They sorta miss the embedded boat on this one.

Diane

Published Sunday, December 5, 1999, in the San Jose Mercury News

For VCRs and the like, 1972 is the quick, easy Y2K solution

BY DAVID L. WILSON
AND TOM QUINLAN
Mercury News Staff Writers

http://www.mercurycenter.com/premium/business/docs/house05.htm

[Fair Use: For Educational/Research Purposes Only]

IN ALL likelihood, you will wake up in the year 2000 with everything in your home functioning just like it always does -- except perhaps your aching head.

But if you find yourself in a world in which your videocassette recorder lies inert, your thermostat is catatonic and your fax machine won't produce a reasonable facsimile of a fax, just remember this date: Jan. 1, 1972.

It's not that reminiscing about the Nixon administration will make your problems go away. But that date could offer a simple solution to the year 2000 problem, also known as Y2K.

The Y2K bug is rooted in an old practice to save expensive storage space in the early days of computing: Programmers used just two digits to represent the year when storing dates.

Although the most modern computer chips use four-digit dates, many older chips are still in use today in cars, home appliances and factory machinery.

When the clock strikes midnight on New Year's Eve, a few of those devices won't know how to interpret ``00'' and will malfunction.

In many cases, simply telling the machine that the year is ``72'' will solve the problem. The days of the week and dates of the year 2000 match up exactly with the days and the dates of 1972.

The fix usually won't work with personal computers for various technical reasons -- lots of software won't recognize a date prior to 1980, for example. But it's a reasonably good workaround for what the computer cognoscenti call the embedded processor problem.

It's hard to find anything that runs on electricity these days that doesn't have a computer chip in it. Modern automobiles have dozens of processors that track the fuel mixture, compression, even the angle of the cam shaft. Microwave ovens, television sets, coffee makers -- all have chips embedded in them. Even hotel doorknobs have a built-in computer processor that can read the electronic keys issued to guests.

Many of those chips have some kind of clock, even if it's not obvious or necessary, because devices are often built with the chip that's cheapest for the company making the device.

The good news is that, from a consumer perspective, it's highly unlikely that any of the embedded processors in your household appliances are going to go crazy because of Y2K. ``If you're worried about a single chip in your microwave oven causing your oven to fail on Jan. 1, rest easy,'' said Rick Cowles, president of energy consulting firm CSAmerica Inc. in Penns Grove, N.J.

The bad news is that the manufacturing, utility and transportation sectors will almost certainly trip over the Y2K problem, and minor glitches will cause a bit of pain for consumers, who might have to deal with things like billing mistakes, water that tastes a bit more chlorinated than usual or an empty store shelf where their favorite shampoo usually is.

That's because bigger systems tend to use many embedded processors, and such processors are most likely to get confused if there are several of them that need to function together.

``In my experience, which has been considerable at this point, I have yet to see a single chip device fail because of a Y2K problem,'' said Cowles. ``What I have seen is failure of multiple chips working together.''

Embedded in reactors

Cowles said sectors like utilities are likely to be harder hit because they rely on many embedded processors exchanging information, and some of those processors simply can't be tested. Some processors are inaccessible because they are sitting inside a nuclear reactor or 600 feet underwater on an oil rig. In other cases, no one knows the equipment has date-sensitive processors except long-vanished engineers.

And most testing of embedded processors has been at the individual level, not in more sophisticated tests that check how chips work with others. ``You can't take a production system off line to actually test it,'' Cowles said. ``Our first real end-to-end test of these large systems is going to occur on 12/31.''

Consumer systems should be OK because most of the processors built into them don't keep track of time continuously. For instance, even though cars can have dozens of processors on board, they are believed to be immune to any problem because any on-board timekeeping functions are nearly always reset to zero every time the engine is turned off, according to Mark Frautschi, senior analyst with the Center for Y2K and Society, a Washington non-profit group.

GM's `nuisance failure'

``I have yet to find a single credible instance of a Y2K failure risk in an automobile,'' Frautschi said. ``GM did confirm one report of 1989 model year Caddies, which used one digit to specify the year, which gave them a 1990 problem. That will roll over to a 2000 problem. But it was a nuisance failure, nothing that would keep the car from starting or put someone in danger.''

The chances of a system with a single chip going screwy are even less, experts say.

Tom Halfhill, editor of the Embedded Processor Report newsletter in San Jose, sees virtually no problem with Y2K and embedded controllers in consumer devices, except with older VCRs. ``I expect to have a problem with my VCR, but it's 8 years old,'' he said. ``Sooner or later, with consumer electronic devices, you have to buy a new one. These things have limited shelf lives.''

