The reason for changing to four digit dates is *NOT* Windows 9X. Our
office uses Office 97 as the "official" software. There are flaws and
inconsistencies in the date code between Office 95, Office 97 and Office
2000. The result is that *ONLY* four digit dates work correctly. Now as
the IMD guy pointed out to me "I hope we won't be using Office 97 in
2031" (one of the trigger dates.) I also get bad dates on files from Mac
users; is this the fault of Windows?
Mark
[log in to unmask]
http://bigfoot.stones.com/~smith
>The following is the message that was responded to.
>
>From [log in to unmask] Tue Aug 24 06:47:07 1999
>Return-Path: <[log in to unmask]>
>Received: from huey.nawcad.navy.mil by tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil (8.8.8+Sun/SMI-SVR4)
> id GAA15536; Tue, 24 Aug 1999 06:47:07 -0400 (EDT)
>Received: by huey.nawcad.navy.mil; id GAA09374; Tue, 24 Aug 1999 06:47:06 -0400 (EDT)
>Received: from rs8.loc.gov(140.147.248.8) by huey.nawcad.navy.mil via smap (V4.2)
> id xma009318; Tue, 24 Aug 99 06:46:59 -0400
>Received: from rs8 (rs8.loc.gov [140.147.248.8])
> by rs8.loc.gov (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP
> id GAA42466; Tue, 24 Aug 1999 06:42:27 -0400
>Received: from RS8.LOC.GOV by RS8.LOC.GOV (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with
> spool id 1584 for [log in to unmask]; Tue, 24 Aug 1999 06:42:20 -0400
>Received: from rs8 (rs8.loc.gov [140.147.248.8]) by rs8.loc.gov (8.8.4/8.8.4)
> with SMTP id GAA42154 for <[log in to unmask]>; Tue, 24 Aug 1999
> 06:42:18 -0400
>Approved-By: [log in to unmask]
>Received: from tundra.wr.usgs.gov (tundra.wr.usgs.gov [130.118.177.65]) by
> rs8.loc.gov (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP id TAA101992 for
> <[log in to unmask]>; Mon, 23 Aug 1999 19:55:07 -0400
>Received: from tundra.wr.usgs.gov (glaxor.wr.usgs.gov [130.118.179.63]) by
> tundra.wr.usgs.gov (8.6.8/8.6.4) with ESMTP id XAA11861 for
> <[log in to unmask]>; Mon, 23 Aug 1999 23:58:25 GMT
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (Win95; U)
>X-Accept-Language: en
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Approved-By: Jill L Schneider <[log in to unmask]>
>Message-ID: <[log in to unmask]>
>Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 15:55:05 -0800
>Reply-To: Science Fiction and Fantasy Listserv <[log in to unmask]>
>Sender: Science Fiction and Fantasy Listserv <[log in to unmask]>
>From: Jill L Schneider <[log in to unmask]>
>Organization: U.S. Geological Survey
>Subject: regional date settings andY2K compliance of Windows
>To: Multiple recipients of list SF-LIT <[log in to unmask]>
>
>Barry et al- I have gotten more than one message that says this is a hoax, but I also received the
>message below. Read & decide for yourself. I have already changed mine to the 4-digit year - what
>could it hurt??? ttfn - jill in alaska.
>
>-------- Original Message --------
>Subject: What Microsoft "really" says about the regional date settings andY2K compliance of Windows
>Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 13:38:19 -0700
>From: "Mattison, David ISTA:EX" <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: Archives & Archivists <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>
>This is a case of the Microsoft right hand not knowing what its left hand is
>doing. Microsoft claims, in refuting this e-mail hoax, you don't have to
>worry about the regional date settings (
>http://www.microsoft.com/y2k/hoax/y2khoax.htm
><http://www.microsoft.com/y2k/hoax/y2khoax.htm> ). On the Microsoft Year
>2000 site for home and small business users, the first thing they advise
>Windows users to do:
>
>"The following actions will enhance readiness for the new century:
>
>1. Change the Short Date format in Regional Settings (in the Windows
>Control Panel) to one that includes a four-digit year ("yyyy").
>
>2. Use four-digit years in important documents, spreadsheets, or other
>personal data files."
>
>
>Source:
>http://computingcentral.msn.com/guide/year2000/msy2k/learningmore/microsoftp
>rod.asp
><http://computingcentral.msn.com/guide/year2000/msy2k/learningmore/microsoft
>prod.asp>
>
>I'll grant that there is a fine line between enhancing readiness and
>claiming compliance. Read the Microsoft Year 2000 Readiness Disclosure &
>Resource Center product summaries carefully and you will discover that
>products like Windows 98 SP 1, 4.10.1998 (English) - 32-Bit Win (as of
>August 17, 1999) and some of its components do indeed rely on the regional
>date settings even though Microsoft claims on its hoax rebuttal page that
>"The short date format style in Regional Settings is a display setting
>only." One example:
>"COMCTL32.DLL - When Regional Settings from Control Panel is set to use 2
>digits for years, the Date/Time Picker function may not return the proper
>date. To ensure proper handling of dates, set Regional Settings to 4-digit
>date handling."
>
>Source: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/year2k/product/user_view71356EN.htm
><http://www.microsoft.com/technet/year2k/product/user_view71356EN.htm>
>
>To be safe and not sorry, follow the advice of the "hoax" e-mail.
>
>David Mattison, Archivist
>British Columbia Archives
>Victoria, BC, Canada
>[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>http://www.bcarchives.gov.bc.ca <http://www.bcarchives.gov.bc.ca>
|