Dave_Tomita@ibm.net wrote:

>Can anyone help clarify the differences (if any) between
>Y2K-compliant vs. Y2K-ready vs. Y2K-compatible?

Dave,

Do you think anyone's going to proclaim their system ready but admit it's
not compliant, or compatible but not ready? As far as I know there's no
universally accepted body that's attempted to define these terms for Y2K,
and even if there were the chances of everyone out there correctly using
and understanding them in their narrow sense is vanishingly close to zero,
I'd say.

Imagine the court cases: "We never said our system was Y2K-compliant,
m'lud, or even compatible; we made it perfectly clear it was only
Y2K-ready."

To my mind compliant = compatible = ready = proof =
any-old-word-that-implies-it-won't-bomb.

Dave Kahn, ABB Steward Ltd.


+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---


This thread ...


Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2019 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].