Okay, since no one could produce a single independently verifiable "Y2K-doom embedded IC," we will consider that matter settled for now. In a continuing effort to identify one verifiable catastrophic failure of anything in use today, I ask the following: Can anyone produce the manufacturer, part number, a procedure for verifying Y2K non-compliance, and one current application or platform for an industrial controller (since these have been a hot topic lately). To ameliorate the request, I include the following example of a Y2K compliant system: Example: Manufacturer: Allen-Bradley
Part Number: 1747-L511, 1747-L514, 1747-L524
Procedure: Attempt to roll the real-time clock for powered down/powered up 991231/000101 rollover tests.
Results: No real-time clock in SLC 5/01; 5/02 processors, only a free-running clock.
Platforms/Applications: SLC 5/01, 5/02 are part of the A-B Small Logic Controllers family of processors. Uses are varied and industry-wide. Found in McKee-Addison Tube forming equipment, ITWMima palletizing equipment (ooooh, one of those industrial distribution applications that is supposed to fail post-Y2K!), and Cincinnati milling machines, to name a few.
So there is no mistake or lag in finding it, I have posted a message in the debunking forum (or is it fora?) already. I am certain the readers there will be interested in your intelligent responses, as will I. Again, this is all in the interests of science. Regards, Andy Ray

-- Andy Ray (andyman633@hotmail.com), July 06, 1999

Answers

Start your stop watch Andy...you have become quite a joke! Nobody seems to want to post on your threads anymore. We will let you in on the information that we e-mail each other, but we have to finish selling our stocks first... OK?

-- BiGG (supersite@acronet.net), July 06, 1999.

Just searching for a little empirical evidence of the claims made here - that's all. I don't expect any, but, in the interests of science, I provided an opportunity for the participants in this forum to produce a shred of evidence to back their hopes. I will interpret silence on the issue as a confirmation of my postulate that no such evidence exists, and re-assert my agreement with Mr. Yourdon's prediction that (paraphrasing) the events of 990701 would establish the catastrophic nature of Y2K.

:) Cheers! Andy Ray

-- Andy Ray (andyman633@hotmail.com), July 07, 1999.

...stopwatch ticking...

-- Andy Ray (andyman633@hotmail.com), July 07, 1999.

I guess you don't know how to connect the dots Andy. You dismiss the IEEE report because they don't list the part number? Get real. You dismiss the 90+ items listed on the Motorola link because they don't list the test procedure? Get real. I guess you'll dismiss this link for the same reason, even though it does list the manufacturer and part number:

Medical Devices With Known Y2K Related Defects

And I suppose this link doesn't meet your standards either:

Y2K List of Failures Part 4

I doubt that you're serious about this. If you are, do your own damned research, and stop wasting our time with this silly game. <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), July 07, 1999.

Andy Ray, you sweet little moron, the reason your threads are a joke is simply because you are not real.

You wanna know what will fail you stupid ass? Check

"www.willitwork.com"

and you will find literally thousands of y2k non-compliant equipment as per original OEM acknowledgement. Windows 98 ain't compliant yet for Crissake !!

-- George (jvilches@sminter.com.ar), July 07, 1999.

I would have been disappointed - again - if I hadn't seen this coming. I now have two threads of proof that no one on this forum really knows how to do anything other than whine, complain, trivialise, post links, and copy and paste other people's unfounded claims (and since my corporation paid the technician who ran the above tests, I am not being hypocritical in pointing this out...). It is no wonder you have it all wrong - you are not familiar with the subject on a professional level. I am sure glad I didn't quit posting here yet - I have discovered my Y2K mission: education, facts, scientific method, and common sense.

Lesson 1:
Do not believe anything you hear without evidence to back it up - especially if it is catastrophic.

Regards,
Andy Ray

-- Andy Ray (andyman633@hotmail.com), July 07, 1999.

Andy,

Is there any hope for you? Can you read or is your problem in the understanding part? Maybe you should try some schooling relating to computers, this should really help with your problem. Not trying to flame here, but you don't seem to have a clue about what your asking for, if you did you could find the answer very easily with the information provided.

-- BiGG (supersite@acronet.net), July 07, 1999.

Ken I mean Andy Ray

You would be advised to do some research on

http://www.deja.com/home_ps.shtml

Choose

comp.software.year-2000

then go back to last spring and find that this topic had been thrashed to the point of boredom.

-- Brian (imager@home.com), July 07, 1999.

...just one shred of evidence...patiently waiting.

:)

-- Andy Ray (andyman633@hotmail.com), July 08, 1999.

Andy,

Learn to read and start at the top of this thread...

-- BiGG (supersite@acronet.net), July 08, 1999.