Zyxel - False Advertising! - Beware of this Company!
Le Chaud Lapin
> On Jun 26, 12:50 am, Le Chaud Lapin <jaibudu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jun 25, 11:31 pm, Le Chaud Lapin <jaibudu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > For all else who are interested, the pseudo-generic name for what I am
> > looking for is "SoftAP".
>
> > Google it, and much information will come forth.
>
> I appears that the complete package is Zyxel G200 series:
>
> http://us.zyxel.com/web/product_family_detail.php?PC1indexflag=200405...
BUYER BEWARE:
Zyxel seems to be engaged in deliberate false-advertising to move
products known to be incompatible with Vista in some respects.
I bought the Zyxel AG-225H and was extremely disappointed today that
the Access Point feature will not run on Vista.
The following page:
...reads:
"the Software Access Point feature that is included in each and every
AG-225H."
...it also reads:
"Microsoft Vista Support Out of the Box"
"Microsoft Vista is the next big operating system change users have to
contend with
coming out of Microsoft in 2007. Don’t be afraid of your new AG-225H
becoming
obsolete lagging behind your computer OS upgrades"
I was definitely afraid of no Vista support for my Access Point
dongle, so I spent over an hour carefully searching the web to make
sure that the Access Point device I chose supported Vista. I chose the
AG-225H specifically because it mentioned "Microsoft Vista Support Out
Of The Box."
If you try to use this device with Vista, the Software Access Point
feature not only will not work, it will not install. AT ALL. This is
not a bug. It is deliberate. The engineers have not written any GUI
software for Vista. Zero. If the installation CD detects that the
operating system on which it is being installed is Windows Vista, it
will install the device driver only, and completely block installation
of any other software, including the Access Point software.
I spent 30 minutes on the phone today with a Zyxel representative and
his manager arguing about whether a rational, moderately intelligent
person reading the page at the link above would get the impression
that the device is Vista-ready, meaning not only will it be useable as
a normal Wi-Fi roaming dongle, but will also be useable as an Access
Point, which is the only reason I bought it. The representative I
spoke with, and his manager, staunchly denied that they are
responsible for any wrong-doing or confusion that might have arisen,
and faulted me [an electrical/software engineer that programs in
Windows and network devices in particular] for "misinterpreting their
clearly-written presentation."
To prove that they were not at fault, the representative told me to go
to the "Support and Downloads" location on their web site:
And told to scroll down near the bottom and read one of the FAQ's
where it says:
Q:"When I install my ZyXEL Client Adapter, I can’t use the bundled
Utility that controls the adapter. Is this normal? "
A:"Currently, Vista is not supported on any of ZyXEL’s Client Adapters
however this does not mean that they will not work on Windows Vista!
Using the step by step setup process outlined on this webpage, you can
install any of our client adapters onto your Windows Vista OS PC.
Please remember that the Utility used to configure and control the
Client Adapter will be the Windows Zero Config Utility within Windows
Vista."
What this means, in English, is that the Access Point feature *WILL
NOT WORK* on Vista. NOT AT ALL. Note how they call the Access Point
software the "Utility", not "Access Point Software".
I then asked, "Isn't the Support & Downloads area of a company's web-
site typically visited by customers *after* they have already
purchased the product?" He said "No, it is clearly written there, and
you could have excercised some initiative and looked at that page and
seen that the Access Point feature was not supported by Vista."
I then said, "But I was mislead by the page that describes the
product. Why do you not simply put an asterisk next to the 'Microsoft
Vista Support Out of the Box' blurb on the product description page to
say that Vista support does not include the Access Point feature?
After all, the only reason I bought your product is so I could use the
Acess Point feature on Vista." He said, "We will consider that in the
future."
I noticed that too many questions on the FAQ page seemed to indicate
that I was not the only person who inferred that "Microsoft Vista
Support Out of the Box" meant that the Access Point feature would work
on Vista, so I asked the manager..."Certainly there are other people
who where duped by this page...I cannot be the only person who thought
that the Access Point feature would work on Vista only to find out
that it doesn't?" he said, "Yes, you're the only person." I said, "Are
you sure? I am not an idiot...I know how to read, I'm not lazy, this
simply doesn't make sense." He said, "No,..no..you're the only one."
I was about to ask if I could return the device and get my money back
until I read the following FAQ not far from the other FAQ:
Q: "Do you have an exchange program for customers that upgrade their
PC’s to Windows Vista only to find out that the ZyXEL product they are
using does NOT support Windows Vista?"
A: "Unfortunately the 2 Year ZyXEL Warranty program does NOT include
exchanges if the product is not Micosoft Vista supported. The
supported operating systems are dependent on the time of which the
product was developed. Although ZyXEL tries our best to make sure that
all products will be Microsoft Windows Vista certified, sometimes a
replacement product will shift resources from one product to another."
Liar.
This company certainly knows how to make first impressions.
[NOTE: To those reading this post, this is not just a rant. I will
likely sue this company for false advertising as a matter of
principle. What would help me greatly is if you could simply take a
look at the following link, and make a mental note (or otherwise)
that, as of 2008-07-08, there is nothing on the product description
page that says that the Access Point feature of the device cannot be
used under Windows Vista.]
Zyxel Customer Support In USA: (800) 978-7222
-Le Chaud Lapin-
LR
> [NOTE: To those reading this post, this is not just a rant. I will
> likely sue this company for false advertising as a matter of
> principle. What would help me greatly is if you could simply take a
> look at the following link, and make a mental note (or otherwise)
> that, as of 2008-07-08, there is nothing on the product description
> page that says that the Access Point feature of the device cannot be
> used under Windows Vista.]
>
> http://tinyurl.com/6zr6zn
Under Specifications
System Requirement
* Notebook or PC with the Pentium II
o 300 MHz or compatible above
o Minimum 32MB RAM (64MB Recommended)
o A minimum of 20MB available hard disk space
o A CD ROM drive
o USB Type A slot (V2.0/V1.1 Comparable)
o Microsoft Windows XP/2000
No mention of Vista
LR
Le Chaud Lapin
This link [http://tinyurl.com/6zr6zn] is the main link for the product
description page.
It has "Microsoft Vista Support Out of the Box" written in bold
letters.
I think that counts as a "mention of Vista".
-Le Chaud Lapin-
Le Chaud Lapin
> http://www.zyxel.com/web/support_vista.php
Apparently you did not read my OP. In it, I placed that link already.
Here, let's take two paragraphs, bout written by Zyxel, and place them
next to ecah other to see if it becomes clear:
First, the link that you put above reads:
Q:"When I install my ZyXEL Client Adapter, I can’t use the bundled
Utility that controls the adapter. Is this normal? "
A:"Currently, Vista is not supported on any of ZyXEL’s Client
Adapters
however this does not mean that they will not work on Windows Vista!
