×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft Issues Workaround For Zune Freeze

kdawson posted more than 5 years ago | from the discharge-before-you-leap dept.

Microsoft 277

UnknowingFool writes "As a followup to the Zune New Year's Eve meltdown, Microsoft has issued a workaround for what some users have correctly guessed was a bug caused by a leap year. To recover from the problem, let the Zune drain the batteries and restart it after noon on January 1, 2009. Many sites are reporting that Microsoft has 'fixed' the issue, but technically all Microsoft has done is to ask users to wait out the conditions that triggered the bug. Unless a software patch comes out, Zunes will suffer the same problem again in four years." Reader ndtechnologies adds, "According to posts in the Toshiba forum at anythingbutipod.com, the same bug that shut down millions of Zune 30's also affects the Toshiba Gigabeat S. The Zune 30 is based off of the Gigabeat S series and was co-developed by Microsoft with Toshiba."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

277 comments

It probably won't last another 4 years (5, Funny)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313329)

So this is an acceptable solution.

Re:It probably won't last another 4 years (1)

Sancho (17056) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313415)

After all the hell that people give Microsoft for not supporting a 9 year old OS? Yeah, right.

Besides, I know people who still have first generation iPods.

Re:It probably won't last another 4 years (3, Insightful)

ccguy (1116865) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313587)

Besides, I know people who still have first generation iPods.

And if they broke, would they expect apple to fix them?

Suppose instead of this being Zune's firmware it was a microwave you bought 5 years ago. Would you have any claim to have it fixed (out of warranty, etc).

Re:It probably won't last another 4 years (4, Insightful)

datajack (17285) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313735)

The difference being that microwaves suffer wear and tear and can develop a fault after five years.

This is software, the fault was there when it was purchased.

Re:It probably won't last another 4 years (5, Informative)

mindwhip (894744) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313799)

The microwave failure would be acceptable wear and tear. The Zune was in effect sold with a predictable and correctable flaw (leap years are very predictable), causing it fail out with normal wear and tear, which would class it as defective product.

In UK law at least this is a significant difference... you can never tell in the US though.

Re:It probably won't last another 4 years (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 5 years ago | (#26314209)

But after 4 years, you don't have an automatic right to a refund. It would be reasonable for the retailer to repair it (which would simply involve applying this workaround). Alternatively a partial refund of 1/1461 times the price of a new Zune. That could be as much as £1.37.

Re:It probably won't last another 4 years (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 5 years ago | (#26314215)

That could be as much as £1.37.

Uhm... I mean 13.6p. I made a typo in calc.exe (and it turns out my mental arithmetic is abysmal).

Re:It probably won't last another 4 years (5, Insightful)

Pentium100 (1240090) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313853)

You can get the microwave (or a tape recorder, or a VCR) fixed by a third party (or do it yourself) depending on what part has broken.

Only Microsoft can fix these firmware issues. If the source code for the firmware was publicly available, someone could fix the problem and distribute the fixed firmware for free or for money, but since it isn't, only MS can patch it.

Re:It probably won't last another 4 years (0)

gparent (1242548) | more than 5 years ago | (#26314219)

Which they will. So I don't see how this is a big issue.

Re:It probably won't last another 4 years (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26314325)

Actually, if you RTFA, they haven't, and won't.

MS does NOT like you. They feel no obligation to help you in any way. Until and unless the cost of leaving it alone outweighs the cost of fixing it (lawsuit vs. bad press), they will do NOTHING.

Re:It probably won't last another 4 years (5, Insightful)

witherstaff (713820) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313963)

Why are consumer electronics any different than any other product? Let's talk about items costing less than a laptop, so less than 2000.

Would you accept if your 5 year old ___ broke , was unfixable, and needed a new replacement?