In fact, ``buy a new one'' is the standard advice that appliance makers are giving owners of older appliances. For instance, Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., which makes Quasar and Panasonic products, notes that one Quasar VCR model will continue working just fine after Jan. 1 -- except that you won't be able to program it to tape shows more than one day in advance. If that's a problem for you, the company has a solution: Buy a new model, which will set you back about $150.

Bad date displays

Most consumer failures will be trivial, or at least tolerable. Devices that offer a date display, such as TVs, cameras, and stereo receivers, may need to be reset. At worst, they might permanently display the incorrect date, but they should otherwise function normally.

Security alarms, sprinkler systems and electronic thermostats often keep track of the day of the week, knowing, for example, to water the lawn only on certain days. Since they don't track the year, however, Y2K should make no difference in their operation.

Many experts advise consumers to check with the devices' manufacturers if they have any concerns. It's a prudent step, although some manufacturers, such as Radionics Inc. of Salinas, kind of wish people didn't bother.

``We're getting so many calls about this that we now have two people where all they do is answer calls about it,'' said Drew Chernoy, vice president of marketing at the maker of security and fire alarm devices.

``We were the first company to start using chips in our systems in 1974, and every one of our products from that time on is Y2K compliant,'' he added. ``This is the biggest waste of time I've ever encountered.''

Like most other companies that make electronic products, Radionics has put up a Web page that lists all of its devices and whether they're Y2K compliant. Only one -- a system that relied on a very old computer with a non-compliant BIOS chip -- is non-compliant. All the rest will be fine next year, or are conditionally compliant, meaning a user might have to manually reset a date one time.

For its commercial systems, which are more sophisticated, Radionics did have to take more concrete steps to ensure Y2K compliance, including requiring customers to describe their overall system setup. ``A lot of our small-business customers became upset with us because they aren't used to fielding these kind of requests from suppliers, and they weren't really set up to handle it.''

The 1972 trick is the easiest one for consumers to implement themselves, but Frautschi said people shouldn't wait until January to see if their electronics will work. After all, your fax machine might not accept a year of 1972. Critical devices need to be tested this month and replaced if they can't be jury-rigged.

``Everybody needs to be prepared,'' he said.

Contact David L. Wilson at dwilson@sjmercury.com or at (202) 383-6020. Contact Tom Quinlan at tquinlan@sjmercury.com or at (408) 271-3667.

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), December 05, 1999

Answers

Let me see if I understand this,Rick is saying that hundreds of millions of dollars are spent on building an oil platform in, say the gulf of Mexico.Then we put a couple of chips deep in the hole subject to moisture/like sea water,pressure,heat,etc.Now a chip malfunctions,so then the whole platform is then abandoned,right!! One question. Are you people smart people putting us on, or are you idiots who really mean it???

-- Tired of dummies (w@v.m), December 05, 1999.

One of the first things a journalist is taught is to recognize what the lead should be in a story. If the journalist forgets, one of the first things an editor is supposed to do is to point out what the real lead is.

Even to a journalist unfamiliar with the subject matter, the lead here is so obvious, the story is almost laughable.

Usually folks this clueless dont hang around newspapers too long.

Moral of the Story: Bad stories = uninformed public = potential loss of life. A buried lead can lead to real burials next year.

-- (normally@ease.notnow), December 05, 1999.

"Cowles said sectors like utilities are likely to be harder hit because they rely on many embedded processors exchanging information, and some of those processors simply can't be tested. Some processors are inaccessible because they are sitting inside a nuclear reactor or 600 feet underwater on an oil rig. In other cases, no one knows the equipment has date-sensitive processors except long-vanished engineers."

And most testing of embedded processors has been at the individual level, not in more sophisticated tests that check how chips work with others. ``You can't take a production system off line to actually test it,'' Cowles said. ``Our first real end-to-end test of these large systems is going to occur on 12/31.''

Of all those who are considered "experts" in y2k embedded systems, I have found Rick Cowles to be the most knowledgeable, and have had many discussions with him on the subject. While we don't agree on the impact of y2k in many areas, I find him to be far more knowledgable concerning nuclear power than others frequently quoted, and in discussing systems that I have been the responsible engineer for its quite easy for me to verify his credibility. Therefore I question the accuracy of some of the quotes attributed to him, especially "Some processors are inaccessible because they are sitting inside a nuclear reactor reactor or 600 feet underwater on an oil rig."

There are absolutely no iaccessible processors inside of a nuclear reactor, they wouldn't last a second in that environment. I am confident that Rick knows this and I do not believe he said this. A far more likely scenario is that he was misquoted.