Using the step by step setup process outlined on this webpage, you
can
install any of our client adapters onto your Windows Vista OS PC.
Please remember that the Utility used to configure and control the
Client Adapter will be the Windows Zero Config Utility within Windows
Vista."
And now, the link for the AG-225H [http://tinyurl.com/6zr6zn] reads:
"Microsoft Vista Support Out of the Box"
"Microsoft Vista is the next big operating system change users have to
contend with
coming out of Microsoft in 2007. Don’t be afraid of your new AG-225H
becoming
obsolete lagging behind your computer OS upgrades."
So, quick question: After reading this last paragraph, should I expect
Vista support or not? This last paragraph, which is on the main page
for the product, indicates that I should, even though it does not. The
other paragraph is in the product support section.
If I buy even a $40,000 vehicle, I do not go to the car manufacturers
web site to look at the product support section to see if the
marketing materials about its features were dishonest. That would not
make sense.
If a company says that their product has Vista support on the main
description page of the product, then, in my mind, there should be
Vista support for that product. If not, then they should not write on
it, "Microsoft Vista Support Out of the Box".
One of five key tests of whether this constitutes false advertising,
as outlined by US DOC and other laws , is whether a majority of
people, upon seeing on main description page,
"Microsoft Vista Support Out of the Box".
would be lead to believe that there is Vista support for the product.
If so, then this is false advertising.
-Le Chaud Lapin-
LR
posted and the one I posted are not the same, there are no FAQ's on the
link I posted and it clearly states that the "Vista Utility" is not
supported.
LR
not read. If in your original post you had said that you required the
device to work in Vista rather than just "Windows" I would have advised
that there was a good chance it would not work. I got the G-202 as part
of a package deal and as the "spec" says works in XP, with limitations
on encryption, however I downloaded the Vista Utility to my Vista "play"
machine and the Vista Utility does not contain the "SoftAP" function and
I would think this applies to all their Vista Utilities.
If you wish to find a system that works in Vista you would stand a
better chance with the Ralink Chipsets. Check the release notes:-
<http://www.ralinktech.com/ralink/Home/Support/Windows.html>
Le Chaud Lapin
Given that one of the few distinguishing features claimed by the
AG-225H is that it can work as a Softwware Access Point, and given
that it is obvious from the main page for this product that customers
are worried about Vista support, what would be wrong with Zyxel simply
putting an asterisk next to the blurb that reads "Microsoft Vista
Support Out Of The Box!" that indicates to customer that "Software
Access Point feature will not work on Vista."
That way, any customer who comes across the page, after searching
specifically for a dongle that has software access point feature and
Vista support, seeing "Software Access Point" and "Microsoft Vista
Support Out Of The Box!" on the same page, within a few paragraphs of
each other, will not be mislead into thinking that the Software Access
Point feature is supported on Vista.
That's what happened in my case. I googled SoftAP Vista dongle. Zyxel
came up. I went to the main product page, and there it was, with no
qualifications.
I did not go to the product support page since I had not yet had a
product that needed supporting.
-Le Chaud Lapin-
Bill Kearney
Quit whinging about it and move on.
Le Chaud Lapin
> TLDR
>
> Quit whinging about it and move on.
No one asked your opinion.
-Le Chaud Lapin-
Robert Redelmeier
> On Jul 4, 6:17 am, "Bill Kearney" <wkearne...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Quit whinging about it and move on.
> No one asked your opinion.
Actually, as OP in this thread, _YOU_ most definitely did.
You might not like contrary opinions but you invited them.
Beggars cannot be choosers, hot [drunk] rabbit.
Nor can you make a comment and expect others to
listen without listening to their comments in turn.
-- Robert
Le Chaud Lapin
> In comp.dcom.lans.ethernet Le Chaud Lapin <_jaibuduv...@gmail.com> wrote in part:
>
> > On Jul 4, 6:17 am, "Bill Kearney" <wkearne...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> Quit whinging about it and move on.
> > No one asked your opinion.
>
> Actually, as OP in this thread, _YOU_ most definitely did.
> You might not like contrary opinions but you invited them.
>
> Beggars cannot be choosers, hot [drunk] rabbit.
> Nor can you make a comment and expect others to
> listen without listening to their comments in turn.
On the contrary, I very much believe in freedom of speech, in all
forms. ;)
-Le Chaud Lapin-
Mark McIntyre
>
> On the contrary, I very much believe in freedom of speech, in all
> forms. ;)
>
This comment
>>> No one asked your opinion.
doesn't sounds like it though, you must admit.
Mark McIntyre
> On Jul 4, 6:17 am, "Bill Kearney" <wkearne...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> TLDR
>>
>> Quit whinging about it and move on.
>
> No one asked your opinion.
Out of interest, who asked yours?
And FYI, this is usenet, nor your private chatroom. You post a comment,
people reply, thats how it works. Not all the replies will agree with
you or be ones you like. If you don't like the replies, grow a thicker
skin.
Le Chaud Lapin
wrote:
I made the comment anticipating that someone, especially the person I
made it to, would respond as you and Robert Redelmeier did.
What is remarkable is what you both say is 100% true, which means we
could go back an forth indefinitely.
In essence, anything goes.
-Le Chaud Lapin-
Jeff Liebermann
<jaibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>What is remarkable is what you both say is 100% true, which means we
>could go back an forth indefinitely.
The easiest way to determine if you want to continue an endless
discussion is to ask yourself if you would be interested in reading
what you're about to post. If the answer is negative, then cease,
desist, and don't post. Following my own advice, some useful content:
There's been some litigation over "Vista Capable" and "Vista Ready"
claims for various products that really are not.
<http://blogs.computerworld.com/bought_a_vista_capable_junk_pc_you_may_be_in_luck>
Google should help you find other suits involving claims of false
compatibility. For example, Nvidia can't seem to get it right:
<http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/02/03/0110248>
<http://www.nvidiaclassaction.org>
If you're serious about having been grievously injured by your
purchase of a Zyxel AG-225H, then I suggest you initiate or join one
of the numerous class action suits. Otherwise, just return it to your
vendor or sell it on eBay.
>In essence, anything goes.
In reality, everything goes.
--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Le Chaud Lapin
> On Sat, 5 Jul 2008 08:25:26 -0700 (PDT), Le Chaud Lapin
>
> >What is remarkable is what you both say is 100% true, which means we
> >could go back an forth indefinitely.
>
> The easiest way to determine if you want to continue an endless
> discussion is to ask yourself if you would be interested in reading
> what you're about to post. If the answer is negative, then cease,
> desist, and don't post. Following my own advice, some useful content:
>
> There's been some litigation over "Vista Capable" and "Vista Ready"
> claims for various products that really are not.
> Google should help you find other suits involving claims of false
> compatibility. For example, Nvidia can't seem to get it right:
> <http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/02/03/0110248>
> <http://www.nvidiaclassaction.org>
> If you're serious about having been grievously injured by your
> purchase of a Zyxel AG-225H, then I suggest you initiate or join one
> of the numerous class action suits. Otherwise, just return it to your
> vendor or sell it on eBay.
>
> >In essence, anything goes.
>
> In reality, everything goes.
I guess one should not be suprised that a few companies are trying to
claim Vista-compatibility when they know that it is non-existent or
partially existent. No one wants to wasted development resources on an
OS that has been adopted with uncertainty.
In the case of Zyxel, it appears that the only truly Vista-compatible
software is the device driver itself and the Installshield shell that
does the installation, which, of course, they didn't write. The rest
of the software, if I am not mistaken, is XP-only. But since NDIS 5.1
drivers will often work without modification from XP to Vista x86, my
guess is that the driver was tested to see if it would work in station-
only mode on Vista, and if it did, then Zyxel resolved that they would
claim "Microsoft Vista Support Out Of The Box", knowing that no
software was written specifically for Vista, but hoping that anyone
hoping to use the the Access Point feature on Vista would not
complain.
In any case, as of 2008-06-02, the US Federal Trade Commision has
launched a formal investigation of Zyxel's Vista-support claims of the
AG-225H, so we'll see what happens.
Your links and comments much appreciated,
-Le Chaud Lapin-
Mark McIntyre
>
> I made the comment anticipating that someone, especially the person I
> made it to, would respond as you and Robert Redelmeier did.
So you were trolling.
And I just realised you're xposting too.
Ok, plonk.
Robert Redelmeier
I thought so too, until I saw the smiley and figured it meant
"all forms" included rude, misleading and/or erronious speech.
Self-depracating humor is far more common in the UK and EU
than in the US.
-- Robert
Jeff Liebermann
<jaibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> For example, Nvidia can't seem to get it right:
>> <http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/02/03/0110248>
>> <http://www.nvidiaclassaction.org>
Ooops. That was a terrible example as the class action web pile is
now owned by a domain squatter and the class action suit was
apparently never initiated.
>I guess one should not be suprised that a few companies are trying to
>claim Vista-compatibility when they know that it is non-existent or
>partially existent. No one wants to wasted development resources on an
>OS that has been adopted with uncertainty.
I know of one company, that paid an expert to test some of their
existing XP drivers for Vista compatibility. They didn't want to pay
Microsoft to certify the drivers. Apparently, he did a not so
wonderful job of testing, and pronounced that everything was just fine
with minimal tweaks. The company announced that most of their
products and drivers installed and functioned under Vista. It took
about a month for the complaints to accumulate in support, along with
a dramatic increase in returns, to convince marketing that perhaps
something was not quite right. I haven't bothered to check if
anything was actually done about it.
For entertainment value, MS labels "Vista Capable" and "Vista Premium
Ready" PC's.
<http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/windowsvista/buyorupgrade/capable.mspx>
and various levels of Vista certification. You might wanna see if
your hardware is compatible, ready, certified, blessed, or compatible:
<http://winqual.microsoft.com/HCL/Default.aspx> (IE6 or IE7 only).
Looks like Zyxel has certified some wireless devices, but not the
AG-225H.
<http://winqual.microsoft.com/HCL/ProductList.aspx?m=v&g=d&cid=711&f=86p>
Note that some of the model numbers are missing from the certification
list. I wonder why.
>only mode on Vista, and if it did, then Zyxel resolved that they would
>claim "Microsoft Vista Support Out Of The Box",
Actually, that phrase is not one of the offical Microsoft labels and
could very well indicate that they did their own testing.
Incidentally, if you read the phrase exactly as you wrote it, it means
you can call Microsoft and get Vista support by opening the box. I
don't think that's what they intended, but that's what it says. Not a
very good OOBE (out of box experience).
>In any case, as of 2008-06-02, the US Federal Trade Commision has
>launched a formal investigation of Zyxel's Vista-support claims of the
>AG-225H, so we'll see what happens.
Reference? URL? I couldn't find anything with Google.
Le Chaud Lapin
> For entertainment value, MS labels "Vista Capable" and "Vista Premium
> Ready" PC's.
> and various levels of Vista certification. You might wanna see if
> your hardware is compatible, ready, certified, blessed, or compatible:
> <http://winqual.microsoft.com/HCL/Default.aspx> (IE6 or IE7 only).
> Looks like Zyxel has certified some wireless devices, but not the
> AG-225H.
> <http://winqual.microsoft.com/HCL/ProductList.aspx?m=v&g=d&cid=711&f=86p>
> Note that some of the model numbers are missing from the certification
> list. I wonder why.
>
> >only mode on Vista, and if it did, then Zyxel resolved that they would
> >claim "Microsoft Vista Support Out Of The Box",
>
> Actually, that phrase is not one of the offical Microsoft labels and
> could very well indicate that they did their own testing.
Oh I bet they did. Remember here, though, I am not talking about the
driver. It was the user-mode software that does not work on Vista,
and the user-mode software drives the driver, which means that, if
all I have are Vista machines, I cannot use the dongle as an AP.
> Incidentally, if you read the phrase exactly as you wrote it, it means
> you can call Microsoft and get Vista support by opening the box. I
> don't think that's what they intended, but that's what it says. Not a
> very good OOBE (out of box experience).
>
> >In any case, as of 2008-06-02, the US Federal Trade Commision has
> >launched a formal investigation of Zyxel's Vista-support claims of the
> >AG-225H, so we'll see what happens.
>
> Reference? URL? I couldn't find anything with Google.
The investigation just started (at my behest), meaning any consumer
can cause and investigation of any company for any reasonable claim of
false advertising.
I will however, say that the FTC representative was suprisingly
diligent in verifiying details, etc. I also discerned from our
conversation Zyxel is not the only company playing this game.
-Le Chaud Lapin-
Jeff Liebermann
<jaibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Oh I bet they did. Remember here, though, I am not talking about the
>driver. It was the user-mode software that does not work on Vista,
>and the user-mode software drives the driver, which means that, if
>all I have are Vista machines, I cannot use the dongle as an AP.
Yep. You have a valid complaint in that all the software in the box
doesn't play with Vista. Whether it justifies all the noise you're
making is debatable.
