2010

[Mintjulep]

What are most of you going to call this year?
Two thousand ten or twenty ten????

I saw this being debated on tv this morning and started thinking about it.
After much thought, I decided on twenty ten. It's easier to say.
Also in the last century when someone would say, for instance, nineteen hundred and ninety nine instead of nineteen ninety nine, it reminded me of how my grandparents said it...

We couldn't say twenty nine last year or people would think we were saying 29.
But twenty ten works, obviously has 4 numbers.

[Julie]

Without much thought, chalk me up with the twenty ten crowd. It's so much snappier than two thousand ten. What the heck I may even decide to live dangerously once in awhile and go with plain ol' ten from time to time. :laugh:

[Pturner]

Without much thought, chalk me up with the twenty ten crowd. It's so much snappier than two thousand ten. What the heck I may even decide to live dangerously once in awhile and go with plain ol' ten from time to time. :laugh:

I'm with you Julie! I filled in a form today and dated it 1/1/10 (not 1/1/2010). As for saying it, twenty ten is more economical and roles off the toungue. :)

[Barefoot]

Without much thought, chalk me up with the twenty ten crowd. It's so much snappier than two thousand ten. What the heck I may even decide to live dangerously once in awhile and go with plain ol' ten from time to time. :laugh:

:thumbup: Plain ole Ten .. I like it.

[Lobwedge60]

Put me down for 2K10.

[Pturner]

:thumbup: Plain ole Ten .. I like it.

It's plain ole Ten then. And here's hoping that's what this year is for all of us: A Perfect Ten. :beer3:

[tpop1]

I'll go with 20-10 for 2 reasons.........

1) I was saying 19-90 not 1000-900-90!
2) In 90 years I do not want to be saying 2000-100- !!

..... and that's all I'm going to say about that!!!:thumbup:

[Bosoxfan]

I'll go with 20-10 for 2 reasons.........

1) I was saying 19-90 not 1000-900-90!
2) In 90 years I do not want to be saying 2000-100- !!

..... and that's all I'm going to say about that!!!:thumbup:

90 years:a20: what an optimist!! 2k10 sounds good!:beer3:
!

[wmchale]

Just got to remember to 2010 on the checks

Hard enough

[otherbruddaDarrell]

t-2 and counting?

[debzaranti]

I agree w/the majority "twenty ten"! Much easier than the last decade having to say "twenty O-nine".

[Jazzper]

2K10...less syllables and in memory of all the time I wasted doing Y2K IS/IT stuff!!

[zcaveman]

2K10...less syllables and in memory of all the time I wasted doing Y2K IS/IT stuff!!

Never considered the time spent on Y2K stuff wasted. Thanks to the extreme efforts by IT and programming areas everywhere, Y2K went off without a hitch. We were the reason that they labeled it a big do nothing scare or the Y2K hoax. If we had not done our jobs there would have been a LOT of problems.

I know because I tested before and after applications and worked with numerous vendors to get their products fixed.

Anyway so as to not hijack the thread, Twenty-Ten seems to work.

[swrinfla]

For sure,

20 10

SWR
:beer3:

[Michael D]

two thousand ten

[Michael D]

t-2 and counting?

I still live in Indiana cold here

[Pturner]

Never considered the time spent on Y2K stuff wasted. Thanks to the extreme efforts by IT and programming areas everywhere, Y2K went off without a hitch. We were the reason that they labeled it a big do nothing scare or the Y2K hoax. If we had not done our jobs there would have been a LOT of problems.

I know because I tested before and after applications and worked with numerous vendors to get their products fixed.

Anyway so as to not hijack the thread, Twenty-Ten seems to work.

Hi neighbor,
As you said, this is a hijack, but, as you are an expert, I can't help asking your more about Y2K. I thought it was a hoaks too, for a few reasons:


In my unknowledgeable "logic," I thought code was just a bunch of "1"s and "0"s to a computer. I didn't think computers knew or cared wether one number (1999) was higher or lower than another number (2000).
I couldn't understand why a computer would be be confused about 2000 following 1999, but not 20 following 19.
As I recall, April x, 2000 (I forget the exact date) something also was supposed to happen because the digits for that date meant something else somewhere else in the computer code. But I couldn't understand how one line of code governed by one set of coded paramerters would confuse another line of code governed by a different set of coded perameters.
Convinced there was nothing to it, I did nothing to my home computer, nothing to my digital clocks and nothing to my appliances that had digital clocks. I didn't even change the date display on my home PC to show the 4 digit vs. 2 digit year. Come Jan. 1, 2000 all my home stuff worked the same as it had on Dec. 31, 1999 and before. Excel '97 (I think?) worked flawlessly, although I did not upgrade or run any program to correct it. Quicken '98 worked flawlessly, although I bravely and defiantly didn't upgrade or run any program to correct it. (Ok, not that brave and defiant-- I always backed it up.) Outlook, Word, and all my other non-y2k compliant programs worked flawlessly
Whatever that date was in April-- I think there was one in February too?-- that something was supposed to happen to my non-y2k compliant hardware, again, nothing did.
So, zcaveman, any explanation you can provide demonstrating it wasn't a hoax, I would like. I realize I don't know what I don't know, and I enjoy trying to expand what I do know. Thanks.

[chacam]

Just got to remember to 2010 on the checks

Hard enough

What are checks ? ?

[TomW]

Twenty -Ten. I just feel like it is going to be a good year. No reason, just a gut feeling.

[Jazzper]

Never considered the time spent on Y2K stuff wasted.

Probably should have been a bit more specific. While we did find some legacy apps using just the last 2 digits of the year, I was specifically referring to that last night of the year when many of us were either on call or hunkered down in the basement data center waiting around in case we missed something.

