It’s coming | WebProNews

Text:

| Print

| Share:

51 commentsWednesday, January 14, 2009

The Y2K+38 Crisis

It’s coming

51 Comments

By Franchise Opportunities (WPN reader) - Sat, 04/04/2009 - 03:32

And I thought the 32-bit

And I thought the 32-bit ipv4 issue was big.

By Guest (WPN reader) - Tue, 01/13/2009 - 11:24

This is fine for me...since I suspect by 2038 the machines will have taken over and will be in the middle of their plot to kill us all. So once the 32bit date bug hits it will be our chance to strike and take them down!

By Network Geek (WPN reader) - Mon, 01/12/2009 - 10:18

Office Space

Well, in 28 or 29 years, Office Space can be updated for a new generation of frustrated cubicle farm gophers.

We do tend to repeat history, don't we?

By Guest (WPN reader) - Sun, 01/11/2009 - 22:08

Y2k + 38

Is this why so much span comes through with a 2038 date on it???

By Guest (WPN reader) - Sun, 01/11/2009 - 21:39

i was working with a cross

i was working with a cross platform app worth 10k+ when a customer started complaining about crashes on startup. after trying to figure out the cause for a few days, the customer figured out it was because he'd set the clock forward 100 years by accident - sure enough i tried the same and BOOM on startup. I'm going back about 8 years here, but the point is that even tho you think it shouldn't make a difference, it can.

By Sarah Conner (WPN reader) - Sun, 01/11/2009 - 17:44

RE: 2038

I say...

Judgement Day is coming... prepare yourselves people!

By Diamonds (WPN reader) - Mon, 01/12/2009 - 15:32

Not if we get hit by a

Not if we get hit by a comment on 2036 as predicted by scientists then we are fine, Oh wait, we're screwed...

By Andreas Marschke (WPN reader) - Sun, 01/11/2009 - 16:47

WHat if ?

What if i change the date settings on my Linux boxes to that partibular daate will they crash too and if they do how could i reset them?

By ron (WPN reader) - Sun, 01/11/2009 - 14:41

Y2K+38 Crisis

This whole thing does not worry me in the least, why?
I will probably be DEAD by then....unless it affects the computer inside me keeping me alive AND sexually active or no point (grin)

By Professional-Mover London (WPN reader) - Sun, 01/11/2009 - 13:00

Seo not work why

Can you see my page and what you think its ok with Seo google.

http://www.professional-mover.co.uk

By JimL (WPN reader) - Sun, 01/11/2009 - 12:45

on The Y2K+38 Crisis

Now, the _timet is 64 bit. If we recompile the application using a newer version of the compiler, this will offset that end date quite a bit.

By Guest (WPN reader) - Sun, 01/11/2009 - 12:33

But REM legacy code

To the pooh-pooers, saying that by 2038 we will have advanced beyond the 32-bit Unix system, note this from the author:

The problem with this kind of optimism is the same root problem behind most of the Year 2000 concerns that plagued the software industry in previous years: Legacy Code. Developing a new piece of software is an expensive and time-consuming process. It's much easier to take an existing program that we know works, and code one or two new features into it, than it is to throw the earlier program out and write a new one from scratch.

By Borg drone 3 of 10 (WPN reader) - Sun, 01/11/2009 - 11:27

Resistance is futile...

...you will be assimilated

By Guest (WPN reader) - Sat, 01/10/2009 - 19:49

Doubtful that quantum

Doubtful that quantum computers will suffer from this issue. More likely the "kill all humans" scenario.

By Guest (WPN reader) - Wed, 01/28/2009 - 00:57

Quantum computers don't

Quantum computers don't solve this type of problem at all. You still have bit-widths for quantum computers, hence data types and data sizes are still just as relevant.

They just do the math quicker.

By Guest (WPN reader) - Fri, 01/09/2009 - 17:19

all this mongering is

all this mongering is useless... are you all suggesting that (by the time it's 2038) that code written 60 years ago would still be in use?.. that's like saying a VCR will still be the home-owner's choice to watch movies on...

By FaTe (WPN reader) - Sun, 01/11/2009 - 16:37

well said, If we are indeed

well said, If we are indeed still reliant on technology from this period or beyond in 2038 then I think everyone should turn right and slap the person next to them.

By Guest (WPN reader) - Fri, 01/09/2009 - 18:12

I have to assume that your

I have to assume that your (inaccurate) analogy is facetious. We are currently using plenty of code from the 1970s. Even if we upgrade the hardware, the software won't "automatically" start using larger numbers, anyways.

By Guest (WPN reader) - Sat, 01/10/2009 - 08:27

Yes it wills...

By 2030, retrodecorecompilers will be in use to transform any windows program and data from any bit size to any other bit size. I say windows because there will be no other OS by 2025.

I remember in the late 1980's that programmers were going to be obsolete due to the introduction of drag and drop style modular program thingies (like Access et al) that anyone could use (including well trained parrots) and we all know how that turned out!

But true, disaster awaits those who don't plan ahead and insist on using old software for sentimental reasons (or laziness and cheapness). I know one company relying on 1998 software by one guy who didn't get to see 2004 and currently supported by ONE person world wide.

Some people don't get it. If your business relies on some software, keep up to date or migrate if support and updates stop. Crunchy time cometh!