>The investigation just started (at my behest), meaning any consumer
>can cause and investigation of any company for any reasonable claim of
>false advertising.
Yeah. That happens. I've been involved in a few class action suits
against companies that fumble over their advertising claims. Hard
disk manufacturers that couldn't resist stating unformatted capacity.
3Com that used the X2 trademark on their modems, only to discover that
buyers genuinely expected the modems to be x2 or two times as fast.
Several companies, who thought that a change of name justifies not
paying any rebates and revising some of their product specs. Also,
some medical billing issues that are not exactly relevant here. The
bottom line is that the lawyers collected millions by shaking down the
companies, while the victims usually received a gift certificate or
nominal discount on future purchases.
>I will however, say that the FTC representative was suprisingly
>diligent in verifiying details, etc. I also discerned from our
>conversation Zyxel is not the only company playing this game.
Conversation? Have you ever heard of the world wide web?
<https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov>
Fill out the form and wait your place in line. The FTC is required by
law to "investigate" any and all complaints that it receives. The
investigation may end up going no further than someone reading your
complaint and filling it appropriately. It may also be taken
seriously and obtain the attention of the Justice Department. Hard to
tell. If Zyxel didn't provide any campaign contributions, I'm sure
the threat of an investigation would get their attention. It works
for Microsoft.
As for other companies playing the same game, I suppose that's true.
Everyone lies, but that's ok because nobody listens.
Le Chaud Lapin
> On Sat, 5 Jul 2008 13:25:56 -0700 (PDT), Le Chaud Lapin
> As for other companies playing the same game, I suppose that's true.
> Everyone lies, but that's ok because nobody listens.
I used to believe that until about 20 years ago, when an employee of
of Massachussetts Turnpike Authority started shaving $1 of my toll
payments. One day I deliberately paid with a $20, pretended I was in
hurry to make my 1 hour commute from Boston to Framingham, got all
$1's back (which is what made me suspicious in the first place), and I
pulled over to count. $18 back, when toll was $1. I walked back to
booth to demand my extra $1, and he pretended he didn't know. I called
MTA in vain, until finally a coworker who knew a friend of friend,
etc...let it be known that he was funding his drug habbit by
skimming. Anyhow, long story short, I have a check in my safe for $2
from MTA that took me 7 months to get. Obviously it is a matter of
principle for such a small amount, but I learned quite a bit from that
experience.
Since then, I have never had to sue anyone, but I have had countless
situations where people have been induced to make good their accounts.
Sometimes I let things go, like when took a drink at fancy Boston
restaurant and end up with mouthful of broken glass (manager wanted to
refund entire $140+ ticket + extra), and sometimes I push, like when
Air France tried to keep $2000 payment without telling me decisively
up front whether I would be allowed to travel not long after 9/11.
Sometimes the "defendant" finds mutual compromise, like when I was hit
by uninsured driver ($200), again ($0 and a handshake since there was
very little damage to my vehicle), etc. There is also matter of oil
company that trespassed on property I jointly own in East Texas.
Ahem. ;)
But it's not really the dollar amount. I look at the Zyxel situation
as an opportunity to do for others what others have done for me,
whether I was aware of it or not.
Who knows...someone else might want to run AP on PC running Vista, and
come across my post, and think twice, saving $65.
Zyxel certainly came across it (within 24 hours in fact).
-Le Chaud Lapin-
LR
>>> In any case, as of 2008-06-02, the US Federal Trade Commision has
>>> launched a formal investigation of Zyxel's Vista-support claims of the
>>> AG-225H, so we'll see what happens.
>> Reference? URL? I couldn't find anything with Google.
>
> The investigation just started (at my behest), meaning any consumer
> can cause and investigation of any company for any reasonable claim of
> false advertising.
>
> I will however, say that the FTC representative was suprisingly
> diligent in verifiying details, etc. I also discerned from our
> conversation Zyxel is not the only company playing this game.
>
> -Le Chaud Lapin-
If you are doing something about it rather than just Trolling at least
get your facts straight. "2008-06-02" is either 2nd June or 6th Feb and
your post " Windows PC As IEEE 802.11 Access Point" commenced 25th June.
At the start of that post you had "supposedly" not decided what item to
buy. If you filed a complaint with the FTC on 2008-06-02 then you
deliberately bought an item knowing that it would not work in a
particular function.
jpd
On Sun, 06 Jul 2008 10:22:44 +0100, LR <lr...@privacy.net> wrote:
>
> If you are doing something about it rather than just Trolling at least
> get your facts straight. "2008-06-02" is either 2nd June or 6th Feb
Don't do that, you silly person. We have trouble enough with the
braindead ``nuxi''-style US date format as is. According to ISO8601
"2008-06-02" is 2nd June *only*. In fact, this sort of silly doubting is
why that standard exists in the first place.
Repeat after me: YYYY-MM-DD; fullyear dash month dash day and no other
interpretations. If for whatever reason you have to fuck up the order,
you write the month as Roman numbers or the month name or abbreviation.
--
j p d (at) d s b (dot) t u d e l f t (dot) n l .
This message was originally posted on Usenet in plain text.
Any other representation, additions, or changes do not have my
consent and may be a violation of international copyright law.
Le Chaud Lapin
> Begin <EL-dndO5EJF5E-3VnZ2dnUVZ8vudn...@bt.com>
>
> On Sun, 06 Jul 2008 10:22:44 +0100, LR <l...@privacy.net> wrote:
>
> > If you are doing something about it rather than just Trolling at least
> > get your facts straight. "2008-06-02" is either 2nd June or 6th Feb
>
> Don't do that, you silly person. We have trouble enough with the
> braindead ``nuxi''-style US date format as is. According to ISO8601
> "2008-06-02" is 2nd June *only*. In fact, this sort of silly doubting is
> why that standard exists in the first place.
>
> Repeat after me: YYYY-MM-DD; fullyear dash month dash day and no other
> interpretations. If for whatever reason you have to fuck up the order,
> you write the month as Roman numbers or the month name or abbreviation.
I agree with this, for multiiple reasons.
In any case, I meant 2008-07-02.
-Le Chaud Lapin-
seaweedsl
>
> Don't do that, you silly person. We have trouble enough with the
> braindead ``nuxi''-style US date format as is. According to ISO8601
> "2008-06-02" is 2nd June *only*. In fact, this sort of silly doubting is
> why that standard exists in the first place.
>
> Repeat after me: YYYY-MM-DD; fullyear dash month dash day and no other
> interpretations. If for whatever reason you have to fuck up the order,
> you write the month as Roman numbers or the month name or abbreviation.
