![]()
Those who believe strongly that there will be a big negative impact point to embedded systems - computers that are part of instrumentation and control systems like those that regulate nuclear and fossil-fuel power plants, and large manufacturing and chemical plants. And third, relatively few systems have critical functions that depend on knowing the right date. In older systems, there are many noncomputer-based back-ups and many checks and balances built in. Second, the phenomenon of relying completely on computers is fairly recent. An organization would have to be extremely irresponsible not to have done so. There are several reasons for this.įirst, most mission-critical systems are fairly easy to test for the problem. AUTOMATION TESTING FOR Y2K DEFECT PROCESS PROFESSIONALI have been involved with computers at fairly technical levels for all my professional life, and I find that most of my colleagues have difficulty believing that the problem is very great. There are authoritative people on both sides of the issue, or rather, all across the spectrum, from “the end of the world as we know it” to “no one will notice.”Īs we get closer to the end of the year, I have found, interestingly, that there are fewer and fewer people on the “sky is falling” end of the scale. Joel Orr: This question is still very controversial. However, no industry is an island and we are dependent on suppliers (e.g., telecommunications, coal, gas, water) and are spending a great deal of time making sure all the critical systems and suppliers are ready. We have issues with monitoring and ancillary equipment but Y2K problems in critical systems are few. Fortunately, Y2K’s impact on our ability to generate, transmit, and distribute electricity has been minimal. In the electric-utility industry, we spend a tremendous amount of time and effort to ensure we have the most reliable electricity service in the world. Jon Arnold: Depending on the industry, the risks of Y2K can be great and if they are not understood and managed, they could seriously harm businesses, suppliers, the Government, or even the economy as a whole. Most larger companies, however, started working on the problem years ago. So when the New Year comes, noncompliant computers, those that still rely on two-digit numbers for describing the year, will process the data for year “00” as representing 1900, and this could cause problems.Įd Stengel: There are estimates that over 65% of the hardware sold in 1997 was noncompliant, and over 35% sold in 1998 was also noncompliant, so the scale of the problem is quite large and will effect large and small companies. It was extended to microprocessor chips, almost all of which process dates with two-digit years encoded in their hardware. This habit stayed with us even as advances brought larger computer memories and more storage. The card had only 80 spaces for data, so to save space, programmers routinely omitted the first two digits of the year. Neff: There is a problem and the source is absurdly simple: It was the limitations in the paper-punch card, the analog representation of digital data in the early days of computing. While reassuring, their answers leave some room for caution. To try and answer those questions, Machine Design talked with several computer experts and Y2K gurus. AUTOMATION TESTING FOR Y2K DEFECT PROCESS SOFTWARE1, 2000? Will their software crash or start generating gibberish when the calendar reads 01/01/00? And if the software goes belly up, will civilization come crashing down as well? Or will everything be hunky dory, with the exception of a handful of out-of-work computer consultants? What will happen to computers worldwide on Jan. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |