Re: Y2K tools for BPCS -- BPCS-L


I am not  a particular fan of INTO2000 but if  it works  for you  fine.  I've 
 found many other paths to  solid  solutions.

In a message dated 9/22/99 5:17:06 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Zoranp@idt.net 
writes:

<< Subj:     Re: Y2K tools for BPCS 5.1
 Date:  9/22/99 5:17:06 PM Eastern Daylight Time
 From:  Zoranp@idt.net (Zoran Pirjevec)
 Sender:    owner-bpcs-l@midrange.com
 Reply-to:  BPCS-L@midrange.com
 To:    BPCS-L@midrange.com
 
 Hi,
 
 Thank you for your comments.
 
 Clearly you did not read mine closely enough, to repeat "Horror stories 
abound and I
 have heard some about Nexgen as well but not as bad as the ones about 
INTO2000."
 
 I am not making any suggestions, merely repeating what I have heard from 
reliable
 sources. Why do you say they are false? One in particular from South East 
Asia where
 it was reported that the above mentioned tools were in competition. One side
 discounted his price for 4 copies of the software down to $20,000 (from 
$80,000 per
 copy) and still lost the sale. Doesn't seem to add up, does it?
 
 Mind you, I have heard positive stories as well, just like you have I imagine
 (please correct me if you haven't) , but I omitted making any reference to 
them.
 
 Incidentally, I have had a conversation with Ardi Batmanghelidj to our mutual
 satisfaction and did not foist it upon the rest of the uninterested parties 
as
 debating it here would do. Call me directly if you so wish, I would be 
pleased to
 speak with you.
 
 Your objective no doubt is to win Mr. Bourdin's ear, whether by a 
gentleman's debate
 or knock down drag out verbal battle.
 
 Its fair to say that each of our respective solutions  do the job. What job? 
Helping
 a BPCS user navigate through 1/1/2000 and beyond.
 
 As to which is the "better" choice, the decision maker has to consider (at 
least)
 Milt's and Manus' checklists, how standard his system is, his available 
resources,
 budget and time constraints and over what period of time the chosen solution 
needs
 to stay in operation - and of course your particular checklist.
 
 If the user can get past the glib rhetoric of 'cheap', 'quick and dirty' and
 'fooling the computer' and such like nonsensical, totally subjective, 
righteous
 postulations he most often comes to the conclusion that the 28 year offset 
method
 (to use a neutral phrase) will do - unless he is convinced to attempt to buy 
a more
 comfortable peace of mind with the use of another method. It costs more and 
he feels
 better. Why do we have 779 different models of car on our roads?
 
 Incidentally, what irresponsible outbursts......?
 
 
 mitchell@nexgensoftware.com wrote:
 
 > Zoran:
 >
 > I know that this discussion group has had it with the Y2K mudslinging.
 >
 > And you have crossed a very serious line.  To spuriously suggest that 
there are
 > horror stories about any vendor, without any context to be able defend your
 > claims is irresponsible and damaging.  Not only are your comments false 
but they
 > are probably violate list guidelines.
 >
 > I, like Mr. Batmanghelidj, was hoping for a technical discussion of the 
merits
 > of the opposing approaches.
 >
 > Let us either have a productive discussion of the sort that can help 
people like
 > Mr. Bourdin make an informed decision or drop it alltogether.
 >
 > I hope that the group demands a silencing of such irresponsible outbursts.
 >
 > +---
 > | This is the BPCS Users Mailing List!
 > | To submit a new message, send your mail to BPCS-L@midrange.com.
 > | To subscribe to this list send email to BPCS-L-SUB@midrange.com.
 > | To unsubscribe from this list send email to BPCS-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
 > | Questions should be directed to the list owner: dasmussen@aol.com
 > +--- >>
+---
| This is the BPCS Users Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to BPCS-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to BPCS-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to BPCS-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner: dasmussen@aol.com
+---