>
> --
In the US it's definitely DD-MM-YYYY. I'm trying to get used to the
"braindead" (insult-speak for "not the way we do it"-eh?) method
they use in Mexico, um, MM-DD-YYYY I think.
But now I have to fill out all these US goverment forms right now,and
they are very strict about DD-MM-YYYY. They will reject the form if I
attempt to adhere to somebody else's standard.
Jeff Liebermann
<seawee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>In the US it's definitely DD-MM-YYYY. I'm trying to get used to the
>"braindead" (insult-speak for "not the way we do it"-eh?) method
>they use in Mexico, um, MM-DD-YYYY I think.
>
>But now I have to fill out all these US goverment forms right now,and
>they are very strict about DD-MM-YYYY. They will reject the form if I
>attempt to adhere to somebody else's standard.
Methinks you have it backwards. If you're running W2K or XP, go to:
Control Panel -> Regional Options -> Date.
For the USA, it's M/d/yyyy
Le Chaud Lapin
> >In the US it's definitely DD-MM-YYYY. I'm trying to get used to the
> >"braindead" (insult-speak for "not the way we do it"-eh?) method
> >they use in Mexico, um, MM-DD-YYYY I think.
>
> >But now I have to fill out all these US goverment forms right now,and
> >they are very strict about DD-MM-YYYY. They will reject the form if I
> >attempt to adhere to somebody else's standard.
>
> Methinks you have it backwards. If you're running W2K or XP, go to:
> Control Panel -> Regional Options -> Date.
> For the USA, it's M/d/yyyy
It can be changed of course. I have mine set as YYYY-MM-DD on Vista.
I was under the impression, as jpd noted, that the ISO standard format
is YYYY-MM-DD:
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/iso-time.html
Makes sense, as it eliminates ambiguity if one has to correspond
internationally.
I have been writing my dates on checks and other paper this way since
1993.
-Le Chaud Lapin-
Bill Kearney
"Le Chaud Lapin" <jaibu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0bac9444-84ba-42fd...@79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 4, 6:17 am, "Bill Kearney" <wkearne...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> TLDR
>
> Quit whinging about it and move on.
> No one asked your opinion.
Too fucking bad. You're a whiner, and a long-winded one at that. Give it a
rest.
Le Chaud Lapin
> "Le Chaud Lapin" <jaibudu...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:0bac9444-84ba-42fd...@79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 4, 6:17 am, "Bill Kearney" <wkearne...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > TLDR
>
> > Quit whinging about it and move on.
> > No one asked your opinion.
>
> Too fucking bad. You're a whiner, and a long-winded one at that. Give it a
> rest.
On Jul 5, 5:21 am, Mark McIntyre <markmcint...@TROUSERSspamcop.net>
wrote:
> And FYI, this is usenet, nor your private chatroom. You post a comment,
> people reply, thats how it works. Not all the replies will agree with
> you or be ones you like. If you don't like the replies, grow a thicker
> skin.
The beauty of this statement is that it is universally applicable.
-Le Chaud Lapin-
Rich Seifert
<4258cfd4-e251-40b9...@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
Le Chaud Lapin <jaibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
I usually write dates as:
DD MMM YYYY
where the day and year are numeric, and the month is in alpha; e.g.,
today is: 7 July 2008. This avoids all ambiguity, even the ambiguity as
to which standard one is using, since there can be no confusion as to
which two-digit number is the day, and which is the month.
--
Rich Seifert Networks and Communications Consulting
21885 Bear Creek Way
(408) 395-5700 Los Gatos, CA 95033
(408) 228-0803 FAX
Send replies to: usenet at richseifert dot com
Le Chaud Lapin
wrote:
> In article
> <4258cfd4-e251-40b9-94c3-4de511261...@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
This works well for English speakers, speakers of certain Romanized
languages from which "July" can be inferred, and poorly for everyone
else, which is several billion people. :)
We must not forget the significance of the "I" in "ISO".
-Le Chaud Lapin-
jpd
> wrote:
>> In article
>> <4258cfd4-e251-40b9-94c3-4de511261...@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
>> Le Chaud Lapin <jaibudu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I usually write dates as:
>>
>> DD MMM YYYY
>>
Which is entirely acceptable under ISO8601 and reasonable if your
audience can be expected to understand your names for the months.
> This works well for English speakers, speakers of certain Romanized
> languages from which "July" can be inferred, and poorly for everyone
> else, which is several billion people. :)
>
> We must not forget the significance of the "I" in "ISO".
You're assuming it is even desirable to strive for such ultimate
universality. You'll likely find that with corner cases far enough away
from the English speaking world the entire concept of an alphabet and
the western/`arabic' numerals is unknown. Then what do you do?
My original comment was mostly directed at introducing a YYYY-DD-MM
format, which AFAIK nobody except perhaps the one person upthread uses.
I see no sense in doing so except deliberately creating confusion with
the ISO8601 ``all-numeric'' YYYY-MM-DD format, which is otherwise
perfectly unambigious and distinct from the other two widely used
notations, at least for people who know about the Christian(!) date
system and can read western numbers.
seaweedsl
> On Sun, 6 Jul 2008 12:16:00 -0700 (PDT), seaweedsl
>
> >they are very strict about DD-MM-YYYY. They will reject the form if I
> >attempt to adhere to somebody else's standard.
>
> Methinks you have it backwards. If you're running W2K or XP, go to:
> Control Panel -> Regional Options -> Date.
> For the USA, it's M/d/yyyy
Once again, I failed to think before typing. Especially embarrassing
when one is being a bit persnickety about details !
MM-DD-YYYY or YY in US. DD-MM-YYYY in Mexico
International standard is a good idea, of course! I could unlearn
old habits, but switching back and forth is confusing.
I agree that writing the month out is safest for operating within this
hemisphere. And on some parts of the same Gov forms, they do that.
But always month first.
Le Chaud Lapin
> On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 09:00:43 -0700 (PDT),
> Le Chaud Lapin <jaibudu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 7, 10:44 am, Rich Seifert <use...@richseifert.com.invalid>
> > wrote:
> >> In article
> >> <4258cfd4-e251-40b9-94c3-4de511261...@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
> >> Le Chaud Lapin <jaibudu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> I usually write dates as:
>
> >> DD MMM YYYY
>
> >> where the day and year are numeric, and the month is in alpha; [...]
>
> Which is entirely acceptable under ISO8601 and reasonable if your
> audience can be expected to understand your names for the months.
>
> > This works well for English speakers, speakers of certain Romanized
> > languages from which "July" can be inferred, and poorly for everyone
> > else, which is several billion people. :)
>
> > We must not forget the significance of the "I" in "ISO".
