Much in-depth analysis of the embedded chip problem has been done here. It appears that in the Y2K cyberworld the most reasonable and knowledgeable frequent here. In depth analysis of the NERC reports, individual utilities progress via analysis of web sites and 10Q's, and cause and effect analysis of potential scenarios due to utility industries.

Place your bets here! Put it all together, you've got the big picture better than anyone else. Log in your your prognostications.

1. In the April rollover, how widespread will the power outages due to a Y2K code or embedded chip failure (NERC region only)?

2.How long will they last?

3. Will you lose YOUR power?

4. How long?

Place your bets, and we can all come back and see.

As for me:

1. NONE

2. N/A

3. NONE

4. N/A

April showers bring May flowers.

-- Anonymous, February 06, 1999

Answers

Ooops, #3 should have read NO. Also forgot to mention - let's include any outages due to human error during the NERC drill since it has had so much air time here. It's only fair.

-- Anonymous, February 06, 1999

Embedded systems don't know about fiscal years, do they? I like the idea of avoiding a buildup to major problems in April, which may not happen, and may not become manifest quickly even if they do. Embedded systems in April???

-- Anonymous, February 06, 1999

Bill,

See the thread "Why would they choose these dates". Maybe you would understand why this may be appropriate here. As you see I agree with your final assessment - I'd just like to see if anyone else thinks the same.

-- Anonymous, February 06, 1999

All of my answers are based on your assumption of a problem in the April, 1999 timeframe:

1. No impact (this is a fiscal year and potentially a mainframe program issue with 99th day of 1999 as an EOF marker; dubious at best)

2. n/a

3. See #1

4. n/a

-- Anonymous, February 06, 1999

I agree with Rick.

I would expect the April 9, 1999 to be a much different problem that Y2K although it does occur at a very bad time in relationship to Y2K.

-- Anonymous, February 08, 1999

Thanks for the question.

Back on the thead; Why choose those dates, I began wondering if embedded chips had any troubles of the 999 or 9999 variety,(or any other special programmers codes). My thoughts ran like Rick's; these special dates might affect software and mainframe systems, but not embedded systems. But I wasn't sure. I looked around for an answer but none were readily available. So I decided to ask the NERC why they chose those dates.

The terse response was; "It's the 99th day in 1999". I tried to get further clarification but none was forthcoming.

Here's the request for clarification;

I'm aware it's the 99th day in 99! Perhaps I should have been more clear. Would it not be prudent to drill on a date prior to that? If it were a fire drill in a school for example, it would be better if proper procedures were drilled well in advance of a potentially disasterous event.

Could you elaborate? In testing your various systems have you found a relatively higher percentage of software and or chip failure due to the date of April 9, 1999? Have you also found this true of Sept. 9, 1999?

I'm very glad you are performing these drills and will have extra personell on hand on these dates. I ask the questions of you so there won't be speculation or misunderstandings about exactly why the NERC chose them.

Thanks for your help.

No answers so far. So I must confess to not being sufficiently informed about the significance of this date on embedded systems. Has anyone in this audience ever programmed an embedded chip or system? Would there be any need for a "999" type of signal to interrupt or stop the system?

Regarding the "Fiscal Year"; I think the fiscal year rollover dates in April are either the first or fifteenth, or perhaps the last day of the month. I don't think the fiscal year end, (end of 1999, start 2000), occurs on April 9 for anyone special.

For me the question still remains; Do programmers of embedded systems ever use "special codes" the way other programmers use them? Have embedded systems been found in testing to be affected by these dates?

Steve

-- Anonymous, February 08, 1999

CL

This bet is too easy, change the date to 9/9/99 or 1/1/2000.

Menno

-- Anonymous, February 09, 1999