Lets all start wishing (real hard), and maybe if enough of us wish it, Y2K won't happen.

From the EPRI The Year 2000 Challenge web site - The Electric Power Research Institute is North America's think tank for the power industry

http://year2000.epriweb.com/year2000/challenge.html

The Year 2000 Challenge

"Many chips perform date-sensitive functions, and even those that do not may be internally date-sensitive and, hence, susceptible to Year 2000 problems. Malfunctions by date- and time-sensitive systems widely referred to as the "millennium bug" or Year 2000 problem could result in component and process failures, service interruptions, and economic losses. Any industry that uses computerized systems needs to identify date-sensitive operations embedded in its systems and take action as necessary before high-risk dates are reached. Given today's interconnectivity, companies must also collaborate with business partners and customers in reaching solutions. "

-- Matt (Butenam1@aol.com), January 22, 1999

Answers

This looks like an old statement. No one here claims the embedded chip theory is a myth, just that the extent of the problem is not as big as previously thought.

You just don't understand the problem.

-- happy go lucky pollyanna (happy@go.lucky), January 22, 1999.

Matt, I too have noticed that the pollyannas have taken Y2K denial to a new level by simply pretending that the embedded chips problem does not exist. They try to say, well its really embedded systems not chips, and these are much easier to deal with, or something like that. But all the reputable folks, such as the EPRI that you quote from, as well as NERC, keep referring to chips that have internal date awareness, and state that the only way to fix the chip problem is to locate-check-replace_if_needed.

-- Jack (jsprat@eld.net), January 22, 1999.

the issue isn't chips vs. systems, jack

it's that many just don't seem to understand that most chips are not affected.

controllers, clocks, and processors are a subset of all chips. those are the ones that may have issues.

saying there are 40 billion of those creatures is misinformation.

-- happy (happy@go.lucky), January 22, 1999.

O.K. Happy, most chips aren't affected... How many are? What percentage? I don't think anyone knows the answer to that question. Do you realize that when your car breaks down, most of the parts aren't affected? It doesn't make much difference how many fail, if the ones that do are important.

-- d (d@dgi.com), January 22, 1999.

Perhaps this will help (from England)

Gartner Corporation categories Gartner Corporation divides embedded systems into three categories Microcontrollers These are found in domestic and consumer products. These cannot be programmed and rarely have a real-time clock. Gartner estimate that the chance of one of these systems failing is 1 in 100,000. Microprocessors Microprocessors are more complex and sophisticated. They may cause problems if used in conjunction with a program that is connected to a real-time clock. It is estimated that 7% of these will have transient Year 2000 problems; 2% may have persistent problems. Large-scale systems These where a computer with a hard disc drive is connected to equipment (which may incorporate microprocessors. The failure rate for these systems is estimated at 35%. w45.doc//12/11/98 16:50:05 updated 18nov98 webmaster@iee.org.uk

Note that "systems" are expected to fail at a much higher rate

-- Len (wwjd@mbayweb.com), January 23, 1999.

Hi, Reality speaking. I am currently working and have worked on other y2k remediation efforts. And I am here to assure you that Y2k problems in embedded systems are real. A lot of money will be spent to fix these systems and components. Now here comes the reality part - take it or leave it - most all of these problems are minor. Most all of these problems have nothing to do at all with control functions. It is very, very, very rare for a device to use a date function for control or otherwise affect control processes. There are a few cases where a system is significantly affected, but again these are rarer. This holds true with SCADA systems, PLCs, individual conrol devices, lab equipment, you name it. Most Y2K failures in embedded systems fall into the following categories:

* Minor date problem - a date stamp on screens and reports, log files, etc. By far this is the most common Y2k problem being found in embedded systems. And this is what most of the time, effort, and money is being spent to fix.

* Date problems that affect some functions - typically, trending and graphing screens and reports may have problems. This can adversely affect maintenance reliability long term, but there is no immediate effect on control, and is certainly not a catestrophic failure. These types of problems are typically found in the higher level control systems, computer systems, and sometimes in specialized equipment.

*Date problems that cause functional failures - Very, very, very, rare, but these have been found. But this is such a small piece of the overall picture, it doesn't make sense to assume this worst case scenario is lurking inside every embedded system. It just isn't.

Hey, here's a new approach - why not prepare for reality? It can be rewarding too, although maybe not quite as fun and exciting as getting ready for Armegeddon.....

-- Deals with Reality (me@reality.com), January 23, 1999.

*Date problems that cause functional failures - Very,
very, very, rare, but these have been found. But
this is such a small piece of the overall picture,
it doesn't make sense to assume this worst case
scenario is lurking inside every embedded system.
It just isn't.

It certainly does make sense to assume the worst case scenario: that every embedded/chip/device/whatever is affected -- that is exactly what "worst case" means! Now, obviously if the embedded system is not really of very much importance, then certainly you can make a judgment that it is not worth worrying about (e.g., a coffee maker). But if the embedded system does something important -- like generating electricity, filtering water, adminstring medicine, stuff like that -- then yes, it needs to be checked with a fine tooth comb! Obviously....

-- Jack (jsprat@eld.net), January 25, 1999.

And if its recent evidence of the embedded chips folks are looking for: On January 20th -- thats 5 days ago, people -- JOEL WILLEMSSEN, DIRECTOR, CIVIL AGENGIES INFORMATION SYSTEMS, ACCOUNTING AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT DIVISION, U.S. GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE, testified before the SUBCOMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT, INFORMATION, AND TECHNOLOGY, of the COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM AND OVERSIGHT, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. He stated:

Medical devices and scientific laboratory equipment
may experience problems beginning January 1, 2000,
if their software applications or embedded chips
use two-digit fields to represent the year.

His full testimony is at:

1/20/1999 Joel Willemssen Testimony

C'mon, pollyannas. To claim that the embedded chips problem does not exist is just plain ludicrous!

-- Jack (jsprat@eld.net), January 25, 1999.