It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Y2K D�J� VU � 10TH JANUARY 2004

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 24 2003 @ 09:24 AM
link   
Software running on thousands of computers worldwide will become inoperable in a few weeks because of an obscure date-related glitch, and developers are rushing to create and apply patches.

Sound familiar?

Software maker PTC, a specialist in product lifecycle management applications for engineers and product designers, has rekindled memories of the Year 2000 bug, or Y2K, as it scrambles to patch a glitch that will render most of its products inoperable after Jan. 10.

I for one didn't believe this to be true the first time this theory came round. However, there is always a little voice in the back of my mind ( i am not crazy) thinking it could be true. I can't see how because the makers of these software products should have took this bug into consideration. If this is true there will be alot of unhappy customers.



posted on Dec, 24 2003 @ 09:29 AM
link   
Do you have a link? This is the first I've heard of this.



posted on Dec, 24 2003 @ 09:36 AM
link   
yeah sure i got it off a friends website
www.scportal.tk...
go onto homepage then onto news then view more thats the link



posted on Dec, 24 2003 @ 09:39 AM
link   
Sounds like it was a bug they failed to catch, or didn't think of. They just made the infinite date a far far far too small of a number. Patching it shouldn't be hard, just time consuming.



posted on Dec, 24 2003 @ 09:44 AM
link   
The real story: news.com.com... " Software maker PTC, a specialist in product lifecycle management applications for engineers and product designers, has rekindled memories of the Year 2000 bug, or Y2K, as it scrambles to patch a glitch that will render most of its products inoperable after Jan. 10. " Not a big deal, only a few software products from ONE company.



posted on Dec, 24 2003 @ 09:44 AM
link   
strange bug, i understood the y2k one
but why would the date 10-01-04 crash programs :S



posted on Dec, 24 2003 @ 09:47 AM
link   
In UNIX, you need an infinite date. I'm not sure why, I usually code for windows products, but it is needed. Most programs use 2^32, or a full 32 bit number, which will cause them to perminantly timeout in 2038. That number, by the way, is the number of seconds since 0 (Don't remember the date, or why that date, but CPUs calculate the date and time by the number of seconds since that date). This company used 2^30 seconds for the infinite date, instead. That's why it's going to perminantly timeout on the 10th, it'll be about a billion seconds after the zeroth second.



posted on Dec, 24 2003 @ 09:48 AM
link   
Solution: Everyone could just turn the clocks on their computers back 10 years. Problem solved!



posted on Dec, 24 2003 @ 10:21 AM
link   
14 years, Jonna (yes, really.)

And you can run software on PCs from the 1990's that aren't patched for the Y2K bug. They still run (I own one) and the programs run fine. But any time you try to pick up the system date, it says something weird. Other than that, you can play Civilization and do everything else just as you've always done.

(for the record, William and I are both in the IT biz and are genuine computer geeks.)

So it's just one program from one company who had a programmer on the project who didn't do a good job of debugging. This happens all the time... trust me on this one.



posted on Dec, 24 2003 @ 10:23 AM
link   
typical it would be windows *cough* microcrap *cough* that has this bug, ah well seeing as i cant get broadband yet and i have to pay for my winmodem drivers for linux im kinda stuck with XP



posted on Dec, 24 2003 @ 10:28 AM
link   
Y2K was a bug in COBAL, not windows. It was a mainframe thing, which is why big institutions were worried about it, but individuals didn't have to worry about anything, unless for some reason they were using COBAL on their PC.



posted on Dec, 24 2003 @ 10:55 AM
link   

unless for some reason they were using COBAL on their PC.


Now THAT would be a computer geek, hehe.....


Next one is going to be 2050. There's a lot of software that can't handle dates past 2049...(that will read it as 1950). However, with 46 years to debug it, I'm not too worried, hehe....



posted on Dec, 25 2003 @ 05:36 PM
link   
More stupid programers...I mean they should have cought it before hand...

I have a question though...how can you tell if you have anything by PTC on your computer? or if you never downloaded a program, then your fine? Because I really don't know since my computer is on loan from my school...



posted on Dec, 25 2003 @ 10:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Curiosity
More stupid programers...I mean they should have cought it before hand...

Have you ever programmed before (something complex that takes 2 years to finish?) You might have a bit more of an understanding how hard it is to crank out 10,000 lines of code and make NOT mistakes.


I have a question though...how can you tell if you have anything by PTC on your computer? or if you never downloaded a program, then your fine? Because I really don't know since my computer is on loan from my school...

Not to be tacky, but read the article again. It talks about "product lifecycle management applications." If you don't know what that means, your computer doesn't have the software. Even if it was on there, unless you happened to be doing analysis of equipment (such as trucks and appliances) and their failure rates and replacement rates, it wouldn't affect your computer. If you made your living tracking inventory and parts and labor in machine shops or huge corporate motor pools, you might have something to be concerned about.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join