In message , at 11:12:16 on Sat, 2 Jan
2016, Richard J. remarked:
The free travel thing points even more to a Y2K style problem, if the
charging system wasn't active yesterday. In the Nottingham case it
wasn't spotted until the 2nd because no buses ran on the 1st.

ps I note some NatWest debit cards had outages on the 1st: another Y2K
problem perhaps.

For decades, computer systems have exhibited faults after a holiday
period, caused often by problems in restarting hardware or software
after a holiday outage or reverting to normal operation after
non-standard holiday operation, or caused by changes to the system that
were applied during the holiday. Why are you assuming that this
particular instance was in any way similar to Y2K?

Firstly, because a very similar incident *was* tracked down to that
cause, and secondly the other routine issues you mention ought to be
well understood and planned for during a holiday period.

Plus the fact they are having to talk to their suppliers to work out a
fix, rather than applying a clue-bat to the sysadmin-du-jour.
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 11:12:16 on Sat, 2 Jan
2016, Richard J. remarked:
The free travel thing points even more to a Y2K style problem, if the
charging system wasn't active yesterday. In the Nottingham case it
wasn't spotted until the 2nd because no buses ran on the 1st.

ps I note some NatWest debit cards had outages on the 1st: another Y2K
problem perhaps.

For decades, computer systems have exhibited faults after a holiday
period, caused often by problems in restarting hardware or software after
a holiday outage or reverting to normal operation after non-standard
holiday operation, or caused by changes to the system that were applied
during the holiday. Why are you assuming that this particular instance
was in any way similar to Y2K?

Firstly, because a very similar incident *was* tracked down to that cause,
and secondly the other routine issues you mention ought to be well
understood and planned for during a holiday period.

Plus the fact they are having to talk to their suppliers to work out a
fix, rather than applying a clue-bat to the sysadmin-du-jour.

ISTR that the "contracted out" admin and the suppliers are the same people

tim

In message , at 12:33:58 on Sat, 2 Jan 2016,
tim..... remarked:

Plus the fact they are having to talk to their suppliers to work out
a fix, rather than applying a clue-bat to the sysadmin-du-jour.

ISTR that the "contracted out" admin and the suppliers are the same people

The admin are son-of-EDS and the suppliers Cubic, I thought.
--
Roland Perry

On Sat, 2 Jan 2016 12:50:45 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 12:33:58 on Sat, 2 Jan 2016,
tim..... remarked:

Plus the fact they are having to talk to their suppliers to work out
a fix, rather than applying a clue-bat to the sysadmin-du-jour.

ISTR that the "contracted out" admin and the suppliers are the same people

The admin are son-of-EDS and the suppliers Cubic, I thought.

Probably with half the development and support staff based in Bombangaloristan
to save a few quid. You pays your money....

--
Spud

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 12:33:58 on Sat, 2 Jan 2016,
tim..... remarked:

Plus the fact they are having to talk to their suppliers to work out a
fix, rather than applying a clue-bat to the sysadmin-du-jour.

ISTR that the "contracted out" admin and the suppliers are the same people

The admin are son-of-EDS

Oh, who are "son of EDS" (I need to keep track of them as they own me a
pension from 4 mergers ago)

tim

In message , at 14:06:54 on Sat, 2 Jan 2016,
tim..... remarked:

The admin are son-of-EDS

Oh, who are "son of EDS" (I need to keep track of them as they own me a
pension from 4 mergers ago)

HP Enterprise Services. In Plano, Texas [1], which gives another clue to
its parentage.

[1] Also home of the Ewings. I've been to the ranch, that's the real one
not the film-set in California.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote on 02 Jan 2016 at 11:32 ...
In message , at 11:12:16 on Sat, 2 Jan
2016, Richard J. remarked:
The free travel thing points even more to a Y2K style problem, if the
charging system wasn't active yesterday. In the Nottingham case it
wasn't spotted until the 2nd because no buses ran on the 1st.

ps I note some NatWest debit cards had outages on the 1st: another Y2K
problem perhaps.

For decades, computer systems have exhibited faults after a holiday
period, caused often by problems in restarting hardware or software
after a holiday outage or reverting to normal operation after
non-standard holiday operation, or caused by changes to the system that
were applied during the holiday. Why are you assuming that this
particular instance was in any way similar to Y2K?

Firstly, because a very similar incident *was* tracked down to that
cause,

You mean there was a very similar incident 16 years ago? But what is
special about 1/1/2016 compared to 1/1/2015, 1/1/2014, etc?

and secondly the other routine issues you mention ought to be
well understood and planned for during a holiday period.

In theory, yes, but in practice there is always a greater risk of a
problem following a period of non-standard operations. This is
especially so if you're doing a major update of fare tables across the
network, which might be "routine" in the sense that you do it every
year, but is still a more obvious likely cause than some previously
unknown fundamental problem connected with 1/1/2016.

Plus the fact they are having to talk to their suppliers to work out a
fix, rather than applying a clue-bat to the sysadmin-du-jour.

Quite normal if there's a major system outage. It doesn't tell you
anything about the cause.
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

In message , at 16:58:52 on Sat, 2 Jan
2016, Richard J. remarked:
Why are you assuming that this
particular instance was in any way similar to Y2K?

Firstly, because a very similar incident *was* tracked down to that
cause,

You mean there was a very similar incident 16 years ago?

The Nottingham City Transport smartcard issue in around 2006.

But what is special about 1/1/2016 compared to 1/1/2015, 1/1/2014, etc?

Or 1/1/2006 compared to 1/1/2000. There's something about the range of
years for which 1/1/xxxx is recognised, which transcends xxxx=2000.
--
Roland Perry

In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message , at 16:58:52 on Sat, 2
Jan 2016, Richard J. remarked:
Why are you assuming that this
particular instance was in any way similar to Y2K?

Firstly, because a very similar incident *was* tracked down to that
cause,

You mean there was a very similar incident 16 years ago?

The Nottingham City Transport smartcard issue in around 2006.

But what is special about 1/1/2016 compared to 1/1/2015, 1/1/2014, etc?

Or 1/1/2006 compared to 1/1/2000. There's something about the range
of years for which 1/1/xxxx is recognised, which transcends xxxx=2000.

That's not the millennium bug then. It was about years being held in 2
digits so not able to handle properly to rollover of the century.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In message , at 18:47:45
on Sat, 2 Jan 2016, remarked:
Why are you assuming that this
particular instance was in any way similar to Y2K?

Firstly, because a very similar incident *was* tracked down to that
cause,

You mean there was a very similar incident 16 years ago?

The Nottingham City Transport smartcard issue in around 2006.

But what is special about 1/1/2016 compared to 1/1/2015, 1/1/2014, etc?

Or 1/1/2006 compared to 1/1/2000. There's something about the range
of years for which 1/1/xxxx is recognised, which transcends xxxx=2000.

That's not the millennium bug then. It was about years being held in 2
digits so not able to handle properly to rollover of the century.

It's the same class of problem, which is why I put the "Y2K" in quotes.
--
Roland Perry