03 Mar, 2007, Guest wrote in the 1st comment:
Votes: 0
Ok. The timezone code in QSFP is currently very bulky and unwieldy to maintain. While working on updates for 1.3.5 I realized I needed to update all those binaries in the timezone directory due to US, Canada, and other locations, making changes to their DST rules. A nightmare.

Further, this data does not currently work at all on 64 bit systems and nobody knows how to fix it. Which results in whacked dates showing up. Like today being May 5, 1955 or something equally ridiculous in 2075. Reminds me of Back to the Future. This isn't a problem here on MudBytes - yet.

And lets not forget, all of this information needs to be kept in the database and updated regularly. Which means adding to it. Changing names when the world decides a name should change. Updating DST rules as laws change.

Further, the php date() function is capable of determining if a given timestamp value is within DST, but this is only accurate to the 24 general GMT timezones. It won't be aware of exceptions like Arizona, the many silly counties in Indiana who can't make up their minds, along with other locations around the world who might ignore the changes. But it would never be more than one hour wrong in those cases. This is the system most other packages seem to be using.

So. Where do you stand? Me, I'm opting for #2 since php is capable of providing enough accuracy to satisfy me right now.

I posted the same poll on qsfportal.com but I'm expecting responses there to be more developer oriented and figured this would be a good spot to get user oriented responses.
03 Mar, 2007, Justice wrote in the 2nd comment:
Votes: 0
I'd use the php date function. Without more accurate location information you can't support the little stuff anyway. If they have a problem with the dates, it's a couple clicks to change their time zone to one that is appropriate.
04 Mar, 2007, Conner wrote in the 3rd comment:
Votes: 0
I'd be okay with just having the general time zones accurate, the folks who live in places that are the exceptions should be well used to being the exception by now.
04 Mar, 2007, Brinson wrote in the 4th comment:
Votes: 0
As long as time is relative to itself it should be fine.

As in the "Today" and "Yesterday" things on posts are all I care about, as I tend to hit posts near when they're posted. :D

Beyond that, I don't care about the hour, the date should suffice perfectly. Who thinks, "OMG! What time is it! I'll forego the desktop clock and open my browser to www.mudbytes.net, create a post and check the time!"

;)

Its not a big deal to me. They all sound cool. :D
04 Mar, 2007, Conner wrote in the 5th comment:
Votes: 0
Brinson said:
Who thinks, "OMG! What time is it! I'll forego the desktop clock and open my browser to www.mudbytes.net, create a post and check the time!"


While the seriousness of the question is a real issue that does impact far more than just mudbytes.. that really is pretty funny, Brinson. :lol:
05 Mar, 2007, Scandum wrote in the 6th comment:
Votes: 0
The problem is that the USA decided to single handedly change the starting date of the daylight saving time while the rest of the world still uses the old time. It's going to end up costing more money than the fools in charge were trying to save.
05 Mar, 2007, Guest wrote in the 7th comment:
Votes: 0
The fools in charge were fools to ever think DST was going to save money on anything. It's a ritual we never needed, don't need now, and never will need. We should all just put an end to it. But until that happens we're all stuck with trying to deal with it.

And FYI, it isn't just the US making the change. We may have led the charge, but as I was reading up on it it seems Canada is following suit, along with several European and Asian nations. Probably in some vain effort to stay in sync with us :P
05 Mar, 2007, Fizban wrote in the 8th comment:
Votes: 0
I still say DST can just go hang itself….It had no use even when we were all farmers who needed more time to cultivate our crops. Back then it may have been conveniant but I doubt it as it never really increased the amount of daylight per day, it just made the "normal" hours that people are generally awake have more daylight without adjusting the times of day in wehich they wake up (well they did adjust, the clock just changed with their adjustments to create the illusion of no effect). But today it's a moot point, it has no use, we're not farmers, most people in the US, and other civilized nations, spend far more time typing on a keyboard than they will ever spend working in a field. If anything it is a hassle and causes depression (It has been proven that the suns rays help fight depression, and DST causes there to be even less sunlight in the Winter than there would naturally be, which was already far less than what there is in the Summer). In fact…this makes me wonder…why is so much of the American population (and perhaps the population of other countries as well) drugged up on anti-depressants.
05 Mar, 2007, Guest wrote in the 9th comment:
Votes: 0
Actually, as it turns out, farmers may not like DST at all:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daylight_sa...

Quote
Farmers and others whose hours are set by the sun are adversely affected by DST. For example, farmers may miss non-work evening activities due to scheduling conflicts. Many people alter their nominal work schedules (in effect ignoring DST) to coordinate with daylight, TV broadcasts, or remote colleagues.


And it's apparently not legally required:
Quote
On March 19, 1918, the U.S. Congress formally established several time zones, which had been in use by railroads and most cities since 1883; at the same time it established DST from the last Sunday in March to the last Sunday in October. The law, however, proved so unpopular, mostly because it obliged people to rise and go to bed earlier than had become customary since the advent of electricity, that it was repealed after 1919, when Congress overrode President Woodrow Wilson's veto of the repeal.


