I think we can defederate that company’s name from our personal vocabulary instances.

  • @Poiar@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    161 year ago

    I’m pretty sure that it wasn’t Windows that was the main offender, but instead legacy systems of all kinds made since 1970, where people were not expecting for their programs to run for more than 30 years.

    Surprise! Businesses don’t care whether the code is old, as long as it works - so that data type you store the year in only held two characters, and hard-coded the 19 onto it.

    1999 would be written as 99. 19 + 99 = 1999 = computers were happy.

    2000 would be written as 00. 19 + 00 = 1900 = computers went to shit

    • macniel
      link
      fedilink
      11 year ago

      Yeah good explanation. I was too young to had any further knowledge about this issue way back and only saw it manifesting when I had to adjust my windows 95 clock :)

      • @NABDad@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        Next doom and gloom scenario is 2038, when poorly maintained *nix systems will think it’s Jan 1st, 1970.

        I’ll be pushing 68. Hopefully retired or dead by then.

        … I’ll probably still be working, though…

        • @visor841@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          31 year ago

          Eh, it only being an issue for 32-bit systems will hopefully help. But of course somebody will still be running that in 15 years.

          • @Bruncvik@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 year ago

            Lots of financial institutions are still using software programmed with Cobol. My father graduated with a software engineering degree for Cobol in the mid-1970s. My company provides external API for customers who still use green screen terminals. Of course there will be people running 32-bit systems. And I’m sure there will be well-paid jobs for fixing any date overflow on those systems.