>
> You're assuming it is even desirable to strive for such ultimate
> universality. You'll likely find that with corner cases far enough away
> from the English speaking world the entire concept of an alphabet and
> the western/`arabic' numerals is unknown. Then what do you do?
I think the question is one of context.
For some people, there is no problem with the "July" format because
their context is only for people for whom "July" makes sense. For
others, the context is universal to start with. Especially in
computation, the context is large. I noticed this once in lunch room
where seven languages (Mandarin, Urdu, French, German, English,
Spanish, Russian) were going at once.
On a related topic this past Saturday I was at a party where almost
all present were Brazilians. Whatever language was spoken, English/
Portuguese/Spanish, the method of delivery was altered to a form that
is more understandable (avoiding German adjectification, avoiding
slang, rearranging prepositions, etc.). In other words, everyone
there was aware of context. My portuguese is not good at all, and for
about 15 minutes, I struggled with a conversation until the guy
talking realized that I was not Brazilian. He continued in Portguese,
but switched to a mode that made it easier for me to keep up. One
might argue that his mode is more universal, and was desirable within
that context.
So I guess what I am saying is that it depends on the context of the
person asking the question.
There are probably people living in the country who who never saw the
need for area codes, and still don't.
-Le Chaud Lapin-
seaweedsl
>
> You're assuming it is even desirable to strive for such ultimate
> universality. You'll likely find that with corner cases far enough away
> from the English speaking world the entire concept of an alphabet and
> the western/`arabic' numerals is unknown. Then what do you do?
>
Yep. Agreed.
Returning to topic, I think the best way to publicly punish Zyxel for
their sins is to informatively and nicely (to avoid above insults and
digressions) state your findings, so that people believe and support
you. More support = more buzz.
That way the word gets around the web about them and their marketing
guys lose points (jobs) for cheating. Well, not for just cheating,
but for going so far as to get caught red-handed at it.
I do know what you mean about holding your own with the companies. I
get like that at times. It's not fun, but if nobody ever called them
on stuff, we'd really be screwed.
Steve
Jeff Liebermann
<seawee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>That way the word gets around the web about them and their marketing
>guys lose points (jobs) for cheating. Well, not for just cheating,
>but for going so far as to get caught red-handed at it.
Won't happen. Interestingly my favorite vendors tend to also be the
worst offenders. For example, the Buffalo web pile is a mess of
marketing baloney (i.e. MIMO-like performance), and unsubstantiated
performance claims (2x thru 12x). Linksys is a close second with the
added entertainment value of having them try to sell trash using the
same model numbers as previous successful products. Just how many
products need to have WRT54G in the name before the customers are
totally confused? Zyxel is one of my favorite router vendors with the
G-2000 Plus v2 having one of the few internal WPA/WPA2 RADIUS (PEAP)
servers. I'm not sure why better products equate to marketing hype,
but I'm prepared to tolerate the hype to get a superior product.
Bill Kearney
> The beauty of this statement is that it is universally applicable.
PLONK
Mark McIntyre
> In article
> <4258cfd4-e251-40b9...@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
> Le Chaud Lapin <jaibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> <seaweedst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> In the US it's definitely DD-MM-YYYY. I'm trying to get used to the
>>>> "braindead" (insult-speak for "not the way we do it"-eh?) method
>>>> they use in Mexico, um, MM-DD-YYYY I think.
>>>> But now I have to fill out all these US goverment forms right now,and
>>>> they are very strict about DD-MM-YYYY. They will reject the form if I
>>>> attempt to adhere to somebody else's standard.
>>> Methinks you have it backwards. If you're running W2K or XP, go to:
>>> Control Panel -> Regional Options -> Date.
>>> For the USA, it's M/d/yyyy
>> It can be changed of course. I have mine set as YYYY-MM-DD on Vista.
>>
>> I was under the impression, as jpd noted, that the ISO standard format
>> is YYYY-MM-DD:
>>
>> http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/iso-time.html
>>
>> Makes sense, as it eliminates ambiguity if one has to correspond
>> internationally.
>>
>> I have been writing my dates on checks and other paper this way since
>> 1993.
>>
>
> I usually write dates as:
>
> DD MMM YYYY
Small problem with
02 GEN 2008
03 FEV 2008
04 LUN 2008
06 GIU 2008
07 IUL 2008
08 AGO 2008
10 OTT 2008
to name but a few European variants!
The ISO standard is ccyy-mm-dd hh:mm:ss.nnn
Tim Smith
Mark McIntyre <markmc...@TROUSERSspamcop.net> wrote:
>
> The ISO standard is ccyy-mm-dd hh:mm:ss.nnn
This format has the advantage that you don't have to parse it to sort it
correctly. A plain old alphanumeric sort puts it in chronological order.
--
--Tim Smith
DanS
news:slrng74gtd.1eb...@mantell0.local:
> My original comment was mostly directed at introducing a YYYY-DD-MM
> format, which AFAIK nobody except perhaps the one person upthread uses.
Not true. As it says later in the thread about the context of the format...
I've used yyyy-mm-dd format in a lot of programming efforts.
The reason being, if you're only using a String datatype, that specific
date format is the only that sorts properly.
jpd
DanS <t.h.i.s....@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> wrote:
> jpd <read_t...@do.not.spam.it.invalid> wrote in
> news:slrng74gtd.1eb...@mantell0.local:
>
>> My original comment was mostly directed at introducing a YYYY-DD-MM
>> format, which AFAIK nobody except perhaps the one person upthread uses.
>
> Not true. As it says later in the thread about the context of the format...
>
> I've used yyyy-mm-dd format in a lot of programming efforts.
*cough* read again *cough*
> The reason being, if you're only using a String datatype, that specific
> date format is the only that sorts properly.
Glad you agree with my advocacy of the YYYY-MM-DD format. :-)
^^^^^
DanS
news:slrng76bv5.1h2...@mantell0.local:
> On Tue, 8 Jul 2008 02:59:10 +0000 (UTC),
> DanS <t.h.i.s....@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> wrote:
>> jpd <read_t...@do.not.spam.it.invalid> wrote in
>> news:slrng74gtd.1eb...@mantell0.local:
>>
>>> My original comment was mostly directed at introducing a YYYY-DD-MM
> ^^^^^
>>> format, which AFAIK nobody except perhaps the one person upthread
>>> uses.
>>
>> Not true. As it says later in the thread about the context of the
>> format...
>>
>> I've used yyyy-mm-dd format in a lot of programming efforts.
> ^^^^^
>
> *cough* read again *cough*
>
>
>> The reason being, if you're only using a String datatype, that
>> specific date format is the only that sorts properly.
