Subj : Y2K again..? was: Note f To : Nancy Backus From : Barry Martin Date : Fri Jan 31 2020 08:23:00 Hi Nancy! BM>>>> January 4th: I'm back! Appears there some sort of problem with the BM>>>> mailruns when rolled to 2020 -- two decade delay on Y2K?! NB>>>> Richard just mentioned tonight that apparently some of the Y2K fixes NB>>>> merely tossed the problem down the road 20 years.... maybe that caught NB>>>> you...? He said that nothing that I use would be affected by that, NB>>>> though.... :) BM>>> I may have read the same article. Prior I hadn't heard anything; it BM>>> would have seemed there would have been some 'leak' there could be a BM>>> problem. NB>>> Perhaps the authors of those kick-it-down-the-road fixes aren't NB>>> around any more or forgot it would eventually loom again... it was, NB>>> after all, 20 years ago.... BM>> I would guess a combination of all options. I didn't read anything; BM>> admittedly I'm not "in the loop" but usually read in the techier stuff BM>> of potential problems. NB>> I don't think that Richard had heard anything ahead of time, either... BM> OK -- not that I'm concerned with being out of the loop, but nice to BM> know I was sort of caught unawares also. NB> An unexpected "gotcha".... Yes; LIS like being aware of potential problems/issues - I can't do much about them in the way of programming/fix but nice to know something could be happening and monitor the situation. ...Quite sure other similar issues have snuck by. BM>>>> And it's really bad when the patch has to be patched! NB>>>> That's for sure.... BM>>> Years and years and years ago I used WordPerfect. Not cheap but BM>>> worked the way I wanted it to and had the functions I wanted and BM>>> whatever Microsoft offered didn't. Recall reading WordPerfect did a BM>>> complete overhaul of their product about 2/3rds of the way into my BM>>> using them because there were so many patches and sub-sub-sub-routines, BM>>> etc., it was causing a significant slowdown. So they started from BM>>> scratch, rewrote the code, and came out with a much faster and BM>>> better-running product. NB>>> Makes sense... :) Did they offer the new product at a discount to NB>>> their faithful customers that were still using the old version...? BM>> I don't recall: that was probably more like forty years ago. NB>> Must have seemed equitable to you at the time... otherwise, I'd expect NB>> that you'd remember it more vividly... ;) Especially as you kept NB>> using it for quite a while longer... ;) BM> Right: probably more along an upgrade price as opposed to a brand new BM> version price. NB> Which would make sense.... :) When the author of the BlueWave NB> Reader came out with an entirely new version, he offered to NB> register the new one for free for a limited time to those who had NB> registered the original version... I did take advantage of NB> that... :) Good and good. The free probably cost him a little bit (not getting paid for his work) but may have also saved him work supporting old versions which were now replaced by his new one. And could have created money with the customers using upgrads to the new version telling users of other products how good the new and improved BlueWave is. (That made a lot more sense in my mind when I only had to use thoughts and not words!) BM>> ...Had to do a rescan of the TVs because of the "Repack" ==> BM>> television stations moving their transmitting frequencies. Locally BM>> "Channel 6" had done it (finally) a month or so ago, with lots of BM>> notifications on-air and their website, including delays because of BM>> weather. BM>> That left Chs. 8, 18, and 26. (Other stations not moving.) Ch 8 had BM>> a handful of announcements it would be updating today (January 17th) BM>> but seemed like their total announcments would have added up to what BM>> Ch. 6 notified in one day. Never did see announcments for the other BM>> two stations. BM>> So Ch. 8 was "off the air" this morning, did my rescanning which BM>> brought them back. Also found out later Chs. 18 and 26 had changed so BM>> locally the TV stations should be up-to-date. NB>> Ours happened a couple of months ago, I think.... I remember Richard NB>> needing to rescan at one point, and lots of announcements ahead of NB>> time on my radio station for the (PBS) TV's changing transmitting NB>> frequency. And I think it affected all the stations in our area.... BM> For whatever reason about half the local stations moved. I'm not sure BM> why the move other than to use the band more effectively. Did notice BM> one thing different: my MythTV scan only went to Channel 52; UHF band BM> used to go to 68 or 69. Maybe the "repack" name is to overall condense BM> the band; I half-remember the FCC wanting to use some new channels for BM> things like cell phones, maybe WiFi and conumer devices. LIS, half- BM> remembering bits and pieces. NB> That sounds like what I heard... ;) Ah! You are just an inkling of a techie! BM> Back to the local repacking, Ch. 6 was the first one, but delayed BM> because of weather, and some of the weather delay was at whatever BM> station the tower crews were working on before coming here, some BM> weather delays due to the bad weather locally. As for the other BM> stations, just didn't say much. NB> As I'm not watching the TV at all, I wasn't really paying NB> attention until Richard started talking about it.... :) Right: TV? Oh, yeah, that monitor-like thing in the corner. ¯ ® ¯ Barry_Martin_3@ ® ¯ @Q.COM ® ¯ ® .... From the Mudiocre Wine List: White Trashfindel --- MultiMail/Win32 v0.47 þ wcECHO 4.2 ÷ ILink: The Safe BBS þ Bettendorf, IA --- QScan/PCB v1.20a / 01-0462 * Origin: ILink: CFBBS | cfbbs.no-ip.com | 856-933-7096 (454:1/1) .