I guess I would be what you would all call a newbe. I have been reading postings on this forum off and on for about a month now. I've been cruising other sites for about a year. Please forgive the formatting, as I have never before attempted to post anything to one of these before except a quick one liner to someone wanting info on a stove.

I would describe myself as a fence sitter. Not quite sure what to think of all this stuff. I've read a number of news articles that seem to leave one with the belief that Y2K wont be much more than a few days of inconvenience, and a number of web articles that claim it's TEOTWAWKI.

The "GI" position seems to be, everything is going to stop working and you better be ready to stash and grow your own food and protect it and your family from those that haven't. This is usually followed by a " But don't take my word for it, do your own research" type of statement. That's not too helpful as a search on Y2K will net you about 250,000 responses, and most of them seem to give the same general links with general facts like "If we lose 40% - 50% of the worlds computers, we're in deep s&*t!" Well I don't think anyone would deny that but how do we know it will happen?

The "Polly" position seems to be, there is no evidence, historical or otherwise, (unless you can find them some) that proves that anything will happen, so "Don't worry, everything is going to be ok. Koskinen (or the head of the FAA, or who ever) said so just the other day" Well I must say, I have never met a government official that I would trust as far as I could throw them. Please don't quote government officials in an attempt to make a point that you want any intelligent person to believe. Other than that, it is hard to find facts to support or prove a negative or non event.

The other day I ran upon this posting from Andy Ray.

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.

(snip)

Regards, Andy Ray

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

So I took the advice of the "GIs" and now the challenge from Andy (a Polly?) to do some research on embedded chips and systems. Now I have read on other sites that 3% of these will fail. Some others I found said up to 15% will fail, but no verifiable facts. The way I figure it, if 3% of these fail then 3% of the total systems will have problems or become unusable (assuming we agree that all of the non compliant chips are found in an equal amount of computers). A 3% slowdown in everything would cause some problems, but not the end of the world. So I went to 3 different websites of 3 different companies. I'm sure there are more but I just used the one Andy used "Allen-Bradley" and the only two I could think of Texas Instruments and Motorola. I've put the addresses below so everyone could look into the horses mouth. I don't know how to make a hot link like you guys do, so you will have to forgive me.

Findings

Allen-Bradley http://domino.automation.rockwell.com/webstuff/y2k.nsf Of their 199 listed date sensitive items they listed, 89 (or 45%) need to be fixed or replaced.

Texas Instruments http://www.ti.com/corp/docs/year2000/dspsds.htm Of their 121 listed date sensitive chips, 37 (or 30%) are not compliant.

Motorola http://mot-sps.com/y2k/realtimeclocks.html They only list their non compliant chips totaling 72. I guess if it's not on their "Black status" list, your ok.

Based on this little bit of data, we must conclude that 30% to 45% of the embedded systems (and the computers they are part of) will have problems. This excludes any software problems. If this is true for all the manufactures, We will be seeing problems everywhere for some time. Even if a company doesn't fail, if everything just slowed down or services are reduced by 30% to 45% until they get fixed, we're in deep S&*T! Remember, the companies involved in doing the fixes will be slowed down too and would be overloaded under normal circumstances.

GI'S I come from the days of Woodward and Bernstein and figure there's some kid out there wanting to make a name for themselves that would want to get to the truth. I guess that's just not the way it is any more. I mean, this was not that hard to find once I knew what to look for. I haven't seen any facts like this in any news article or web posting I've read so far. Let's start finding and posting facts folks not just other WebPages that support your view with links to others that support them Etc..