By Guest (WPN reader) - Fri, 01/09/2009 - 15:08

just Keeps Going and Going and Going

I should be so smart to be able to write code that works for 70 Years!

By Guest (WPN reader) - Fri, 01/09/2009 - 12:26

Someone needs to get on th eball here...

Comments, comments, comments...

yet nobody has said:
"My project(s) are good."

"I will check my code, it will pass y2k+38
by the end of the month".

"I vow to check this on any new code I make."

I say this only because last night I was coding in XNA (C#.Net) and discovered that when they put out the first 3 releases, they still haven't corrected a basic matrix method....

http://forums.xna.com/forums/p/6674/35269.aspx

So yeah maybe we should be talking about perfecting our own code....

By Guest (WPN reader) - Fri, 01/09/2009 - 15:16

No Way!

No - People should keep goiong on like they are now, then I can come out of retirement and charge big bucks to fix legacy applications, like the COBOL people for Y2K.

After that little hickup in the stockmarket, this is my new retirement plan.

By Guest (WPN reader) - Fri, 01/09/2009 - 11:19

On Windows based systems the

On Windows based systems the period of 100 years that should be used can be set. Default is 1980 - 2079.

By Guest (WPN reader) - Wed, 01/28/2009 - 01:02

Default for which windows?

Default for which windows? XP defaults to 1930-2029 I believe.

By Guest (WPN reader) - Fri, 01/09/2009 - 10:30

There is COleDateTime for

There is COleDateTime for Microsoft users which uses a 64 bit time variable. I would assume that by 2038 we will be on to bigger and better things and may be into 128 or 256 bit computing. Using Moore's law, Kryder's Law and as a rough guide computing power should be at least 10X what it is today and hard drives (or storage of some form) should be approaching the petabyte and displays should be displaying in the neighborhood of 10 or 12 million pixels with 36-bit color.

This problem will not affect home PCs. What it might affect is embedded systems using C/C++ that could possibly still be around in 30 years.

By Dusani (WPN reader) - Fri, 01/09/2009 - 09:41

Prediction

Here is my prediction - you can quote me on this in 30 or so years.

The problem won't get fixed, because it doesn't need to be - we've got other problems ahead of us. But, in about 30 years, business will start to spring up with offering of some kind of middle-tier solutions which would map legacy 32-bit code to the latest n-bit platforms (64-bit? 128? more?). This solution will prove cheaper than reinventing the software again from scratch on the newest platforms, and this will be the solution most financial institutions will take - and whoever is making these middle-tier solutions will get LOOOAAAADDDEDDD.

The this way to go might sound too weird right now, but i'm sure my iPod Touch would have sounded weird to someone 30 years ago :)

By Guest (WPN reader) - Fri, 01/09/2009 - 09:15

Just patch the kernel

Either Windows or C, either way, just patch the kernel so that time_t starts instead of 1970, to 2010, or even 2030. I have to think that starting at 1970 is just a kernel issue. We are all used to patches by now. Just patch the kernel of your OS, or your programming language.

By Guest (WPN reader) - Fri, 01/09/2009 - 08:58

Old Code Never Dies

I work for a major company in one of the financial industries and the truth is there is still a lot of COBOL code still in use that was written in the 70's. I can honesty see where some of the code one of my teams writes today could be in use in 30 years. Guess I know what to tell my grandchildren to study!

By jason (WPN reader) - Fri, 01/09/2009 - 08:57

test anyone?

Can't this be tested for now? Couldn't we just set the system date to 2038 or whatever and watch the sparks fly?

Just asking. I'm a programmer, but I didn't actually read Wilcox's article.

By Ando (WPN reader) - Fri, 01/09/2009 - 07:58

I'm not panicking

I'm a new coder, just 2 years out of college. It's a pretty safe bet I'll still be coding in 2038. But I'm not panicking. Nor am I ignoring the problem. Why?

Because people tend to make a huge deal out of things like that. Have we really become so dependent on computers for our lives that we think the end of the world is coming just because our coding ancestors were short-sighted and made their date datatype in such a way as to cause problems years down the road?

I mean, I code now on web pages with the full belief that in 5 years nothing I code will still be in use. Why wouldn't they have believed the same thing? When languages like C and C++ were being created, do you think the creators really believed that by the year 2038 they'd still be used?

Seriously, the world is not going to end. As for programs crashing - yeah, that might happen, but a couple of things make me not fear it as much as some. Firstly, that's almost 30 full years away, and with all this time, I would imagine we'd find a fix for it as an industry, and even the most old-fashioned legacy sticklers will either have to suck it up and use it, or be ousted by angry stock-holders who rightly accuse them of apathy in the face of disaster.

Secondly, let's say a large percentage of systems do go down. We'll have problems. The IT job market will become a gold mine as people sramble to re-build, and when the dust settles, a lot of people will be employed, smarter, and our systems will hopefully then be date-bulletproof, and the old legacy systems will be where they belong - in the *PAST*!

We cling far too tightly to the past, just because it's 'easier that way', rather than being willing to take a risk now and then and stay current. Maybe a little shakeup of the old ways is the best thing that could happen to some companies who are a little too set in their ways.

I guess we'll find out in 30 years, eh?