  • Home Furnace
  • Central Air
  • Oven
  • Refrigerator
  • Bike

You get the picture. Why are electronic manufactures exempt from shoddy products that don't have some sort of reasonable lifespan? Not wear and tear or dropping a product, just the product becoming unusable due to the product having some bug/feature to break it outright like the Zune.

As to a microwave, a 5 year old whirlpool oven broke on me and they no longer had replacement circuit boards. Whirlpool expects their products to have at least a 10 year lifespan. They pro-rated my equipment and sold a new unit, installed, for 33% of the cost. Now that's an acceptable solution for shoddy workmanship.

Re:It probably won't last another 4 years (4, Insightful)

mustafap (452510) | more than 5 years ago | (#26314011)

>Why are electronic manufactures exempt from shoddy products that don't have some sort of reasonable lifespan

Because collectively we accept this. Sad but true.

Re:It probably won't last another 4 years (1)

bobstreo (1320787) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313967)

I have a 22+ year old microwave that won't die.

Unfortunately, it doesn't work correctly with PlaysForSure, no matter how many times I've called Microsoft.

Now, that being said, I am on month 7 trying to get xbox support to RMA me a 360 wireless dongle.

Re:It probably won't last another 4 years (3, Informative)

SimonTheSoundMan (1012395) | more than 5 years ago | (#26314005)

If the microwave was only 5 years old and it broke down, you are covered in England and Wales by consumer protection laws if it less than six years old and it break down. Just as long as you can prove it was not accidental damage, your covered for a free repair. :)

Just something for the UK readers here. Covers anything electronic.

Re:It probably won't last another 4 years (1)

falcon5768 (629591) | more than 5 years ago | (#26314137)

Expect no, will get? usually. Apple has either repaired or given a reduced price on a replacement iPod to 1st gen owners for a few years now.

Re:It probably won't last another 4 years (1)

Idaho (12907) | more than 5 years ago | (#26314225)

Suppose instead of this being Zune's firmware it was a microwave you bought 5 years ago. Would you have any claim to have it fixed (out of warranty, etc).

In the case of a microwave or similar household appliance (dish washer, washing machine, fridge etc.), if it breaks within only 5 years or even less from mechanical failure I'd never buy that brand again. If it breaks due to what is obviously a (software) design flaw that the manufacturer subsequently refuses to address (at their cost), same story.

Such stuff should be designed to last 10 years or more given normal usage. If it is designed to break in less than 5 years I ain't buying that shit.

Re:It probably won't last another 4 years (1)

Francais Troll (1442059) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313419)

Le Zune est un bien lecteur multimedia. J'aime ecouter de la mine et tous les jours, sauf si elle se trouve etre le dernier jour d'une annee bissextile. J'ai aussi plaisir a utiliser Microsoft Genuine Windows Vista Ultimate et ma Xbox 360 a jouer ma collection de HD-DVD.

Re:It probably won't last another 4 years (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26313649)

C'est quoi ça veut dire, "écouter de la mine" ?!

Most modern hardware/software bundles (0, Redundant)

Finallyjoined!!! (1158431) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313383)

Have problems/bugs of some kind or other, but none quite as spectacularly "shoot yourself in the foot, with a 12 bore" headlines-wise as this little episode. :-)

Nice! (1)

whisper_jeff (680366) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313385)

Nice! The best way to fix something is do nothing at all and hope it works next time. Well done!

Re:Nice! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26313491)

Isn't that reminiscent of Y2K?

I of course, was sitting in a server closet for a Power/Gas Utility during the Y2K rollover...nothing happened obviously.

Where were you, and what were you doing during the "End Of Times"?

Re:Nice! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26313985)

Nothing happened in Y2K because people spend a lot of time and a lot of effort to ensure that nothing happened.

Re:Nice! (1)

Kagura (843695) | more than 5 years ago | (#26314023)

That's also why I spent a lot of time and effort preventing the alien invasion yesterday to ensure nothing happened.

Testing!?! (3, Insightful)

FranTaylor (164577) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313387)

You would think that a company the size of Microsoft would have the resources to have a few Zunes in QA with their clocks set ahead. But hey, there were no lessons to be learned from Y2K, right?

Re:Testing!?! (1)

Sancho (17056) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313445)

Clocks set ahead? Leap year is a really well-known edge case. There's no acceptable reason that setting the date to the boundaries in a leap year (including February 29, and the day before, and the day after) shouldn't be part of the standard tests.

Re:Testing!?! (0)

dingen (958134) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313465)

Clocks set ahead? Leap year is a really well-known edge case. There's no acceptable reason that setting the date to the boundaries in a leap year (including February 29, and the day before, and the day after) shouldn't be part of the standard tests.

Well, judging from the number of Zune owners who couldn't listen to music on new years eve, it probably should be.

Re:Testing!?! (0)

Sancho (17056) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313531)

Yeah. If you re-read what I wrote, I said there's no good reason that it's not a part of the standard tests.

Re:Testing!?! (1)

Lars T. (470328) | more than 5 years ago | (#26314345)

I don't see "setting the date to ... December 31st of a leap year" in your post. But then I don't see a good reason why that could possibly cause an almost-bricked device either.

Re:Testing!?! (1, Funny)

RoboRay (735839) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313609)

Well, judging from the number of Zune owners who couldn't listen to music on new years eve, it probably should be.

What, all three of them?

Re:Testing!?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26314353)

This is actually a very good example why testing isn't the road to great software: What are you going to test? The first and last days of a leap year? The 29th of February? The days before and after these dates? Starting up, shutting down, rolling into and out of all those dates? That's an awful lot of testing for something so benign, don't you think? If you test that much for a problem that has a well known implementation, the flood of tests for the more innovative functions of your product are going to delay the product until nobody cares anymore if it works or not.

This is a case of someone (badly) reinventing the wheel, with no second pair of eyes looking at the code before it goes into production. In other words, it's an organizational problem.

Cinderella (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26313393)

If you think about it, Cinderella was just a piece of pro-DRM propaganda.

Oh shit, my Zune just turned into a pumpkin.

Sorry to gloat but (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26313397)

My iPod, Macbook, iPhone, Time Capsule, Airport Express, and Apple TV are all working just fine!

Re:Sorry to gloat but (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26313463)

Much like your homosexual lifestyle, you godless sodomite!

Re:Sorry to gloat but (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26313487)

Congrats on becoming a tool!

Sorry to gloat, but (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26313525)

My Zune 120, Thinkpad, Windows Mobile phone, Windows Home Server, Linksys router and Xbox 360 are all working just fine!

Re:Sorry to gloat, but (0, Offtopic)

lordtoran (1063300) | more than 5 years ago | (#26314059)

My Sansa with Rockbox, Mandriva laptop, Kubuntu netbook, LinuxMCE based DVR and my fluffy stuffed penguin are all working just fine!

wow (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26313421)

Old news is sooooo exiciting!! --------^

Can anyone explain this bug? (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313423)

What could it be that makes the device not boot on leapdays? I could understand if the date/time would be wrongly displayed or something, but not functioning at all? WTF?

Re:Can anyone explain this bug? (4, Funny)

sakdoctor (1087155) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313475)

if (year % 400 == 0) hard_crash()
  else if (year % 100 == 0) boot()
  else if (year % 4 == 0) hard_crash()
  else boot()

Re:Can anyone explain this bug? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26313481)

Here's the actual buggy code [pastie.org] .
The error is infinite loop in ConvertDays(), starting at line 249. The first loop does not cope with "IsLeapYear() == true" when "days == 366"

Re:Can anyone explain this bug? (1)

MattCohn.com (555899) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313743)

Here's the actual buggy code [pastie.org] .
The error is infinite loop in ConvertDays(), starting at line 249. The first loop does not cope with "IsLeapYear() == true" when "days == 366"

The fix:

        year = ORIGINYEAR;

        daysInYear = IsLeapYear(year) ? 366 : 365;
        while (days > daysInYear)
        {
                days -= daysInYear;
                year += 1;

                daysInYear = IsLeapYear(year) ? 366 : 365;
        }

Re:Can anyone explain this bug? (2, Insightful)

lucifuge31337 (529072) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313821)

...and a perfect example of why testers should be working closely with programmers, writing sensible unit tests as the code progresses.

Re:Can anyone explain this bug? (1)

drosboro (1046516) | more than 5 years ago | (#26314009)

This is a problem I've given my grade 12 computing class in the past. The quality of code in the linked file is pretty comparable to what I've seen submitted.

Seriously, the IsLeapYear() function is 13 lines long, and is no more readable than, say,

int IsLeapYear(int Year) {
    return (((Year % 4) == 0) && (((Year % 100) > 0) || ((Year % 400) == 0)));
}

It looks to me like the ConvertDays() function was written by the same (amateurish) coder. Other bits of the source aren't nearly so bad.

Re:Can anyone explain this bug? (4, Funny)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 5 years ago | (#26314043)

The error is infinite loop . . .

Typical MS. They're copying Apple again but this time too literally. :P

Re:Can anyone explain this bug? (1)

Kagura (843695) | more than 5 years ago | (#26314055)

Here's the actual buggy code [pastie.org] . The error is infinite loop in ConvertDays(), starting at line 249. The first loop does not cope with "IsLeapYear() == true" when "days == 366"

Wow, that was pretty cool. Thank you.

Re:Can anyone explain this bug? (2, Informative)

judododo (1444351) | more than 5 years ago | (#26314339)

If my understanding is correct, ConvertDays looks like it never returns FALSE either. This might not lead to an other bug but it shows the quality of the code.

Re:Can anyone explain this bug? (1, Interesting)

slash.duncan (1103465) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313529)

I know nothing in particular about Zunes, but a shot in the dark (but based on some of the articles on the DRM tech in Vista I've read about) would be that it has to do with the DRM. The extra day in the year made the time count up further in the year than it expected, and it probably set off a tilt bit that caused it to think that someone was trying to hack it or something so it refused to run.

Maybe someone else with information to replace my frankly admitted speculation can confirm or deny...

Re:Can anyone explain this bug? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26313597)

See the AC above (and six minutes before) you: the bug was in a routine that breaks down a count of days into a days/months/years; it has absolutely nothing to with DRM.

Re:Can anyone explain this bug? (4, Informative)

Fusen (841730) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313551)

while (days > 365)
    {
        if (IsLeapYear(year))
        {
            if (days > 366)
            {
                days -= 366;
                year += 1;
            }
        }
        else
        {
            days -= 365;
            year += 1;
        }
    }

source code that caused the bug.

Re:Can anyone explain this bug? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26313665)

In case you can't see how this fails: On December 31st in a leap year, days is counted down to 366 like it's supposed to, and then the IsLeapYear() test is true, but days>366 is not, so the loop body does nothing and the while becomes an infinite loop.

This code can not possibly have been accepted in any kind of code review. Someone would have pointed out that there are O(1) formulas for calendar calculations.

Re:Can anyone explain this bug? (3, Insightful)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 5 years ago | (#26314081)

Someone would have pointed out that there are O(1) formulas for calendar calculations.

For that to happen, MS would have to follow standards. You know where this discussion will go.

Re:Can anyone explain this bug? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26314375)

Of course, the fix so that this doesn't happen again in 2012 and so on will probably be a 50MB patch.

Re:Can anyone explain this bug? (1)

volxdragon (1297215) | more than 5 years ago | (#26314337)

When days == 366 and IsLeapYear() evaluates to true, you loop forever on the while because you never decrement days internally to the loop under that exact condition.

