Have u seen what happens when u increase the Windows Syste..

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin (More info?)

In news:FEF62F53-5598-49AC-B92E-9416E8E90811@microsoft.com,
Debabrata <Debabrata@discussions.microsoft.com> typed:
> Have u seen what happens when u increase the Windows System Year from
> 2099.
>
> This was a nice and disturbing thing that I found out yesterday. Just
> go to the Windows Clock located on the bottom left corner of the
> screen and double click on it. Double clicking on it will bring up
> the Date and Time Properties Dialog Box. Now increase the Year field.
> Now the magic starts. The moment u cross 2099 the Year becomes 1980.
> So....now what. As u can clearly see when the year 2099 comes (and
> ends) the next ear on Ur Windows calendar will become 1980. That is u
> r actually going back in time (hahaha.). As u can now have understood
> the implications can be manifold. U we staring at another Y2.1
> scenario.
>
> Should not the Microsoft guys come out with a clarification for this
> glaring mistake?

I have no idea, and the Microsoft guys don't talk to me about such things,
but I can't imagine this is a "known issue." Have you reproduced this on
other machines?

Also, what on earth prompted you to try it in the first place? ;-)

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin (More info?)

"Also, what on earth prompted you to try it in the first place? ;-) "

Complete boredom. Maybe the time could have been better spent learning
to spell...

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin (More info?)

If your DOS was invented in 1998 or later (because it’s the DOS that came
with Windows 98 or 98SE or Me or XP), the computer will put “20” before your
2-digit number if it’s less than 80, but put “19” otherwise. For example, if
you type “04”, the computer will put “20” in front and assume you mean the
year 2004. If you type “87”, the computer will put “19” in front and assume
you mean the year 1987.



"Debabrata" wrote:

> Have u seen what happens when u increase the Windows System Year from 2099.
>
> This was a nice and disturbing thing that I found out yesterday. Just go to
> the Windows Clock located on the bottom left corner of the screen and double
> click on it. Double clicking on it will bring up the Date and Time Properties
> Dialog Box. Now increase the Year field. Now the magic starts. The moment u
> cross 2099 the Year becomes 1980. So……..now what. As u can clearly see when
> the year 2099 comes (and ends) the next ear on Ur Windows calendar will
> become 1980. That is u r actually going back in time (hahaha…). As u can now
> have understood the implications can be manifold. U we staring at another
> Y2.1 scenario.
>
> Should not the Microsoft guys come out with a clarification for this glaring
> mistake?
>
> --
> Debabrata Das
>
> Software Engineer
> Kolkata,
> India

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin (More info?)

In news:10CA543F-087F-461C-A196-5B4EC75AF4D0@microsoft.com,
CD <CD@discussions.microsoft.com> typed:
> If your DOS was invented in 1998 or later (because it's the DOS that
> came with Windows 98 or 98SE or Me or XP),

Ah...there's no DOS in NT-based operating systems  

<snip>

> "Debabrata" wrote:
>
>> Have u seen what happens when u increase the Windows System Year
>> from 2099.
>>
>> This was a nice and disturbing thing that I found out yesterday.
>> Just go to the Windows Clock located on the bottom left corner of
>> the screen and double click on it. Double clicking on it will bring
>> up the Date and Time Properties Dialog Box. Now increase the Year
>> field. Now the magic starts. The moment u cross 2099 the Year
>> becomes 1980. So....now what. As u can clearly see when the year
>> 2099 comes (and ends) the next ear on Ur Windows calendar will
>> become 1980. That is u r actually going back in time (hahaha.). As u
>> can now have understood the implications can be manifold. U we
>> staring at another Y2.1 scenario.
>>
>> Should not the Microsoft guys come out with a clarification for this
>> glaring mistake?
>>
>> --
>> Debabrata Das
>>
>> Software Engineer
>> Kolkata,
>> India

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin (More info?)

Debabrata wrote:
> Have u seen what happens when u increase the Windows System Year from 2099.
>
> This was a nice and disturbing thing that I found out yesterday. Just go to
> the Windows Clock located on the bottom left corner of the screen and double
> click on it. Double clicking on it will bring up the Date and Time Properties
> Dialog Box. Now increase the Year field. Now the magic starts. The moment u
> cross 2099 the Year becomes 1980. So……..now what. As u can clearly see when
> the year 2099 comes (and ends) the next ear on Ur Windows calendar will
> become 1980. That is u r actually going back in time (hahaha…). As u can now
> have understood the implications can be manifold. U we staring at another
> Y2.1 scenario.
>
> Should not the Microsoft guys come out with a clarification for this glaring
> mistake?
>
Do you really believe that Microsoft/Windows will still be around 94
years from now. There is a limit to our patience.

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin (More info?)

Do you plan on being around in 2099 using that same version of windows?

Tom

| Debabrata wrote:
| > Have u seen what happens when u increase the Windows System Year from
2099.
| >
| > This was a nice and disturbing thing that I found out yesterday. Just go
to
| > the Windows Clock located on the bottom left corner of the screen and
double
| > click on it. Double clicking on it will bring up the Date and Time
Properties
| > Dialog Box. Now increase the Year field. Now the magic starts. The
moment u
| > cross 2099 the Year becomes 1980. So....now what. As u can clearly see
when
| > the year 2099 comes (and ends) the next ear on Ur Windows calendar will
| > become 1980. That is u r actually going back in time (hahaha.). As u can
now
| > have understood the implications can be manifold. U we staring at
another
| > Y2.1 scenario.
| >
| > Should not the Microsoft guys come out with a clarification for this
glaring
| > mistake?