is windows 3.1 compliant?greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread
Is windows 3.1 compliant??Not that Bil Gates would admit it if it was not.He already refused to give a y2k warranty on microsoft products.
-- Marc Cloutier (firstname.lastname@example.org), December 28, 1997
Marc, The following excerpt on Microsoft and Bill Gates, from ED Yardeni's book in a general way answers your question.***I am amazed at how many people believe that somebody will find a silver-bullet solution before the immovable deadline of January 1, 2000. Many assure themselves that, "Bill Gates will find a solution."
Dont count on it. Mr. Gates Microsoft Corporation doesnt want to touch Y2K with a 10 foot pole:
The real Year 2000 readiness issues are more about testing, good practices, and user education than product warranty. We will continue to provide detailed information to customers about Year 2000 readiness, but contractual warranties specific to Year 2000 readiness are not appropriate given the true nature of Year 2000 issues and the simple fact that a single technology provider, even one as well prepared for the year 2000 as Microsoft, cannot solve all issues related to the transition to the Year 2000 [http://www.microsoft.com/cio/articles/year2000faq.htm].
Microsoft expects that its biggest Y2K problem will be "getting end users to not shoot the messenger. Many PCs are used as terminals into mainframe-based applications. Microsoft warns, "It is highly likely that not all mainframe programs will function properly when we reach the year 2000." But the end user will see the information coming from their PC and may believe that it is a Microsoft problem. Microsoft hopes "to build awareness of this issue so people can quickly identify the real problems and take appropriate and cost-effective steps to solve the problem."
Is Microsoft Y2K Compliant?
A few of Microsofts products have had Y2K-related bugs which are documented in the Microsoft Technical Support Knowledge Base . All of Microsofts operating systems, including MS-DOS, were designed to handle four-digit dates well into the next century. Users can enter two-digit shortcuts that are then stored as four digit dates by Microsoft products. Since there is no industry-wide standard on how to interpret two-digit shortcuts, some PC applications may interpret a two-digit date differently than a user needs. The user will need to type in all four digitse.g., "2000" instead of "00"in order to ensure accurate data. "Users must of course take responsibility for the accuracy of the data that has been entered under either the two-digit or four-digit method, but Microsoft products give users the ability to properly enter and store dates into the next century. Relative to the severity and expense of the mainframe problem, this is a minor issue."
Are You Confused Yet?
Many of Microsofts products do not actually store dates. Instead, they rely on the operating system, and sometimes databases, for storing and manipulating dates. Every Microsoft database product including Microsoft Access, Visual FoxPro, and Microsoft SQL Server stores years in a four-digit form. Microsoft Access 97 interprets manual year input from "00" to "29" as short cuts for the years "2000" to "2029." Access 97 converts all two-digit years within imported text files to 1900-based years. Microsoft recommends "that all legacy data sources be updated to contain four-digit years to avoid incorrect conversions." Microsoft Access 95, and earlier versions, interpret manual year input from "00" to "29" to be short cuts for "1900" to "1929." Microsoft Excel versions 4, 5, and 7 all interpret "00" to "19" as short cuts for "2000" to "2019." Microsoft Excel 97 interprets two-digit years from "00" to "29" as "2000" to "2029" and the short cut "30" will resolve to "1930." Got that? Are you ready for the quiz?
In effect, Bill Gates is saying, "Dont expect me to fix the worlds Y2K problem. Its too big for my company to solve." Fix it yourself:
-- Joe Stout (email@example.com), December 28, 1997.
In answer to the question, "Is Windows 3.1 Year 2000 compliant?" I usually say, "Yes." But I follow the answer with an explanation. Windows 3.1, the Operating System, will work in 2000. It will not help a noncompliant computer turn its real time clock to 2000, you will need to do that yourself using the Windows time set routine (or use a utility from www.rightime.com or www.wsnet.com/~designer/holmesfx to automate the adjustment). The file manager will display dates strangely -- most likely, ":0", instead of, "00". But everything (I have checked) in Windows will work properly. Files created in 2000 will still sort correctly in date-sorted displays. I understand Windows 98 will automatically correct even non-compliant PCs, as does the latest Win NT. I have tested the latest version of SCO UNIX and found it is compliant AND automatically corrects non-compliant 486 machines. My answer does not address application programs running under Windows 3.1, only the operating system.
-- Lester C. Holmes (firstname.lastname@example.org), December 29, 1997.