"Fears". You keep using that word, but I don't think it means what you think it means.Originally Posted by Yppej
I was in charge of Y2K compliance for one of America's most successful technology companies. Both for our own processes and infrastructure, as we didn't want to suffer business losses because of it, and for the products that we produced. Our products were used in situations where they simply couldn't ever fail, even from hardware failure events. It was essential that we could guarantee our products would not suffer from the Y2K issues, and could prove it ahead of time to our fault-intolerant customers.
As a result, I directed a sizeable engineering effort to make that happen. We didn't "benefit" from that activity, except that in doing so we were able to retain our customers. We deployed Really Smart, Highly Paid senior engineers to deal with our software, firmware, and hardware Y2K issues, and we would have produced More Profit if we'd been able to use those scarce, expensive resources for new product development instead.
Yet we, who were probably the most informed people on the planet about the issues, decided it made good sense to spend this effort, weighing the risks and costs based on data, not fear.
How much code or hardware design did *you* inspect during Y2K? How is it you are such an expert that you can classify the conclusions of real engineers and scientists as "fear"?
Waiting for deflection in....3....2.....1
Reply With Quote