Three distinct points of view exist concerning the Year 2000 issue.
There are those who predict disaster, those who expect it to be for the
most part a false alarm and those who just don’t know about it or care
for that matter. Experts have a little advice for the last group: pay
attention.
Discussion concerning Year 2000 — often abbreviated Y2K — has reached a
fever pitch in the last year and is sure to continue to raise eyebrows
as the millennium approaches. The issue is such a scare because it is
not known for sure what will happen to the computers and ultimately
businesses who rely on them.
What is the Year 2000 problem?
The Year 2000 concerns are related to the use of date data in computer
systems, equipment or other products with computer code and chips made
predominately before the 1990s. Before this decade, there was an attempt
to save computer storage space so only two digits were used to identify
years (i.e. instead of 1988 the data was programmed in as simple 88). It
was also a shorthand way of punching in the information.
The fear is that computers will go haywire in the year 2000, because the
computers will only read the numerals ’00,’ which will be interpreted as
the year 1900. That’s a problem when a computer is doing arithmetic,
data field sorting or comparing data. For example, ages of people,
interest on loans and inventory could be significantly altered.
“This is more of an overall business problem not so much a technological
problem,” said Michael Davis of UNICOM, a Providence computer consulting
company. “This is an issue that will affect all different levels of an
organization, specifically the ability to process information and flow
that information throughout the organization.”
Davis said there are several levels to the problem, including the
mainframe or legacy systems (involving COBOL), the network and operating
systems.
What has to be done to address these issues?
Davis said in terms of the mainframe running on COBOL it is a matter of
examining code and making needed changes.
“You have to go in there and fix the COBOL code to make sure it can
handle the four-digit years,” he said. He added that that can be a time
consuming task.
Then there are software and hardware issues involving computer networks,
the internal clock of the computer and the operating systems. Problems
in those areas can be solved by software patching or reinstalling
applications to make them Year 2000 compliant.
Davis said it is important for a company to work closely with its own
computer expert or a computer consultant to make the most fiscally
responsible repairs as possible.
“What we try to do is go into an organization and ask about the computer
environment, how important the systems are and how current they are,” he
explained. “The question often becomes is it more cost effective to fix
existing systems versus going out and buying a new one.”
How should small businesses approach this issue?
“I think the biggest concern out there is for how small businesses
respond to this,” said Kenneth Sousa, a computer information systems
lecturer at Bryant College. He said most small companies don’t have the
advantage of having a technologies person on staff to avoid unnecessary
spending.
“If I was a small company owner I would not start selecting a computer
consultant unless I have verified a problem does in fact exist,” he
said.
Sousa suggests contacting the vendors in which equipment and software
was purchased and ask them if the technologies are Year 2000 compliant.
“Most companies should have that information available to them. Until
you know that there is a problem there is no sense in spending money you
don’t have to,” he added.
If a consultant is necessary, people in the computer industry suggest
doing your homework before picking one. A company’s references and
looking at the number of years they have been in business is a good
start.
Why didn’t the computer industry foresee these problems?
“No one ever thought these Legacy systems, for example, would still be
around,” said Sousa. “Many thought they would be replaced by now.
Unfortunately, a lot of companies upgraded hardware, but never upgraded
the Legacy system simply because it has worked so well.”
He added that it wasn’t like the Year 2000 concerns came up in the last
two or three years, but have been known for more than 15 years.
It has just been a matter of procrastination.
“Many businesses just left it to someone else, figuring they wouldn’t be
in that position by the time the Year 2000 came around,” he explained.
“For example, one of the major banks is spending $350 million on this
issue. Now what CEO was going to embark on that type of expenditure
years ago for a problem they might never be involved with.”
Will there be problems before the Year 2000?
“Forty-four percent of companies in the U.S. have already began having
Y2K problems and that number is expected to increase in 1999,” said Tony
Keyes, author of The Year 2000 Computer Crisis: An Investors’ Survival
Guide.
For example, companies working on 12-month business cycles will be
moving into the Year 2000 as early as next month.
Keyes added that April 1, 1999 is also the fiscal year for two states,
many companies and several foreign countries. He considers Oct. 1, 1999,
the start of the federal fiscal year, to be “the granddaddy” of all
dates prior to Jan. 1, 2000.
“There will be this build up of events that will make it all the more
difficult as the millennium approaches,” he added.
When will it be too late to start making changes?
Davis of UNICOM said that date is right around the corner considering
the demand for Year 2000 work currently and the amount of time it takes
to correct problems.
“If people are not making plans by the first quarter of 1999 then they
will be running up against a risk point,” he said.
Davis said companies late in their preparation might have to go into a
“triage” mode.
“What I mean by that is they will have to begin to prioritize, ” he
said. “If they can’t do everything then do what is most important and
leave the other work alone and hope that it will be OK. It’s a matter of
what can you live with at that point.”