Re:Can anyone explain this bug? (1)

dmihalik (241977) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313695)

The following information is from the analysis done at the Program Phases [programphases.com] site.

Verbose Output of ConvertDays() function:
1980: 366 (10593 - 366 = 10227) years=1
1981: 365 (10227 - 365 = 9862) years=2
1982: 365 (9862 - 365 = 9497) years=3
1983: 365 (9497 - 365 = 9132) years=4
1984: 366 (9132 - 366 = 8766) years=5
1985: 365 (8766 - 365 = 8401) years=6
1986: 365 (8401 - 365 = 8036) years=7
1987: 365 (8036 - 365 = 7671) years=8
1988: 366 (7671 - 366 = 7305) years=9
1989: 365 (7305 - 365 = 6940) years=10
1990: 365 (6940 - 365 = 6575) years=11
1991: 365 (6575 - 365 = 6210) years=12
1992: 366 (6210 - 366 = 5845) years=13
1993: 365 (5844 - 365 = 5479) years=14
1994: 365 (5479 - 365 = 5114) years=15
1995: 365 (5114 - 365 = 4749) years=16
1996: 366 (4749 - 366 = 4383) years=17
1997: 365 (4383 - 365 = 4018) years=18
1998: 365 (4018 - 365 = 3653) years=19
1999: 365 (3653 - 365 = 3288) years=20
2000: 366 (3288 - 366 = 2922) years=21
2001: 365 (2922 - 365 = 2557) years=22
2002: 365 (2557 - 365 = 2192) years=23
2003: 365 (2192 - 365 = 1827) years=24
2004: 366 (1827 - 366 = 1461) years=25
2005: 365 (1461 - 365 = 1096) years=26
2006: 365 (1096 - 365 = 731) years=27
2007: 365 (731 - 365 = 366) years=28 - causes infinite loop
2008: 366 (366 - 366 = 0) -- On last day of leap year, program execution never gets here.

On December 31st 2008, IsLeapyear(2008) is true and days equals 366. If IsLeapYear(2008) is true and days is not greater than 366, the number of days never decrements again resulting in days never becoming less than 366. If the days never becomes less than 366, the infinite looping results.

Leap Year?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26313441)

Wasn't it a leap second?

Isn't this post a dupe? (1)

arover (1153677) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313455)

I thought we had gone over this whole "fix" of Microsoft's a few days ago? If anything, the OP should've focused the article more on its effect on the Toshiba model, because that's more recent news to me. Anyways, I doubt Microsoft is going to do anything else about this issue. The average consumer is willing to put up with a lot, especially if it happens once every few years, and, even then, doesn't give the user THAT much hassle. Plus, this IS Microsoft we're talking about. They have enough trouble fixing their larger hardware/software malfunctions, on products that sell better, let alone tending to things with which they hold a rather small market share for.

The Source Code (4, Informative)

linumax (910946) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313479)

Here [pastie.org] is source of the trouble.

Re:The Source Code (1)

neonux (1000992) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313621)

More precisely the bug is an infinite loop in ConvertDays function starting line 249 :

      while (days > 365)
        {
                if (IsLeapYear(year))
                {
                        if (days > 366)
                        {

When it is the 366th day of a leap year process is trapped in the while loop.

And well I suspect the while-based implementation is quite dumb in the first place...

Re:The Source Code (1, Informative)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313639)

10 points for looking correct, but minus several million for not being correct.

Earlier in 2008, the bug did not exist. In the newest firmware, it does. that means the bug was introduced in 2008.

The copyright on that code ended in 2007, so the code hasn't been edited since then.

Clearly, this is not the code you are looking for.

Re:The Source Code (3, Insightful)

wvmarle (1070040) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313797)

Look through the function starting at line 249: this causes the infinite loop.

Assuming proper code management and version control they will probably branch off a release sometime for release in 2007, and in the meantime continue writing the next version, which may have been mostly finished in 2007 already but maybe only pass quality control in 2008 for release then.