Regards,

-- FactFinder (FactFinder@bzn.com), December 05, 1999.

Diane,

Thanks for the article...the admission that many of the chips can't be tested is just beginning to bubble to the surface. Parts of the infrastructure WILL fail. If only the embeddeds exhibited the Jo Anne Effect, we would have some warning.

With regards to Enterprise Systems, I am growing increasingly skeptical about the "no problems now, therefore no problems in January" line. Ripping the guts out of code and remediating it would leave additional bugs. I think we know the companies that are attempting to run remediated code now...Samsonite, Hershey, Royal Doulton, etc. I think most companies are running 1999 OK code...in fact, I'm sure of it in most cases. Look, they only "fixed" mission critical, 3%-9% depending on who you talk to. Yet their overall productivity and functionality remain in tact. Far from being good news, it is just the reverse...we will hit the wall in January when we cut over to a Production Environment.

-- K. Stevens (kstevens@ It's ALL going away in January.com), December 05, 1999.

Jan 1, 1972 -- EUREKA !!!!

right.

-- Hokie (nn@va.com), December 05, 1999.

Are you people smart people putting us on, or are you idiots who really mean it???

-- Tired of dummies (w@v.m), December 05, 1999.

Lemme see if I have this straight, are you people just simple or are you really smart people caught in the headlights of an oncoming semi frozen in time.

Listen up shithead. I DO know a lot about this problem. And there are quite a few people with much bigger brains than you and I who are taking it all VERY seriously. Included in this contingency are some friends of mine who are former spec forces. They have been clued in by their active duty friends that this IS one hell of a threat from all angles. Were I you, I get me some supplies. If you squint real hard you might be able to make out the Mack Dog on the semi rolling toward you. Then again, you could always just stand still. One less mouth to feed.

-- Gordon (g_gecko_69@hotmail.com), December 05, 1999.

All the main SJ Merc stories and sidebars:

Special Report: Y2K Survival Guide: San Jose Mercury News: Sunday, December 5, 1999

http:// www.sjmercury.com/special/mill/y2kprep/

See also... an interesting graphic, from the front page of the Business section:

http://www.sjmercury.com/special/mill/y2kprep/ 120599impact.htm

And other TBY2K forum threads posted (so far):

Y2K Home Preparation: Officials Worry That Residents Are Not Ready (San Jose Mercury News)

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id= 001vpd

Valley's New Year's Mix: Work And Play; High-Tech: Workers On Y2K Duty To Be Offered A Fun Atmosphere -- Minus Booze (San Jose Mercury News )

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id= 001vra

Y2K Financial Advisers' Bottom Line: Stay Cool (San Jose Mercury News)

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id= 001vrt

For VCRs And The Like, 1972 Is The Quick, Easy Y2K Solution [Also... Rick Cowles & Embedded Systems] (San Jose Mercury News)

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id= 001vsH

Y2K Fixes Cost Billions, With Real Test To Come (San Jose Mercury News)

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id= 001vzz

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), December 05, 1999.

"the admission that many of the chips can't be tested is just beginning to bubble to the surface."

This isn't an admission, its an old myth. And for y2k testing by general industry, chips aren't tested, systems are. Give us documented examples please, companies, manufacturers, model numbers. Facts, not fluff balls.

Regards,

-- FactFinder (FactFinder@bzn.com), December 05, 1999.

This is the winner of the week, the old embedded chips in nuclear reactors story, roflmao!!!

Reactor containment building perhaps. Accessible, yes. Om tje reactor, no way, lol. Made my day...

Please people, turn brain switch to ON.

Regards,

-- FactFinder (FactFinder@bzn.com), December 05, 1999.

Diane said they "sorta missed the boat on this one". That's an understatement.

There's only two quotes attributed to me that are even close to accurate. The first is the one about microwave ovens. The rest of the article is pretty much unrecognizeable as anything that I discussed with Mr. Wilson. The crux of our conversation was about testing, and how difficult it is to do end-to-end testing in a complex control system.

The most egregious error made by the reporters was the following:

Cowles said sectors like utilities are likely to be harder hit because they rely on many embedded processors exchanging information, and some of those processors simply can't be tested. Some processors are inaccessible because they are sitting inside a nuclear reactor or 600 feet underwater on an oil rig. In other cases, no one knows the equipment has date-sensitive processors except long-vanished engineers.

This particular paragraph rankles me. The reporter totally misrepresented what I actually said to him in a summary first sentence. The, to add insult to injury, he added the last two sentences to the above paragraph himself. This crap simply wasn't a quote from me. But the way the paragraph was written, it sure sounds like it was from me, huh? And it makes me look like an idiot to anyone who knows better (as I hope that most of you do).

