Re: OFF TOPIC: Y2K problems with news reader (was Re: Armaggedon)

[/dev/null@.com (Justa Lurker)]

It was Mon, 03 Jan 2000 11:15:27 -0500, and Bob Scheurle
<scheurle@z-eclipse-z.net> wrote in misc.transport.urban-transit:
| On Mon, 03 Jan 2000 14:46:34 GMT, /dev/null@.com (Justa Lurker) wrote:
| >One of the bug fixes for y2k is to set an arbitrary year that all two
| >digit years AFTER that date are 1900 and all two digit years BEFORE
| >that date are 2000.  Which means another upgrade before the arbitrary
| >year chosen is reached.  Silly.  But then most have chosen 2036 or
| >beyond as their arbitrary year, and we will all need new operating
| >systems by then anyhow.
| 
| Is this the 2036 UNIX problem I've heard about?
| 
| I believe MS-DOS will work up to 2108.

Check out Microsoft's information.  They based their dates on UNIX and
when the clock rolls over in bits, it is over ... until the fix.

| It's interesting that all the Y2k bugs on the 'Net seem to be UNIX
| systems that insist the year is 19100.  I've lost count of how many times
| I've seen 19100 (or something like 1/1/100).  I hope the UNIX bigots have
| noticed that Windows problems are few and far between.

You really haven't looked at Microsoft's Y2K Information.  Windows
DIES in 2026.  It is part of the Microsoft Y2K Disclosure!

Hope it doesn't affect the trains.

JL