DOOMER'S For those of you that are in to this for the thrill, I hope you get everything you are hoping for. I see a lot of posts on firearms and weapon of choice. Recently one on the benefits of a 22mag for shooting people as opposed to an AR-15 (or any .223) because of lower report and less muzzle flash. I just got to say, when you grow up and do get into your first fire fight (and if you survive) you will find it less cool than you thought. Unless you are a cold blooded killer. Let me tell you what to expect when it does happen. Everything slows way down. You try to drop to the ground but gravity doesn't pull you down as fast as normal. If you have more than 300cc of urine in your bladder, it will be out of your bladder and in your pants before you do hit the ground (this is a self preservation reflex, don't blame yourself). Then the only thing you can think of is how will your family take it if you don't make it. Then training or instinct takes over and you aren't you anymore. Rational thought, feelings, everything, gone, and you fight or run. I prefer to run if It's an option (stats show an 80% better chance of survival) but maybe I'm just a weenie. If you stay and fight it goes on and on and on forever, then 10 or 20 seconds after it started, it ends. One way or another it will end. Then (if you survive) you have your hole life to look forward to sleepless nights interrupted by nightmares. Gee, I hope my weapon doesn't have too much muzzle flash. There are literally tens of thousands of men and women in this country that have far superior training and experience in this sort of thing than anything you will read in Solder of fiction or see in a Rambo movie. The only battle you can truly win is the one you don't get into. All others are a varying degrees of loss.

POLLY'S I must admit, after I read Andy's post and the follow up posts, I thought the facts would come to Andy's rescue. But I guess that just isn't so. Andy, did you look at that website that you referred to in your post? You should, 45% of their date sensitive stuff doesn't work. Thank you so much for helping me off (pushing me off) the fence. To answer your post, I have found not one but 198 bad chips from 3 manufactures. I would guess there are many more, but you only asked for one. All in all I hope your right and everyone else ends up eating humble pie. I'll be the first one to take a serving, thank you.

ALL I guess now I will be considered a "Doomer" or if I'm lucky a GI. Oh well I guess I can live with it. Sorry if I offended anyone here, that is not my intent. I'm a bit shook up from all this info I found and need to digest it and act fast, but that's my problem and my fault. I would like to ask everyone to try to stick to the high road. I don't believe Dr.Yardon created this forum as a place for people to go to and through barbs at each other (I know, I know, practice what you preach). I think he did it so ideas and facts could be traded freely. I have more that I would like to say but I think this is enough for now.

P.S.

Grandpappy and Faith,

I love your posts, they are very helpful and fun to read. I hope others will follow suit soon.

P.P.S

Poole,

Get a life. At least Andy is trying to prove something he believes is true, you're just mean and deceitful. The end DOES NOT justify the means.

I DIGRESS.

-- DOC (hopefor@thebest.com), July 09, 1999

Answers

Wow.

-- wow (wow@wow.wow), July 09, 1999.

Doc

If you are looking for more information here is a good set of links for you to understand Embedded Systems a bit better. As this is just a list there are some here that are better than others.

This is the Definitive link though

Institution of Electrical Engineers

For our furthering education

Assessing Your Embedded Systems (The Millennium Journal)

Automation and Process Control

The Boston Globe: That `Year 2000' Bug May Hit Appliances, Cars

The Cassandra Project

Conversant Business Technologies

Embedded Systems and the Year 2000 Problem (Mark A. Frautschi)

Embedded Systems Orientation (Idaho)

Firmware for Facilities Infrastructure Best Practices (Minnesota)

GSA

House Subcommittee on Technology and Subcommittee on Government Management, Information and Technology

IEE: An Explanation of Embedded Systems

Institution of Electrical Engineers

Manufacturers of Microprocessors and Controllers (Washington State)

Manufacturing Systems: Something short of disaster

Millennial mayhem for manufacturing

Process Control Software Manufacturers' Survey Responses (Washington State)

Risk Solutions, Inc.

Roleigh Martin

VAR Business, September 01, 1997

Web Links Concerning Embedded Systems (Year 2000 Support Centre)

Westergaard Year 2000 Industry: Manufacturing

Where to Look for Embedded Systems (Year 2000 Support Centre)

The Year 2000 and Embedded Systems (Jon Huntress)

Search year2000.com

Waste Treatment and Y2K

-- Brian (imager@home.com), July 09, 1999.

I've been waiting for the "one" post that will give the the final kick in the ass towards whichever direction I ended up going. This is it. My hat is off to DOC.

