Y2K + 1 - Is this a neverending story?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Attention Programmers!

A lot of the terminology being used is of course very cleverly crafted by lawyers, so I am naturally a little suspicious. Here is the "standard" definition of compliance being used on most 10-Q forms.

FDIC Definition of Year 2000 Compliance

Year 2000 compliant means information technology that accurately processes date/time data (including, but not limited to, calculating, comparing, and sequencing) from, into, and between the years 1999 and 2000 and leap year calculations (Year 2000 is a leap year).

Is there a way that programmers could be trying to save time, by only making corrections for 2000 and nothing beyond?

-- infoman (infoman@web.com), November 28, 1998


Perhaps. If you look at a previous post of mine (Curioser) on Win98 and NT and follow the link (http://www.pcprofile.com/1yrlife.htm ) to the tech site, you'll find the following. --

"If you have any hardware/BIOS debate or issue with their statements please take them updirect with Microsoft and get the situation cleared up as it doesn't look good at all for WinNT4, Win NT 5 and Win 98 on certain machines that are retained in use that may default to a BIOS 1980/1983/19xx date after 31st December 2000!"


"Inside hal.dll (for Win NT 3.51) they hard coded a date routine that checked the hardware abstraction layer and sorted out the cutover to the new century. It would work it seems where the hardware abstraction layer and BIOS that handled a date rollover which reset itself to 1900 as the base year as an error condition. (Microsoft claim there are supposed to be some older BIOS that do this or maybe the hardware abstraction layer gets in the way?). (Microsoft says that this is the most common problem with BIOS systems.) Microsoft then interpreted this error condition and turned it into dd/mm/2000. If at some later point in time through the hardware abstraction layer the BIOS date (after 31st December 2000) resets itself to 1980, 1983 or some other 19xx date, then Microsoft would recognise these as valid years, and therefore ignore the fix which focused on 1900 as the error trigger date." --

Amazingly stupid, half-ass "fix" designed to break on the 00 -> 01 rollover !!!

-- RD. ->H (drherr@erols.com), November 28, 1998.

Thanks, R.D.

Thought that phrase was a bit peculiar, since most people believe this fix will be good until 9999! Almost looks like some of the I.T. guys are learning how to play the game, stickin it to the Corporate Pigs! More power to 'em! Revenge of the Nerds!!

-- infoman (infoman@web.com), November 29, 1998.

Ask the FDIC for its definition of Year 2001 Compliance, Year 2002 Compliance, ...

-- No Spam Please (anon@ymous.com), November 29, 1998.

So the hardware abstraction layer dll (hal.dll) will fail in 2001.

Shoot, Arthur C Clarke predicted that a long time ago. On a certain mission to Jupiter, I think it was....

-- Robert A. Cook, P.E. (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), November 29, 1998.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