Print

Print


At 12:59 07/11/99 +0100, Magnus wrote:
>Kuty:
>>I sniff here a wonderful example of the famous Y2K bug.
(CUT)
>I've checked most of the computers that I could have used
>recently and they all at least say 1999  . . . . but I think
>the default date (on Macs anyway) for a computer that has a
>flat battery might be a particular day in 1956 . .
 
Another one on the list said that about Macs so I guess this explains it.
 
>I have seen this phenomenon before and am pretty sure
>that its not Y2K . . .
 
No, of course not.  This is just like the fact that the old DOS version on
PC's had the 1/1/80 as the default date.
 
The main cause for the Y2K bug is the assignment of two digits for the
year.  You could see it here in the way my computer, and Carl's computer
handled this date (year 1956, prior to our mailing programs default).  Both
computers (or should I say mailing programs) had two digits, set for the
year (the original problem of Y2K) and could not handle any date before a
certain value.  When they were presented with the MFBD (Mac Flat Battery
Date ;-)   ) each program changed the date according to the patch the
programmers had put there.  Carl got 12/31/69 etc.
 
>However I always wondered whether it wouldn't have
>just been easier if we all back dated our computers anyway
>to avoid the bug . . . seems a lot simpler than spending
>billions on fixes, software and hardware . . .
 
Well, we could do it in many scientific applications but all those banking
and life insurance programs which compute interest according to the time
would pose a small problem.  You wouldn't want the bank to back date your
accounts, and delete all the interest your savings might have accumulated,
would you? :-)  Or think about your retirement program ;-)
 
 
Regards,
 
                   Kuty