-- dan (dbuchner@logistics.calibersys.com), July 09, 1999.

Doc, Thanks for the post, and for the information.

There is another category, one which I think applies to most of the GIs who post on this form, and that is as more of a middlegrounder. I would absolutely not agree with your characterization of a GI as someone who believes that "everything will stop working". That would be a doomer or worse. Unfortunately, people like Andy Ray would have the readers believe there are only the two extremes.

For the most part, we are people with something enormous at stake, the welfare of our families, that behooves us to take personal responsibility and prepare to some degree for the possibilities that are out there. Good luck to you with whatever level of preparation you believe is appropriate for your situation.

-- Brooks (brooksbie@hotmail.com), July 09, 1999.

Whatever level you're preparing for, you will find more than enough information on how to prepare on the New Preparation Only Forum. Click on the About at the top of this forum's page and go from there.

DOC, if you're an M.D., please find someone with a HAM radio so that you can give medical advice during crises. Also, stock up on medical supplies if you can. We'll all need all the help we can get. Thanks for the post.

-- nothere nothere (notherethere@hotmail.com), July 09, 1999.

DOC: Good work, and it's quite telling that the answers were under our noses all the time, just like all the other evidence of a y2k disaster in the making has been. Some comments:

• Pollys will point out that some y2k compliant devices can be y2k ready. However, this should not be used in attempt to diminish the extent of the problem. As Bruce Beach has stressed, the behavior of complex black boxes built from dozens or hundreds or thousands of components is quite unpredictable. The only way to know for sure is to test, and clearly only a very miniscule fraction will be tested by the big day.

• I agree that there are a few people that appear eager to put their new investments in steel & lead to good use, and it is disturbing. Viewing of Saving Private Ryan should be required by all who think of war as a glorious adventure.

• I think the reason we do not have a Woodward and Bernstein this time is because the thought of a complete or even partial meltdown is because of two reasons:

  1) Its extremely unpleasant to contemplate. Exposing Nixon was actually quite enjoyable for a large percentage of the people, but envisioning your own imminent death from disease, violence or starvation is no ones idea of fun.

  2) Alerting folks that "The End Is Near" has been ridiculed since the dawn of time. Only during the cold war did this possibility become real. Since then, our world has become even more dangerous, and we are now desensitized to how vulnerable Man has become, regardless of how resilient our species is or how much ingenuity humans posses.

-- a (a@a.a), July 09, 1999.

Just when I thought that Andy Ray was the most worthless waste of thread space I have ever seen! Keep up the good work Andy!

-- BiGG (supersite@acronet.net), July 09, 1999.

I don't suppose it will make you feel any better if I point out that RTC chips aren't Year 100 compliant either. Think about that fact, and you will begin to understand.

-- Paul Davis (davisp1953@yahoo.com), July 09, 1999.

Paul,

Neither is our IBM mainframe. What's your point? <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), July 09, 1999.

Brian,

Thanks for the links. I've already seen some of them but many are new.

Dan,

Good luck.

Brooks,

Thanks for the clarification. I guess I'm a middlegrounder. I have read some of your other posts and I like your even keeled style.

I have been doing a few things over the past year as a just incase type of thing, so at least I'm not getting caught flat footed. The way I use to look at it was, Do you think your house will burn down this year? Probably not. Are you going to buy fire insurance this year? Probably so. The same can be said about your car or your life too. I don't plan on dying, but if I do, my family will at least get through financially. My wife and I talked about what I had found and we decided to increase our Y2K policy. If nothing happens by this time next year, we will donate a bunch of food to a local shelter and write it off our taxes. Not a bad outcome at all I would say. I hope that's the way it goes.

Nothere,

I'm not an MD. Better than that, I'm a HM. It stands for Hospitalman known by most in the field as a Corpsman. It's a rate in the Navy. We also take care of the Marines. I have always had enough medical supplies and experience to start a small clinic even before all this started. Bad things happen all the time, storms, earthquakes, Etc.. I have a neighbor that's a HAM operator. Huge setup, really neat. I have another neighbor that can grow birds from bird seed, and others with other skills. It's a fairly close bunch. I feel fortunate to be where I am.

a--,

All good points. Never thought of that.

