Re: Appleworks

[dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson)]

Nathan Mates <nathan@visi.com> wrote:

> In article <6j28pj$gep$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,  <peter9@usa.net> wrote:
> >Check out http://www.apple.com/macos/info/2000.html - it's got a section on
> >how the Apple IIGS with Sys6.0 and older Apple II's running ProDOS 8 are
> >immune to the Year 2000 problem.
> 
>    Except it neglects to mention that every 6 years ProDOS 8 needs to
> be patched to deal with the year tables.

IF you are using a ThunderClock, or equivalent, then yes.

It does not require any patches if you have no clock at all, or a IIgs,
or a third party clock with a proper year register (and a ProDOS driver
that handles it).

> It *IS* possible to hold more bits in the year field than the braindead
> hardware selected in 1983 for the clock card, despite what some Apple
> whitewashers will try and come up with their usual lame excuses over.

The problem is not the year register.  The method provided by the
ThunderClock to read the time (as a string in the input buffer) doesn't
even provide the year.  ProDOS has to determine the year by working from
the day of week, day of month and month.  This gives a maximum of six
years range (five in the worst case - two leap years within a seven year
period).

Apple chose the ThunderClock because it was the most common clock card
at the time.

-- 
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz
Snail mail: P.O. Box 27-103, Wellington, New Zealand