>
> Glad you agree with my advocacy of the YYYY-MM-DD format. :-)
I'd look back at the post I replied to, but I deleted the orig. post by
accident.
Maybe it was late.
Le Chaud Lapin
> Returning to topic, I think the best way to publicly punish Zyxel for
> their sins is to informatively and nicely (to avoid above insults and
> digressions) state your findings, so that people believe and support
> you. More support = more buzz.
>
> That way the word gets around the web about them and their marketing
> guys lose points (jobs) for cheating. Well, not for just cheating,
> but for going so far as to get caught red-handed at it.
>
> I do know what you mean about holding your own with the companies. I
> get like that at times. It's not fun, but if nobody ever called them
> on stuff, we'd really be screwed.
Update:
I called the (large) Internet vendor that sold me AG-225H to determine
whether the vendor actually thought that the product was Vista
compatible, and the vendor said essentially that
"..our information comes from a third-party reviewer of many products,
including the AG-225H, and if there is a mistake, it will be corrected
shortly..."
Shortly was very short. I accidentally hit the refresh button on my
browser about 7 minutes later, and saw that "Microsoft Windows Vista"
had already removed from main product page for the AG-225H on the
vendor's web site. It now only reads "Windows 2000/XP..." as it
should. The person I spoke to was the director of E-commerce, so the
responsiveness and attentiveness to customer concern was impressive.
Zyxel, however, has yet to qualify their "Microsoft Vista Support Out
Of The Box" statement to say that the Access Point feature will not
work on Vista, and it's been almost a week:
-Le Chaud Lapin-
Rich Seifert
Mark McIntyre <markmc...@TROUSERSspamcop.net> wrote:
> Rich Seifert wrote:
> > I usually write dates as:
> >
> > DD MMM YYYY
>
> Small problem with
>
> 02 GEN 2008
> 03 FEV 2008
> 04 LUN 2008
> 06 GIU 2008
> 07 IUL 2008
> 08 AGO 2008
> 10 OTT 2008
>
I don't see the problem. Those dates are clear to me, with no ambiguity
regarding month-numbers vs. day-numbers.
Jeff Liebermann
<use...@richseifert.com.invalid> wrote:
>In article <Auvck.232089$Gv.2...@en-nntp-07.dc1.easynews.com>,
> Mark McIntyre <markmc...@TROUSERSspamcop.net> wrote:
>
>> Rich Seifert wrote:
>> > I usually write dates as:
>> >
>> > DD MMM YYYY
>>
>> Small problem with
>>
>> 02 GEN 2008
>> 03 FEV 2008
>> 04 LUN 2008
>> 06 GIU 2008
>> 07 IUL 2008
>> 08 AGO 2008
>> 10 OTT 2008
>>
>
>I don't see the problem. Those dates are clear to me, with no ambiguity
>regarding month-numbers vs. day-numbers.
I beg to differ. I see a problem.
It violates the 11th commandement of "Thou shalt not abrev."
Personally, I think that the ISO missed the boat with the whole
localization mess. The very concept of months is silly. Nothing
happens at the end or the month exept that my log files are restarted.
It would be better to do it like some corporations, which have 13ea
equal length 28 day months every year. However, even that's a kludge
because it retains the concept of months. Better to go to a Julian
calendar, and do it all in decimal. See:
<http://aa.usno.navy.mil/data/docs/JulianDate.php>
It's now 7:37 GMT. At the tone, universal conglomerated decimal
politically correct time will be: 2454655.81736 (beep).
Incidentally, the real problem(tm) is that we can't seem to decide
what direction things should be read. Logically, numbers should start
with the LSB and progress to the MSB. This way, the position of the
LSB is always fixed and the magnitude can easily grow without
shifting. For example, we add a column of numbers from right to left,
but we prounounce the result from left to right. Unfortunately, the
ISO would probably fix the problem by making all numbers run
vertically, so please don't mention it to them.
Gordon Burditt
>localization mess. The very concept of months is silly. Nothing
Unfortunately, there are very few calendars without them, so be
prepared to have to deal with them on input and output, even if
you store dates in some special internal format.
>happens at the end or the month exept that my log files are restarted.
>It would be better to do it like some corporations, which have 13ea
>equal length 28 day months every year. However, even that's a kludge
>because it retains the concept of months. Better to go to a Julian
>calendar, and do it all in decimal. See:
><http://aa.usno.navy.mil/data/docs/JulianDate.php>
>
>It's now 7:37 GMT. At the tone, universal conglomerated decimal
>politically correct time will be: 2454655.81736 (beep).
>Incidentally, the real problem(tm) is that we can't seem to decide
>what direction things should be read. Logically, numbers should start
>with the LSB and progress to the MSB. This way, the position of the
>LSB is always fixed and the magnitude can easily grow without
>shifting.
I'll disagree. Punched cards went out a long time ago. And if you
make something longer, the position of what follows changes.
>For example, we add a column of numbers from right to left,
>but we prounounce the result from left to right. Unfortunately, the
We don't generally ADD two dates. However, we do *sort* them, and
sorting dates in the YYYY-MM-DD format is the same as sorting text,
at least until the Y10K or Y1K problems loom.
Jeff Liebermann
Burditt) wrote:
>>Personally, I think that the ISO missed the boat with the whole
>>localization mess. The very concept of months is silly. Nothing
>
>Unfortunately, there are very few calendars without them, so be
>prepared to have to deal with them on input and output, even if
>you store dates in some special internal format.
You wouldn't need a printed wall calendar with a Julian calendar.
Everything would be sequential and continuous, starting at Jan 1. I
suppose that if we retained the days of the week, some kind of lookup
table might be required for those that can't divice by seven. However,
you do have a point. Most of my wall calendars are pornographic and
I'll really miss them.
>>Incidentally, the real problem(tm) is that we can't seem to decide
>>what direction things should be read. Logically, numbers should start
>>with the LSB and progress to the MSB. This way, the position of the
>>LSB is always fixed and the magnitude can easily grow without
>>shifting.
>I'll disagree. Punched cards went out a long time ago.
Not so. The current manifestation of punched cards are smart cards.
They may not have the look and feel of a genuine Hollerith card, but
they perform largely the same function, the storage of information.
>and if you
>make something longer, the position of what follows changes.
Sure. If you increase the length of any number, something will need
to move. I just think it's easier doing it from right to left.
>We don't generally ADD two dates.
If you don't, you might have some difficulties paying your bills.
Quiz:
Today is July 8. Your credit card bill is due in 30 days.
On what date do you panic?
With the present system, you have to remember how many days in the
month of July, subtract todays date from the number of days, and
subtract that from 30 days to get the date in the next month. With
the Julian calendar, you only need to add 30 to todays Julian date.