-- DOC (hopefor@thebest.com), July 09, 1999.

DOC:

Just a thought: Usually, the 3-15% figure was attributed to all embedded devices, including those that are not date sensitive. It seems the percentages you give are based upon those that are date sensitive, and not all devices. Do you have an estimate for the % of all devices that had problems?

I just wanted to make sure your were being consistent in your analysis. I welcome your comments.

-- noone (no@where.com), July 09, 1999.

Glad to hear you're even better prepared than I thought you were.

Sounds like a lot of prep for a fence-sitter.

Excuse me while I make sure that my M.D. wife will survive rollover.

Thanks DOC.

-- nothere nothere (notherethere@hotmail.com), July 09, 1999.

Here's the link to a National Guard page on embedded technology:

http://www.ngb.dtic.mil/y2k/closer.htm

-- Linkmeister (link@librarian.edu), July 09, 1999.

Sysman - most of those noncompliant chips on the Motorola list are RTC's. Noncompliant by definition. And not a problem - the BIOS is the place for trouble.

-- Paul Davis (davisp1953@yahoo.com), July 09, 1999.

You are very welcome, Doc

-- Andy Ray (andyman633@hotmail.com), July 10, 1999.

Doc:

You said: "I have another neighbor that can grow birds from bird seed, and others with other skills." Sorry, but this one tickled me so much that I must ask, "These folks with other skills...can they grow girlscouts from girlscout cookies?" I'm sure you meant to say something else, Doc, but I DID enjoy the laugh. Thank you.

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), July 10, 1999.

If this DOC person is a newbie, then so am I.

Read it again....he (she) didn't just come upon all this info and understanding just lately. The terms used. The understanding shown of prior events. Plenty of really smart people are into the Y2k thing, but they don't come by the 'terminology' and the mindsets involved, all in a week or two. Or a month or two, even; things have gotten that complicated, for those who have tuned in late.

Wake up.

-- Chicken Little (panic@forthebirds.net), July 11, 1999.

Chicken Little,

Maybe some people "catch on" faster then others...

-- BiGG (supersite@acronet.net), July 11, 1999.

Chicken Little:

You said:

"If this DOC person is a newbie, then so am I."

Here's what I read in DOC's post:

"I guess I would be what you would all call a newbe. I have been reading postings on this forum off and on for about a month now."

DOC is saying he/she is a newbie TO THIS FORUM. The post then explains he/she has been reading other Y2K sites for about a year. If you can't understand this simple declaration, I can easily see why you don't understand much about Y2K.

-- Old Git (anon@spamproblems.com), July 11, 1999.

There are no hidden clock func5tions in embedded chips. There are no Y2K failures in chips except for the BIOS problem which everyone knows about and how to fix. There have been no reports of (actual) embedded chips (those which have programs burned into them) that have been found with Y2K date problems. The fact is, there could be, but none have been reported. The IC and embedded chip manufacturers do not make and sell Y2K non compliant chips. The programable chips are made and sent to the companies that need them and are "programmed" there where they document what they burn into them. There is documentation. They KNOW what they have in those chips. The "problems" found in "embedded systems" have been found to be software, usually from a PC that runs through the chips. Not problems with the chips themselfs. So forget the idea that any percentage of "chips" (other thwn BIOS) will have failures due to date functions. All of the "reported" cases have been shown to be a proble with the software program that runs through the hardware, not the hardware itself. There are some situations where the year is displayed in 2 digit years. Those situations use the date as a date stamp and if people understand that 5/23/88 is May 23rd 1988 then they also understand that 6/13/00 is June 13th 2000. The entire embedded problem was basically wrong from the beginning. Thats what happens when people who do not know what they are talking about make statements based on their opinions rather than facts.

-- Cherri (sams@brigadoon.com), July 14, 1999.