Seems to be slow news day, so may be some one can explain this ... : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

This must be a slow news day (compared to the posts coming in the last few days), so let me throw this question out there and somebody with some knowledge about embedded systems can help me with this nagging problem.

Having been a software engineer/IS Manager/CIO etc. for 20 years I can understand the Y2k issue completely from the type of stuff I touch. But to me it would seem that the Y2K issue for embedded systems is only relevant for a limited period of time. I am willing to guess that most of these systems are tracking time for date calcuations for relatively short periods - i.e. few seconds to one month - and therefore date calculations will sort themselves out once all CMOS stored dates used in the embedded chip calculations have all moved to the 00 time frame, which I guess will be in about a month.

In that case would we not have problems until then, perhaps increasing as some ripple effects take effect, and then have them start to die down as we roll into February, and by mid February be over the worst of it? How bad the worst would be is another issue, but I'm trying to see what the time frame for disruptions would be regardless of the severity.

-- Interested Spectator (is@the_ring.side), December 16, 1999


An elapsed time calculation where both dates are in the year 2000 should not often cause serious problems even if the computer thinks both dates are in 1900.

To prevent confusion caused by an elapsed time calculation where one date is in 1999 and the other is in 2000, some organizations will shut down automated controls with embedded systems just before the rollover. Many facilities will be closed for the holiday weekend anyway with no production during the rollover. Facilities with continuous production could cause more problems with a temporary shutdownand start up (if feasible). Those facilities should have repaired tested and repaired embedded systems in 1999 -- "fix on failure" is not likely to be the best solution for Y2K problems. Of course we know all the fix-on-failure problems will be fixed in three days.

-- Richard Greene (, December 16, 1999.

Slow news day? Are you kidding? According to the Local Happy News Team here, Lucy, the baby elephant at the local zoo, spent her first day outside today. Complete with oohs, ahhs and five minutes of happy patter. I thought I would tune in to see if any of the stuff I saw on Drudge or Gary North's site would be reported. Thank God for this site and the Internet.

-- Bubba Smith (duck&, December 16, 1999.

I'm still pretty confused here? and way out of my area of experience, but I was told that the likely embedded problems would occur mainly on the chips created over generic original programs, that incidently had timed/year/date functions, not nessesarily because date/functions were needed but because it was more cost efficient to modify an existing program to fit the application. If I'm not completely in the ozone here, Would the year/date function need a power source to progress? Would that depend on the date it was installed and fired up and create a variety of potential failure dates not based on real time?

-- clueless and puzzled (, December 16, 1999.

Only 360 hours to go and this is the kind of hard hitting reporting we get. I hope my Local Happy News Team ends up killing each other for the last candy bar in the vending machine there at the Happy News Station. I think I would tune in to see that!

-- John Malone (, December 16, 1999.

John Malone, I am with you. I would trade one 5 gallon container of gasoline and 6 tinned hams to see Peter Jennings, Dan Rather and Tom Brokaw crawling down a darkened hallway, headed for the last Snickers bar. And the rest of their giggling, chirping cohorts that manage to smile at the end of every disaster story. You know, smiling, "...50,000 dead in Nirobi, details at 11:00 p.m. Now to twinkle toes for the weather."

Sorry to ramble on, but these jokers slay me.

-- Richard (, December 16, 1999.

ROFLOL..... Now to twinkle toes for the weather

-- John Malone (, December 16, 1999.

December 16, 1999

Westergaard Year 2000: Westergaard Year 2000 Creates Miniature "War of the Worlds" Panic

Albuquerque Journal: PNM's Y2K Fixers Take a Stress Test

Santa Fe New Mexican: In the Schools: Santa Fe schools to take a Y2K snooze

Computer Weekly: Top tips to help prevent writs (requires free registration)

Computer Weekly: Get ready to mobilise your forces again after Y2K (requires free registration)

Computer Weekly: UK government declares itself Y2K compliant (requires free registration)

Computer Weekly: No spin on Y2K failures (requires free registration)

Computer Weekly: No Y2K break for systems (requires free registration)

Computer Weekly: Make a Y2K check-list (requires free registration)

Computer Weekly: Making it a happy New Year (requires free registration)

