Re: Y2k problem with 7.3.4

I will actually be 89 and, if I am still alive and sound of mind, I'll be saying 'I told ya'.:-)

Shober's wrote:

> You appear to be very certain you will be around in the year 2050. If you were
> born in 1980 you will be 70 Yrs old, and probally retired. Also if they are still
> using whatever database, and procedures that you set up now 50 yrs from now, that
> is one stagnant system. In 50 yrs I would imagine what we are working on now will
> seem as archaic as the old plug-board, relay, and vacumn tubes systems are now. I
> would imagine we'll be using handheld or embeded in our clothing
> computers/systems, with cellular type connections, and video headsets with virtual
> vision.
> That or you were a boy scout and believe in being prepared.
>
> Georgette P Cornio
>
> Mike Burden wrote:
>
> > I would recommend that you don't use the RR or RRRR format. See my message
> > entitled 'Date format RR limitations'. It only moves the problem to the year
> > 2050. This may be enough but how many people said the same thing 20 years ago.
> > Either use the YYYY format or write your own function. As soon as you approach
> > the year 2050 the RR and RRRR format will behave, from a users point of view,
> > unexpectedly.
> >
> > Best of luck.
> >
> > "Carl A. Dotger" wrote:
> >
> > > thank you all for your valuable suggestions... We are cuurently looking into
> > > inserting the date
> > > with the RR format...
> > >
> > > Thanks Again
Received on Thu Mar 04 1999 - 03:56:27 CST