Re: Y2k problem with 7.3.4

Well if I make it ( 100 Yrs old ), and it is a problem I'll buy you lunch, OK. :--) I think it helps to keep a open mind and a sense of humor about all this Y2K. Never have like that as it is a century problem and not a Millenium problem.

Georgette P Cornio

Mike Burden wrote:

> 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 - 22:25:24 CST