Re: AppleWorks 5.1 and Bredon ProDOS Y2K Patch

[dlyons@netcom.com (David A. Lyons)]

In article <85177a$5ha$1@fir.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
Hugh Hood <hughhood@earthlink.net> wrote:
>First, I offer a big 'thank you' to Professor Bredon for taking the time and
>making the effort to re-examine the date routines in ProDOS 2.0.3 and for
>coming up with a patch that will allow proper relative dating across the
>1999-2000 boundary, at least through 2027. Others may differ, but I prefer
>his approach to that given by Apple in its ProDOS technote.
>...
>FINAL NOTE:
>-----------
>There are some patches out that modify AppleWorks 5.1 to work with the NON
>'Bredon Method'. You will not want to apply these patches, unless you prefer
>the Apple approved method. Again, the major advantage to the Bredon method
>is that it provides proper relative dating. (e.g. files dated 1999 are
>_older_ than files dated 2000 and vice versa).

This is a road to chaos.  If you ignore the official definition of a
ProDOS year number, many users will wind up with a mixture of correct
and incorrect dates stored on disk.  The results will be confusing.

Applications should be revised to compare dates as shown in ProDOS 8
Technote #28.  There is no need to ignore the published standard to
get proper relative dating.

--
Dave Lyons
Mr Tangent
<http://members.aol.com/davelyons>