Computer Weekly: Y2K to be smokescreen for criminals (requires free registration)

Computer Weekly: Early birds will catch consultants (requires free registration)

Computer Weekly: VW in trouble over SAP roll-out (requires free registration)

Computer Weekly: A poet's late in the century lament (requires free registration)

Computer Currents: Alabama Last in Y2K Readiness

Computer Currents: Kids Not Afraid Of Y2K

Newsbytes: Australian Skies Safe For Y2K - Aviation Authority

Newsbytes: New Zealand Y2K Commission Issues Virus, Hacker Alert

Newsbytes: Bug could be a self-fulfilling prophecy: Y2K chief

Newsbytes: Strategia to redefine identity Lack of demand for Y2K services dealt huge blow

Newsbytes: Nations and Their Readiness for Y2K

Newsbytes: State Utilities Prepared As Clock Ticks To 2000

Newsbytes: 'Secret army' to beat the bug with web link

Newsbytes: Colorado declared ready for year 2000/ State's computers braced for change

Newsbytes: Risk of Y2K fallout an unknown in much of world / Many nations lack resources to comply

MSNBC: Y2K and computer viruses could be an explosive mix

Newsday: 1999: The Year in Humor

The Intelligencer: Step right up: Time running out on Y2K ripoffs

New York Times: Dug In With a D.J., Waiting for Y2K (requires free registration)

Daily Southtown: State attempts to revive emergency group

New Jersey Online: No drinking for some off-duty cops

Foster's Online: Eating your way through Y2K

Foster's Online: Task force says N.H. government is ready for Y2K

Oklahoman: Oklahoma hospitals Y2-OK

Denver Post: Firms' Y2K claims bug insurers

Boston Globe: Jan. 3 could prove to be first true test of Y2K readiness

Detroit News: Europeans scoff at Y2K predictions

Tokeka Capital Journal: Y2K won't be end of world, but keep a flashlight handy

-- Uncle Bob (UNCLB0B@AOL.COM), December 16, 1999.

Also check out Matt Drudge...









-- Uncle Bob (UNCLB0B@AOL.COM), December 16, 1999.

Yada, yada, yada. Same old stuff.

Not don't be shy, there is a very real serious question at the start of this thread and seems to me like no body's game to handle it. Hmm I wonder why? May be the y2k effect is overblown? Hm, Hm, what dya say? (Now that should rankle a few of you).

-- Interested Spectator (is@the_ring.side), December 16, 1999.

Interested Spectator

Please see the following thread. I believe the information you seek may be found about 3/4 of the way down where Flint explains. Look under Background- then the fourth paragraph.

-- ghost (fading into, December 16, 1999.

I don't know nothin 'bout them chips but the guy down the street does. He says they goin break down and that ain't too good.

-- Bubba Smith (duck&, December 16, 1999.

Some of the problems that we may encounter with embedded systems (and a few other systems as well) include the fact that the clock may not be exact...but may have lost a little time for each of the past 10 years...and will "rollover" sometime in February/March! Or that maintenance is to be done weekly, monthly, and quarterly...or even every 6 months. Also, some failures may occur when (read: rare) unusual activities occur.

-- Mad Monk (, December 16, 1999.

Interested spectator For a while there, I felt like...... I asked a stupid question, got a stupid answer. The embedded mystery is the hardest part of the equation and is the most difficult thing to prepare for, and maybe the most important question with Y2K. I've gone 360 degress around the question and I guess its not gonna give me or anyone else an exact answer. Its like trying to grab a handful of water, it keeps slippin' thru your fingers. Ghost,Madmonk, thanks for your input. Now I'm getting possessed and obsessed. I think I could keep someone busy all day with questions about embeds. Do any of you know if embeds are repaired by a general embedded tradesman, like say a TV repairman that works on all brands and every application or if the people that fix them are limited to just one company's product? The next question would be, "how many of these guys are out there?" I mean, someone said "Trust me, the guys who are working on this stuff are not worried about it". So, does that mean their not worried about their product or the whole world wide problem? Anyone got time to get me that far, who might know for sure?

-- Clueless & Puzzled (, December 17, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