It's the other way around. Thousands of smaller software companies try to use the courts to compensate for their own inability to compete, by accusing Microsoft of various misdeeds on a regular basis.
So would every other software company.
You are too full of yourself to get my drift.
I got your drift just fine. Now lets see if you got mine.
So, two sides of the coin... then, there be the THIRD side of the coin.
Why do you have a clock on your computer? Can't afford a watch or a desk clock or a wall clock?
The answer is that a clock on the computer is useful to record creation/change time on files.
It doesn't really matter if the file was modified at 6:00.00 000000 or 6:00.00 000035
What matters is if one file was created before another. You're compiling, but the source hasn't changed, or has; the params file has been changed since X,Y, or Z... that kind of thing.
On a computer, Approximate Time is almost always all that's really needed; a clock that ***always runs forward***, and keeps time within a few minutes a day.
Even if Perry Mason drags you into the witness stand and confronts you with file dates and times, approximate is probably good enough to acquit you or convict you. If in the rare case it's not, bring in your expert to explain that computer clocks are often not accurate.
Wood
"Woody Brison" bravely wrote to "All" (15 Nov 05 09:51:18) --- on the heady topic of "Re: Why aren't computer clocks as accurate as cheap quartz watches?"
WB> From: "Woody Brison" WB> Xref: core-easynews sci.electronics.basics:146967 WB> sci.electronics.repair:348689 alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:352599
WB> After reading much of this thread, and a lot of it has been WB> quite insightful... I'd like to add 2 more cents.
WB> w_tom wrote: > There are two ways to do as suggested. The first is to make > 'Benjamins' part of the technical facts during design.... >... the technical reason for high verses low accuracy > timers was provided. Computer motherboards don't have the > trimming capacitor and the oscillator is subject to wider > voltage variations. Why this technical decision was made was > not asked and would only be speculation.
WB> So, two sides of the coin... then, there be the THIRD side of the WB> coin. WB> Why do you have a clock on your computer? Can't afford a watch WB> or a desk clock or a wall clock?
WB> The answer is that a clock on the computer is useful to record WB> creation/change time on files.
WB> It doesn't really matter if the file was modified at 6:00.00 000000 WB> or 6:00.00 000035
WB> What matters is if one file was created before another. You're WB> compiling, but the source hasn't changed, or has; the params file WB> has been changed since X,Y, or Z... that kind of thing.
WB> On a computer, Approximate Time is almost always all that's really WB> needed; a clock that ***always runs forward***, and keeps time within WB> a few minutes a day.
WB> Even if Perry Mason drags you into the witness stand and confronts WB> you with file dates and times, approximate is probably good enough WB> to acquit you or convict you. If in the rare case it's not, bring in WB> your WB> expert to explain that computer clocks are often not accurate.
WB> Wood
Not only that but people sometimes purposely change the date and time on their system. For example in order to run programs that can't work past a certain date like 1999 or for some other reason. I still recall the PC and XT would accept [Enter] to the date and time question so that files would end up dated 1980... etc.
A*s*i*m*o*v
... Old pinballers never die, they just flip out.
Or keep your clock set to 1935 and even Perry Mason won't know when they were actually made.
That is true if all activity is confined to a single computer. When multiple computers are involved, however, they must be synchronized. And if the computers interact with other computers outside local control (as by communication over the Internet), then they must not only be synchronized, but they must be synchronized to a universal standard, such as UTC.
This is why clock accuracy is important.
In the old days when every PC was completely isolated, time hardly mattered at all, and often people would use PCs without bothering to ever set the correct date or time. Nowadays, almost all PCs have to be at least approximately synchronized to the correct time of day, and often very precise synchronization is required.
Except for spammers that routinely post years, even decades, into the past.
What's the advantage of doing so? And why can't servers simply reject anything that is obviously far in the past?
OK, thanks, but why is it so important? A message is received on one computer at a certain time per that computer's clock. It was sent from another computer at some time, recorded in the message, per that computer's clock. Are we going to calculate transit time or something? Check to make sure it didn't arrive before it was sent?
Sometimes you have to be able to correlate or synchronize events over long distances with great accuracy (fractions of a second).
Yes.
Yes.
There are many applications for accurate time. In fact, the more accurate time one can obtain, the more useful applications become practical and available.
Hell if I know but I just got one dated 1969.
That's usually because the date header was missing completely, and some system along the way assigned a header of Jan 1 1970 -0000, then corrected for timezone shift.
In almost any instance where a high degree of precision and synchronization is needed, the computer will be running a version of NTP software which can provide precision time from even very poor CPU timebases.
"Ordinary" computers don't need that degree of precision, and a once-or-twice a day comparison to an NTP server somewhere on the 'net is all that's required.
Isaac
Possible. But that doesn't explain the ones dated 2001.
My theory: A lot of spam is sent by computers that have been taken over by spam sending viruses. Computer owners who aren't bright enough to set the time right are also not bright enough to install anti-virus software or take other precautions to prevent their computers from being turned into spam slaves, ergo lots of bad times on spam :-).
P.S.
Recent versions of Windows already include an NTP client.
Yea, but as with almost all attempts Microsoft makes to interoperate with networking standards, their client is badly broken (you can probably find all the rants starting from
--
email: snipped-for-privacy@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL | Free Software and Politics
Highly unlikely, especially after you trace it.
A more likely theory is there are plenty of stupid spammers.
It works perfectly on my system.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required