[ucc] y2k bug madness

[Andrew McColl]

At 4:39 PM +0800 4/1/00, Duncan Sargeant wrote:
>Not much in the way of huge y2k blunders - yet.  But if you're
>interested, there are quite a few documented in comp.risks (digests
>71, 72 and 73).  The highlights:
>
>.  webpages showing 100, 20100 or 19100 are commonplace.
>
>.  netscape and internet explorer differed in their y2k handling of
>   years, and only one is according to spec :-) This makes writing
>   globally y2k compliant javascript a tad hard.

I had a Reverse Y2K weirdness.  My DVD iMacs modem started working after the New Year commenced.   I can't explain it.  And CDM had declared that it was all UCS's fault for having phone numbers that were just too hard to ring.

Skippy

--
skippy at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au
Software Tester: "You name it we maim it"