Re: Zyxel - False Advertising! - Beware of this Company!
On Jul 7, 6:54*am, "Bill Kearney" <wkearne...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Le Chaud Lapin" <jaibudu...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:0bac9444-84ba-42fd-9891-52feff8feb0a@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.
Re: Zyxel - False Advertising! - Beware of this Company!
In article
<4258cfd4-e251-40b9-94c3-4de5112615ab@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
Le Chaud Lapin <jaibuduvin@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
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
Re: Zyxel - False Advertising! - Beware of this Company!
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:
> > > <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
>
> 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.
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".
Re: Zyxel - False Advertising! - Beware of this Company!
On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 09:00:43 -0700 (PDT),
Le Chaud Lapin <jaibuduvin@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?
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.
--
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.
Re: Zyxel - False Advertising! - Beware of this Company!
On Jul 6, 6:30*pm, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Jul 2008 12:16:00 -0700 (PDT), seaweedsl
>
> >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
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.
Re: Zyxel - False Advertising! - Beware of this Company!
On Jul 7, 11:26*am, jpd <read_the_...@do.not.spam.it.invalid> wrote:
> 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.
Re: Zyxel - False Advertising! - Beware of this Company!
On Jul 7, 11:26*am, jpd <read_the_...@do.not.spam.it.invalid> wrote:
>
> 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.
>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.
Re: Zyxel - False Advertising! - Beware of this Company!
Rich Seifert wrote:
> In article
> <4258cfd4-e251-40b9-94c3-4de5112615ab@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
> Le Chaud Lapin <jaibuduvin@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
Re: Zyxel - False Advertising! - Beware of this Company!
In article <Auvck.232089$Gv.207570@en-nntp-07.dc1.easynews.com>,
Mark McIntyre <markmcintyre@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.
Re: Zyxel - False Advertising! - Beware of this Company!
On Tue, 8 Jul 2008 02:59:10 +0000 (UTC),
DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> wrote:
> jpd <read_the_sig@do.not.spam.it.invalid> wrote in
> news:slrng74gtd.1eb7.read_the_sig@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. :-)
^^^^^
--
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.
Re: Zyxel - False Advertising! - Beware of this Company!
jpd <read_the_sig@do.not.spam.it.invalid> wrote in
news:slrng76bv5.1h2c.read_the_sig@mantell0.local:
> On Tue, 8 Jul 2008 02:59:10 +0000 (UTC),
> DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> wrote:
>> jpd <read_the_sig@do.not.spam.it.invalid> wrote in
>> news:slrng74gtd.1eb7.read_the_sig@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.
Re: Zyxel - False Advertising! - Beware of this Company!
On Jul 7, 12:20*pm, seaweedsl <seaweedst...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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:
>In article <Auvck.232089$Gv.207570@en-nntp-07.dc1.easynews.com>,
> Mark McIntyre <markmcintyre@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.
Re: Zyxel - False Advertising! - Beware of this Company!
>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.
>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.
>ISO would probably fix the problem by making all numbers run
>vertically, so please don't mention it to them.
>>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.
Re: Zyxel - False Advertising! - Beware of this Company!
>>>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.
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.
Re: Zyxel - False Advertising! - Beware of this Company!
On Jul 8, 11:20*am, Le Chaud Lapin <jaibudu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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. ;)
Re: Zyxel - False Advertising! - Beware of this Company! 
Linear Mode
