Even in systems that shouldn’t of had a problem.

[ol]
[li]I worked on a proprietary system back in the 1970s and 1980s. This system had built in routines for converting the date into the number of days since Jan 1, 1900. This could be stored in six digits. However, OpenSystems wrote the accounting application and instead stored the date as YYMMDD. [/li]
They did this because they were coding their accounting package on many different systems, and wanted the data to be compatible between them. Plus, it was easier to go into the raw data and see and edit the date. If it was stored in the default number of days since 1900 format, it would be harder to correct corrupted records.

So, we had the ability to get around Y2K, but many developers didn’t use that facility.

[li] Perl is a programming language and uses Unix standard date libraries all of which are Y2K compliant. Dates are stored as the number of seconds since January 1, 1970. When you used the date routine in Perl, you got a whole list of values back. One was the month number (0-11), one was the day of the month (1-31), and one was the year which was in the format of the number of years since 1900. If used correctly, it was all extremely Y2K compatible.[/li]
Well, many developers saw the value being returned for the year as a two digit number. There for they simply tacked “19” on the front. If the year was 1994, the routine returned “94” and you simply displayed “19” in front. Thus “1994”. However, if the year was 2001, you got back 101. Tack a “19” in front of that, and the year is 19101. What you were SUPPOSE to do is add 1900 to the returned year, but that’s not what programmers did.

So, here’s a programming language that is Y2K compliant, on a Y2K compliant OS, but the developers used it in a non-compliant way.

[li] Checkbooks. Like a checkbook accounting program? No your friggin’ checkbook that you keep in your pocket. Pre-2000, all checkbooks had room for the date, and they put a “19” in front of the place for the year. So, even your checkbook wasn’t Y2K compliant. This also affected tombstones. Many people bought them in advance, and they had “19” in front of the place to put the year you died. If you were unlucky enough to live a long life and lived beyond December, 31, 1999, your tombstone had to be fixed.[/li][/ol]

The basic truth is that Y2K wasn’t that bad. Power plants weren’t going to blow up. Planes wouldn’t come crashing down from the skies. A few billing programs would go awry, but the parties involved would have worked out those issues.

How much money was wasted? Probably not all that much. Many people reprogrammed their systems and bought new hardware due to Y2K, but they’d probably would have done that anyway in a few years.

An interesting point: The upgrade in infrastructure helped break the Windows strangle hold on the Internet. By the late 1990s, the Internet became Microsoft’s playground. Windows servers at many sites forced users to use Windows machines and Internet Explorer because many sites wouldn’t work otherwise thanks to proprietary technologies like ActiveX. Companies that once had Macs got rid of them simply because they couldn’t read newer Microsoft Word documents. It looked like Microsoft’s dominance would be forever.

When many companies started looking at replacing all their hardware and software due to Y2K, the cost of Windows licensing became a big factor. People started looking at another operating system called Linux and realized it would make a fine web server, and you didn’t have to pay to license it. Java started making a comeback as a computer language. New ideas like PHP, JavaScript, and AJAX (which ironically was originally a Microsoft invention) started to become popular.

With the Microsoft grip on the Internet breaking down, Apple – using open source protocols and a Unix open source operating system – staged a dramatic comeback. Apple was only able to do this because you no longer needed a Windows machine to browse many websites since many companies were now using Linux web servers.

So, in an indirect way, much of the innovation we’ve seen on the Internet over the last decade stemmed indirectly from Y2K. It broke Microsoft’s grip on the Internet and allowed it to flourish with new ideas and techniques.

86

This fails to attain to the dignity of error; it’s simply nonsense.

87

I just came across an old 9 page Paine Webber memo dated 4/26/98 by Kerschner and Geraghty entitled “Y2K OK”. They thought that a Y2K recession was highly unlikely, never mind TEOTWAWKI. They opined: [ul]
[li]In a worst case scenario a partial shutdown of one governmental agency or another would not bring the country to its knees. After all, the last federal government shutdown in 1995 (when Gingrich decided that he didn’t like Clinton’s 10 year balance budgeting plan - Gingrich wanted a 7 year track) didn’t destroy the economy.[/li][li]Banks would be fine.[/li][li]The lights would remain on.[/li][li]Most PCs were immune.[/li][li]Phones will ring.[/li][li]Airplanes will be safe. Airlines will require some work. The FAA was giving the problem the urgent attention that it deserved.[/li][li]Trains will run, due to efforts by RR cos.[/li][/ul] The memo ends with 6 reasons why “Y2K will not derail corporate America”. The memo begins with a list of the organizations predicting catastrophe: The Gartner Group, Forrester Research and Killen & Associates. Oddly, these operations also offered Y2K consulting services for the right level of fee.

A Y2k Dividend was also discussed, since many organizations took the opportunity to replace some of their antiquated systems.