Happy 2K-10!!!

[zcaveman]

Hi neighbor,
As you said, this is a hijack, but, as you are an expert, I can't help asking your more about Y2K. I thought it was a hoaks too, for a few reasons:


In my unknowledgeable "logic," I thought code was just a bunch of "1"s and "0"s to a computer. I didn't think computers knew or cared wether one number (1999) was higher or lower than another number (2000).
I couldn't understand why a computer would be be confused about 2000 following 1999, but not 20 following 19.
You are correct about the "1"s and "0"s. But that is internal to the process. Back in the "old days", cards were used to input data. Because a card was limited to 80 characters, only the last two years of the date were used to indicate the date. So if you were born in 1950, the date entered was 50. As long as no one was born in 2000 and above, this was no problem. The dates always sorted upward or downward. Date calculations were fine. Once we reached 2000, people born in 2000 and above would be at the wrong end of the sort list and really mess up a calculation formula. As an aside - because I started programming in 1965, I actually had problems will people born in the 1800's but they were special programs (sales leads for those that understand this) so I could program around it. Using the 00 as 2000 for birth, many computer programs would do a calculation and come up with either a negative number or a number out of range with any rate tables, etc. Without changing the programs or increasing the date field to 4 digits - which is what most applications did, everything would have been screwed up. This is probably not the best explanation but I can do better on a PM. Also I don't want to be arrested by the hijack police.

As I recall, April x, 2000 (I forget the exact date) something also was supposed to happen because the digits for that date meant something else somewhere else in the computer code. But I couldn't understand how one line of code governed by one set of coded paramerters would confuse another line of code governed by a different set of coded perameters.
Don't remember that date as any problem but then that was 10 years ago and I have a hard time remembering last week.
Convinced there was nothing to it, I did nothing to my home computer, nothing to my digital clocks and nothing to my appliances that had digital clocks. I didn't even change the date display on my home PC to show the 4 digit vs. 2 digit year. Come Jan. 1, 2000 all my home stuff worked the same as it had on Dec. 31, 1999 and before. Excel '97 (I think?) worked flawlessly, although I did not upgrade or run any program to correct it. Quicken '98 worked flawlessly, although I bravely and defiantly didn't upgrade or run any program to correct it. (Ok, not that brave and defiant-- I always backed it up.) Outlook, Word, and all my other non-y2k compliant programs worked flawlessly
Unless you worked internally with folders and files using Windows Explorer, you probably would have not noticed any problem. Based on what I know and see, any application written for the PC uses the full date (2000 instead of 00). In EXCEL, even when the display is 09, the hidden data is 2009.
Whatever that date was in April-- I think there was one in February too?-- that something was supposed to happen to my non-y2k compliant hardware, again, nothing did.
Again - not aware of a February date.
So, zcaveman, any explanation you can provide demonstrating it wasn't a hoax, I would like. I realize I don't know what I don't know, and I enjoy trying to expand what I do know. Thanks.

See my reply in blue. Hopes this helps.

Z

[zcaveman]

Probably should have been a bit more specific. While we did find some legacy apps using just the last 2 digits of the year, I was specifically referring to that last night of the year when many of us were either on call or hunkered down in the basement data center waiting around in case we missed something.

Happy 2K-10!!!

Legacy apps!! You gave yourself away! Many of us techs were either in the office in 12/31/1999 in case the systems died on 1/1/2000 or were at home on call - not allowed any adult alcoholic beverages in case we were called in to avert the crisis! Fortunately, the year's worth of testing averted that situation. There was some fallout but it was minimal.

I got a nice wooden pen with January 1, 2000 for all my efforts.

And a nice check for the OT on 12/31/1999.

Z

[Jazzper]

Legacy apps!! You gave yourself away!

Yep...that mainframe is long since gone. As are many of my co-workers who either ended up in IBM-land or outsourced to other companies. At that time, I think I had recently moved to the Telecomms group supporting our internet firewalls and perimeter security routers and had to be on-site. All that has been outsourced for years now, too.

No pins or bonuses but I do recall some bottles under the raised floor:)

Ah... but those days are long gone -- now I can't wait for another re-org and a severance package so I can head south out of this freezing weather!

[Pturner]

See my reply in blue. Hopes this helps.

Z

Thanks Z!

BTW, Jazzper and Z, I don't know much about legacy apps (as you can tell from my previous post). But I remember havin' to work on 12/31/99 until after midnight in a non-IT capacity in an emergency response center in case we had problems.

Gosh, now we can all be arrested for hijacking for sure! What was this thread about? Oh yeah, 2010. Back to the future...

[bonnyej]

I'm for twenty ten.

[Golf-Tinker]

In many cases, teams of consultants worked on the "legacy" apps (often, really old COBOL programs) to install fixes that would correct the flip-over date problem. In some cases, the cost of making complete fixes was so large that people in charge elected to have quick 50-year fixes installed. Their thinking was: "I'll be long gone by then." In those cases, the very same problem will surface in 2049 unless corrected before.

[Russ_Boston]

If we had not done our jobs there would have been a LOT of problems.

I know because I tested before and after applications and worked with numerous vendors to get their products fixed.


Amen Z - people think it was a big do-nothing. We changed programs for 2-3 years prior so that it became a big do-nothing!

Last year was oh-9. This year is twenty-ten. At least for me.

[nkrifats]

Amen to A and Russ,
We did more testing than I care to think about. Spent two weeks in beautiful Dayton, Ohio testing our platform used back here in NE. Spend New Years Eve in the office and at mid night testing our ATM's to make sure they where working. Reward was everything worked and customers/members experienced no issues. Will be glad to get out of this business in 2011.