This is what happens when you have a reporter without a clue about technical issues writing about techincal issues. Jeez, I can't wait until all of this is over, one

-- Rick Cowles (rick@csamerica.com), December 05, 1999.

Rick,

Doan'cha just l-u-v the newsmedia? I got quoted on the unimportant stuff (valid, but not what's key)... other than "being prepared to camp at home."

Can we share a collective *Sigh* about the San Jose Mercury News?... bastion of "newz" for the Silicon Valley.

Amazable... huh?

Diane

Y2K Home Preparation: Officials Worry That Residents Are Not Ready (San Jose Mercury News)

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id= 001vpd

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), December 05, 1999.

Are you people smart people putting us on, or are you idiots who really mean it??? -- Tired of dummies (w@v.m), December 05, 1999.

Lemme see if I have this straight, are you people just simple or are you really smart people caught in the headlights of an oncoming semi frozen in time.

Listen up shithead. I DO know a lot about this problem. And there are quite a few people with much bigger brains than you and I who are taking it all VERY seriously. Included in this contingency are some friends of mine who are former spec forces. They have been clued in by their active duty friends that this IS one hell of a threat from all angles. Were I you, I get me some supplies. If you squint real hard you might be able to make out the Mack Dog on the semi rolling toward you. Then again, you could always just stand still. One less mouth to feed.

-- Gordon (g_gecko_69@hotmail.com), December 05, 1999.

G. Geeko; The question still stands!!!! See Cowles Answer on this thread. Now a question to you. Since you know a "lot" about this,would you design a system like this?? Reread my "post", then come back with a better answer other then the standard "DOOOMER" reply.

-- bn (a@s.m), December 05, 1999.

The issue is the National Power Grid (NPG) and transformers within the NPG. Transformers use a date sensitive embedded chip. Transformers are sealed and would have to be unsealed to be tested.

: Un-be-lie-va-ble!!! Chips within a sealed transformer!!!! Pardon me too whilst I hinge my own jaw back in. Transformers are filled with mineral oil. Do any of these folks ever stop to think ***WHY*** on earth would anyone put a date-sensitive processor there in the first place? That old saw about "chips in *inaccessible* places" just will NOT die, will it?

: Incredulously,

-- HaHaHaHa (Forgecko@theexpertsplace.m), December 05, 1999.

Hahahahah...good one! But sir, you are totally, absolutely, wrong. There are no embedded chips in the mineral filled portion of transformers, nor chips anywhere in power transformers that cannot be accessed.

Good day :)

-- FactFinder (FactFinder@bzn.com), December 05, 1999.

Just so there are no misunderstandings here -

I think Diane called it right when she said they missed the boat with this story.

I was making fun of the story itself, in particular the "embedded systems in the reactor" part, and as stated in my first post here I knew that Rick would never say such nonsense. I notified him of the story and thread here, and I'm glad to see him adress this silly example of y2k reporting.

Maybe we should consider a "Clueless Y2K writer of the week" contest for the silliest articles....

Regards,

-- FactFinder (FactFinder@bzn.com), December 05, 1999.

FYI, I just have to respond to this thread. I've heard over and over how home electronic equipment will be OK, and if not it can be set to 1972. BULL!

I make my living repairing consumer electronics, from TVs, VCRs stereo's etc. I've been doing this work for about 25 years. I've set many VCRs ahead, and most that have been manufactured in the last 5 to 8 years have no problem with dates past 2000. They even recognize the leap year. But none that I have checked can go beyond the year 2011.

MOST of them can not recognize a date prior to when they were manufactured. entering the year 1972 will only result in a "?" when you try to enter an out-of-bounds date. IT WILL NOT ALLOW the entry whether it's in the past or too far in the future.

But yes, most VCRs and TV's made in the last 5 years are "compliant" for the time being. Just don't expect them to be compliant beyond the product's expected lifetime.

Dave

-- Dave (christamike@hotmail.com), December 05, 1999.

"But yes, most VCRs and TV's made in the last 5 years are "compliant" for the time being. Just don't expect them to be compliant beyond the product's expected lifetime. "

You know, I just don't get all the hoopla over if a VCR will recognize the date. How many people can get it to stop blinking 12:00 anyway?;)

-- b (b@b.b), December 05, 1999.

A quote from World Oil magazine: " An offshore platform may have 10,000 or more embedded silicon chips governing all automated and even some manual processes. Many of these systems are subsurface or underwater and physically difficult to access." http://www.worldoil.com/archive/archive_98-04/bug-shemwell.html

-- Dave F (dannco@hotmail.com), December 06, 1999.