I mean, hell, if they repealed it in 1919, why did anyone bother to implement it at all? My feeling is this. Do the change one last time. Set DST, and then leave the blasted clocks alone. Nobody I know gives a crap anymore.
05 Mar, 2007, Justice wrote in the 10th comment:
Votes: 0
I have to admit… daylight savings time means that I have to adjust my watch twice a year, but that's it. Normally I only notice because it doesn't match my computer or cell phone.
05 Mar, 2007, Darmond wrote in the 11th comment:
Votes: 0
we have to change our clocks ??? wow

ok seriously though I agree it is a compleate pain in the ass never was fond of daylight saveings time and I live in canada where we dont have extra time zones even… what I often wonder is why the heck dont A we all run on military time *ya its hard hell even I dont know it well* and B why we dont just eliminate timezones altogether and have one time for the whole world might take some getting ust to people outside playing at midnight here but realy is it going to destroy the world for us to not have to count how many hours diferance there are between people *sighs* o well probobly will never change
05 Mar, 2007, Fizban wrote in the 12th comment:
Votes: 0
Timezones are necessary because of terms like midnight and noon, how much sense would it make for noon to have been taught that noon is the sun's zenith for centuries (excluding those oddball places like the North and South poles that have 6 month periods of light and dark.). Also it wouldn't make much sense to have a time of day that has always been termed midnight to be in the middle of the day. Also as to changing to military time…okay it's really no better or worse than having AM and PM, and I see no point to change to it as it would simply confuse people who are incapable of simple math. Even though I believe it confuses people I don't see it as a hard concept to understand, it's only confusing because people aren't used to thinking of a clock as having 24 hours. The one problem I see with military time is how do you set up an analog clock to run on military time, as far as i know no such thing has ever existed, unless 12 would be where the 6 normally is and the 23 where the 11 is.
05 Mar, 2007, Scandum wrote in the 13th comment:
Votes: 0
Samson said:
And FYI, it isn't just the US making the change. We may have led the charge, but as I was reading up on it it seems Canada is following suit, along with several European and Asian nations. Probably in some vain effort to stay in sync with us :P

Just Canada, even Mexico isn't bothering. Europe and Asia have better things to do and react with as much apathy as when Bush decided to invade Iraq.
06 Mar, 2007, Justice wrote in the 14th comment:
Votes: 0
Military time isn't that hard, and the 24 clock is actually used in many countries. For those who don't know it, the idea is simple.

To convert to the 24 hour clock… and the hour is PM, add 12 hours. To go to PM, if the hour > 12, subtract 12. Leaves a little wierdness around midnight (which is most often 0000)
06 Mar, 2007, Guest wrote in the 15th comment:
Votes: 0
Scandum said:
Just Canada, even Mexico isn't bothering. Europe and Asia have better things to do and react with as much apathy as when Bush decided to invade Iraq.


Not just Canada. I've been over so many DST links today it's not even funny, but there are plenty of other places. And it wasn't Bush who decided to invade Iraq. It was Congress, and the UN. But why quibble over details? :)
06 Mar, 2007, Fizban wrote in the 16th comment:
Votes: 0
No he decided to go to war, they decided ti allow him, a president can declare war and partake in a war for x number of days before they need congressional approval. The war was approved by congress after it had begun.
06 Mar, 2007, Guest wrote in the 17th comment:
Votes: 0
We're off topic now, but fine. Here's the deal. In 1991, GHW Bush went to war with Iraq. Congress approved of this, which made it a legal declaration under our Constitution. Once Saddam was driven out of Kuwait, a cease fire was declared. This is important to keep in mind. As part of the cease fire, certain zones of control were put in place. The US was part of the mechanism of enforcement for these zones. Which inlcuded the no-fly zones. Saddam had a habit of shooting at our planes, the British planes, and whoever else was up there.

During all of this, several UN resolutions were passed. Mostly weak and toothless ones, but one stood out. Resolution 1441. This one called for "consequences" if Saddam failed to comply. Well guess what? Saddam failed to comply. So in 2002 we found him to be in violation of the terms of the cease fire. Now at this stage GW Bush could have ordered the troops up and invaded the country. Without consulting anyone. Including Congress. Why? Because the war in 1991 was never officially ended with a treaty of any kind. And lets throw in the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998. Signed by none other than Bill Clinton.

Now, Bush knew that just rushing in would be political suicide, so he sent Colin Powell to the UN to make our case. And make our case he did, even though we later found out he was opposed to the invasion. France threatened to veto any UN resolution that resulted in military action. So that avenue was closed. We'll ignore that they were corrupt and in bed with Saddam. So Bush went to Congress for a vote. And a vote he got. A very decisive majority of them in fact. Including John Kerry, Hilary Clinton, and John Edwards. So at this point the decision was made. The authorization was given. In 2002.

So March of 2003 rolls around and the invasion begins. Officially a resumption of the original war started in 1991. So we have been at war with Iraq now for 16 years. Not 4. The second wave, invasion, or whatever, was begun AFTER Congress gave their authorization. Not before. The decision was made to start the war by GHW Bush, back in 1991. GW Bush decided it was time to resume open combat. That's a very important distinction.
06 Mar, 2007, Guest wrote in the 18th comment:
Votes: 0
And back on topic, it looks like there's an overwhelming consensus so far that super accurate DST information just isn't that important :)
06 Mar, 2007, Davion wrote in the 19th comment:
Votes: 0
Samson said:
And back on topic, it looks like there's an overwhelming consensus so far that super accurate DST information just isn't that important :)

I tried ;)
06 Mar, 2007, Omega wrote in the 20th comment:
Votes: 0
i hate timezones, i'm always working under zulu, oi, work work work.
0.0/25