The company I work for just installed a new system. I am not an expert but have followed this forum for about a year. (daily) Yesterday, it's our month end and we get a message that reads as follows:

"**Value 01/30/1900 cannot be displayed using 99/99/99." Had it said 01/30/2000, I would have ignored this.

So I went to the website for the Software company and they advise in their Year 200 Readiness Disclosure as follows:

(Company) has implemented century date capability for its products using a valid date range (i.e., "windowing") approach in part to provide backward compatability with data records, screen formats and other data items from previous versions of the products."

I have read in various threads that perhaps "windowing" isn't the best solution. Is it going to work. My e-mail is real if you need/want to reach me for further info.

Thanks for anticipated help,

Concerned Employee

-- concerned employee (neilw52@hotmail.com), December 01, 1999

Answers

Concerned- Windowing won't work...Here's a thread that talks about "creeping corruption" in PC's.

-- Brian Bretzke (bretzke@tir.com), December 01, 1999.

Concerned- Windowing won't work...Here's a thread that talks about "creeping corruption" in PC's. Sorry-Here's link http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=001tkG

-- Brian Bretzke (bretzke@tir.com), December 01, 1999.

Brian, Thanks for the input but this is not a PC environment. We are running the latest IBM & I believe it's an RS/6000. Your short and simple response, "windowing won't work" is far from sufficient to present to my companies IT Manager. May I please have further details and technical advise.

Concerned Employee

-- Concerned Employee (mailto:neilw52@hotmail.com), December 01, 1999.

Sorry Sorry Sorry,

That should be ADVICE not advise.

Concerned Employee

-- Concerned Employee (mailto:neilw52@hotmail.com), December 01, 1999.

Just curious....couldn't windowing provide a short term solution for a few months until we know how y2k shakes out? I keep hearing about the patches and problem solving updates being sent out by software companies as we approach '00 and my thought is why try to update until we know what's going to work and what isn't?

-- jb (jb@hotmail.com), December 01, 1999.

Of course Windowing works if --

-- every instance of date handling is found in all the application code and is updated without installing new bugs

-- if the logic is applied even-handedly across platforms, applicatons, workgroups, systems, and other companies that exchange data

-- if management wakes up again in 50 years or so to recode

Pete

-- Peter Starr (startrak@northcoast.com), December 01, 1999.

This error message sounds familiar to me. Guess version of your software is an XXX 8.6 or 9.0 based on Progress (TM). If this is true you should provide me with some more information. I would be pleased to help you.

Please post here, e-mail doesn't work. (But typically windowing does!)

-- Consul (ERP@workfor.you), December 01, 1999.

"Windowing" is a legitimate programming technique that has been in common use for years (decades?) in a lot of software. It allows software to use 2-digit years while still being able to tell the difference between centuries (1900's vs. 2000's). Software with "windowing" properly implemented is not affected by the Y2K problem.

-- A Programmer (notmy@address.com), December 01, 1999.

Windowing is a short term (but years hence) fix that will potentitally cause additional problems (when it hits the pivot year) or will eventually need to be replaced properly... So why not do it right the first time?

-- Mad Monk (madmonk@hawaiian.net), December 02, 1999.

"Windowing" will bite you on the ass. "A Programmer" is full of it. It may be accepted/acceptable -- but it is not RIGHT. It is idiot/stupid/shortsighthed attitudes such as that, that we are sweating this crap. As Mad Monk said, why not do it right the first time?

-- A (A@AisA.com), December 02, 1999.

Windowing is a poor substite for a real fix, but it CAN be used to patch the effects of Y2K. Please don't buy Brian's line - he's exactly the sort of "expert" that gives the polly's credibility, i.e. he's inventing a problem and selling the solution.

It's really too late to enter a technical discussion with your boss about this. Just demonstrate the effects, i.e. "it ain't working" and let HIM worry about why. Best of luck.

-- Colin MacDonald (roborogerborg@yahoo.com), December 02, 1999.

Concerned:

I must agree with Peter. Windowing was NOT the problem here. The problem was that a date was MISSED to be "windowed." This is a bug...not a windowing error.

I would also agree with Colin. Windowing has been used for MANY years in large systems successfully. I call it a REAL fix. Monk: I thought you were in the field. If so, you should know the reasons why date expansion would be a waste of time for systems including old data base technologies that will surely be replaced MUCH sooner than expiration of the windowing timeframe. [Lest one wants to say "That's how we got into this mess in the first place", I may point out that technology is moving along FAR faster now than it did in the 60's and 70's.]

As for Brian's constant hawking of the Australian findings on this forum, SOME blatant inconsistencies in their preliminary document have already been presented on this forum. Although he (Brian) said he welcomed the criticism, I haven't seen him (Brian) yet dispute those criticisms...just continue to blindlessly "believe" that they COULD be right.

-- Anita (notgiving@anymore.com), December 02, 1999.