Perhaps the reason you don't generally add two dates is because it's
currently difficult?
>However, we do *sort* them, and
>sorting dates in the YYYY-MM-DD format is the same as sorting text,
>at least until the Y10K or Y1K problems loom.
Sorta. The problem is again in formatting. I keep getting into
situations where someone fails to include the leading zero before the
first 9 days. So, I get string sorts that result in:
Jan 1
Jan 10
Jan 11
(...)
Jan 19
Jan 2
Jan 20
Jan 21
(...)
Jan 29
Jan 3
Jan 30
(etc...)
By having all the place holders filled, Julian dates don't have sort
problems.
>>ISO would probably fix the problem by making all numbers run
>>vertically, so please don't mention it to them.
Shhhhh....
--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558 je...@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
# http://802.11junk.com je...@cruzio.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS
Gordon Burditt
>>>localization mess. The very concept of months is silly. Nothing
>>
>>Unfortunately, there are very few calendars without them, so be
>>prepared to have to deal with them on input and output, even if
>>you store dates in some special internal format.
>
>You wouldn't need a printed wall calendar with a Julian calendar.
Yes, you would. You still need it to mark dental appointments,
holidays, and your wife's birthday. Some people actually care about
the phase of the moon.
>Everything would be sequential and continuous, starting at Jan 1. I
Didn't you forget the year?
>suppose that if we retained the days of the week, some kind of lookup
>table might be required for those that can't divice by seven. However,
Figuring days of the week is a lot more complicated than dividing
the current julian day by seven. Part of the problem is that 365 1/4
is not evenly divisible by 7. Wierd leap year rules also would not
go away just because of Julian dates.
>you do have a point. Most of my wall calendars are pornographic and
>I'll really miss them.
>>>Incidentally, the real problem(tm) is that we can't seem to decide
>>>what direction things should be read. Logically, numbers should start
>>>with the LSB and progress to the MSB. This way, the position of the
>>>LSB is always fixed and the magnitude can easily grow without
>>>shifting.
>
>>I'll disagree. Punched cards went out a long time ago.
>
>Not so. The current manifestation of punched cards are smart cards.
>They may not have the look and feel of a genuine Hollerith card, but
>they perform largely the same function, the storage of information.
Do they store information in fixed fields in multibyte binary?
From my observation of decoding swiped credit card info, the answer
is NO. If you store the customer's birth date, card issue date, and
card expiration date, you can store them on a single line as:
1950-06-07;2006-03-31;2009-03-30
and in case this system lasts long enough for Y1000K to be a problem,
you just make the line longer. As long as there's enough memory to
hold the result, there's no problem.
>>and if you
>>make something longer, the position of what follows changes.
>
>Sure. If you increase the length of any number, something will need
>to move. I just think it's easier doing it from right to left.
Why? Abandon fixed fields; we have more than enough memory and
CPU processing power to deal with it.
I'd prefer that if something has the correct idea of where a
particular field IS, but a wrong idea of how long it is (perhpas
because it's not Y10K compliant), that it should fail catastrophically
NOW, rather than occasionally fail a long time from now after a
million devices are already in customer's hands.
>>We don't generally ADD two dates.
>
>If you don't, you might have some difficulties paying your bills.
Really? What's the sum of YOUR birth date and your mother's birth date?
And how is the result meaningful?
>Quiz:
> Today is July 8. Your credit card bill is due in 30 days.
> On what date do you panic?
What kind of date is "30 days"? That's an interval of time, not a date.
>With the present system, you have to remember how many days in the
>month of July, subtract todays date from the number of days, and
>subtract that from 30 days to get the date in the next month. With
>the Julian calendar, you only need to add 30 to todays Julian date.
Didn't you forget about years? 30 days from NOW is a bit more
complicated than that when NOW is mid-December.
>Perhaps the reason you don't generally add two dates is because it's
>currently difficult?
No, it's because it isn't even defined, and the result is not useful.
Adding a date and a time interval is done all the time.
>>However, we do *sort* them, and
>>sorting dates in the YYYY-MM-DD format is the same as sorting text,
>>at least until the Y10K or Y1K problems loom.
>
>Sorta. The problem is again in formatting.
ISO specified the format: YYYY-MM-DD. That includes year first,
no alphabetics, and leading zeroes as necessary. Most formats
do not work for that. ISO's format does.
>I keep getting into
>situations where someone fails to include the leading zero before the
>first 9 days. So, I get string sorts that result in:
> Jan 1
> Jan 10
> Jan 11
> (...)
> Jan 19
> Jan 2
> Jan 20
> Jan 21
> (...)
> Jan 29
> Jan 3
> Jan 30
> (etc...)
>By having all the place holders filled, Julian dates don't have sort
>problems.
Yes, they have the same problems with leading zeroes as days of the
month: you just change "Jan" to "Julian" or whatever. And you forgot
the years again.
Le Chaud Lapin
> Update:
>
> I called the (large) Internet vendor that sold me AG-225H to determine
> whether the vendor actually thought that the product was Vista
> compatible, and the vendor said essentially that
>
> "..our information comes from a third-party reviewer of many products,
> including the AG-225H, and if there is a mistake, it will be corrected
> shortly..."
>
> Shortly was very short. I accidentally hit the refresh button on my
> browser about 7 minutes later, and saw that "Microsoft Windows Vista"
> had already removed from main product page for the AG-225H on the
> vendor's web site. It now only reads "Windows 2000/XP..." as it
> should. The person I spoke to was the director of E-commerce, so the
> responsiveness and attentiveness to customer concern was impressive.
>
> Zyxel, however, has yet to qualify their "Microsoft Vista Support Out
> Of The Box" statement to say that the Access Point feature will not
> work on Vista, and it's been almost a week:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/6zr6zn
Update:
As of 2008-07-09, Zyxel has mofidied their main product description
page for their AG-225H to eliminate any ambiguity about whether the
Acces Point feature of the product will run on Windows Vista.
The product description page now reads:
"And the available software AP* can share your Internet connection in
a local area with friends and colleagues. "
Note the asterisk after "AP".
At the bottom of the same page is an appropriate disclaimer:
"Note: * The Software AP function is available for computers running
Windows 2000, XP Operating system only."
This new disclaimer makes it clear to anyone reading the product
description page that AG-225H does not, at present, allow the Access
Point feature to run on Windows Vista.
Thanks, Zyxel, and thanks to all that participated in this discussion.
As for the AG-225 that I bought, I think I will keep it as a
souvenir. ;)
Reference: http://tinyurl.com/6zr6zn
-Le Chaud Lapin-