And this piece of code had not been tested/reviewed properly apparently.

Re:The Source Code (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26313895)

Or the code was updated but not the copyright...

Re:The Source Code (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26313901)

I found the actual problem. From the source:

if (pTime == NULL) goto cleanUp;

THEY USED GOTO?!

Re:The Source Code (1)

Blakey Rat (99501) | more than 5 years ago | (#26314033)

Ok, it's been posted on every website and every forum about this issue on the entire Internet...

Is there any verification at all that this is actually the buggy code? Or did someone just pull it out of their ass? (I mean, obviously this code has the same bug, but is it the same code the Zune uses?)

Cause of the Zune crash? Third party drivers (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26313489)

A quote from the ZuneBoards forum:

After doing some poking around in the source code for the Zune's clock driver (available free from the Freescale website), I found the root cause of the now-infamous Zune 30 leapyear issue that struck everyone on New Year's Eve.

The Zune's real-time clock stores the time in terms of days and seconds since January 1st, 1980. When the Zune's clock is accessed, the driver turns the number of days into years/months/days and the number of seconds into hours/minutes/seconds. Likewise, when the clock is set, the driver does the opposite.

The Zune frontend first accesses the clock toward the end of the boot sequence. Doing this triggers the code that reads the clock and converts it to a date and time. Below is the part of this code that determines the year component of the date:

Code:

year = ORIGINYEAR; /* = 1980 */
 
while (days > 365)
{
    if (IsLeapYear(year))
    {
        if (days > 366)
        {
            days -= 366;
            year += 1;
        }
    }
    else
    {
        days -= 365;
        year += 1;
    }
}

Under normal circumstances, this works just fine. The function keeps subtracting either 365 or 366 until it gets down to less than a year's worth of days, which it then turns into the month and day of month. Thing is, in the case of the last day of a leap year, it keeps going until it hits 366. Thanks to the if (days > 366), it stops subtracting anything if the loop happens to be on a leap year. But 366 is too large to break out of the main loop, meaning that the Zune keeps looping forever and doesn't do anything else.

The unfortunate part is that there isn't anything that can be done to fix this besides somehow changing what the clock is set to (which is exactly what the battery disconnection trick ends up doing). On the other hand, it shows that Microsoft is correct: tomorrow, everyone's Zunes will operate normally again. However, if Microsoft doesn't fix this part of the firmware, the whole thing will happen all over again in 4 more years.. Hopefully by then a fix will be in place.

http://www.zuneboards.com/forums/zune-news/38143-cause-zune-30-leapyear-problem-isolated.html [zuneboards.com]

Re:Cause of the Zune crash? Third party drivers (1)

Skiron (735617) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313645)

If that is a true post, and I think it is, it was the fact 1980 was also a leap year. So we had a last day of a leap year, and then just subtract 365/366 as appropriate 'if (IsLeapYear(year))', you will end up on the last day of 1980 - which isn't > 366 but it is > 365.

Heh. It just proves nothing was tested.

In 4 years? (0, Troll)

fluch (126140) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313517)

In 4 years, is there still a Zune around??

Re:In 4 years? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26313689)

In 4 years, will Microsoft still be around? /duck

Deeper analysis of the bug... (1)

dmihalik (241977) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313549)

Analysis of the bug can be found here [zuneboards.com] and verbose loop analysis can be found here [programphases.com] .

You mean other than..... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26313555)

buying an iPod?

Paul (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26313599)

Wait...
You guys assume the Zune will last another 4 years?

Proper name for this bug (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26313617)

The "Shoodabottaeyepod" bug.

slow news day? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26313625)

This was all known on the 31st, why the re-hash now?

All this really serves to do is allow the trolls to argue over who's favourite consumer electronics device / software product / figurehead / lofty ideals / jello mold is better.

Hooray for the internet

Re:slow news day? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26313683)

Well if it was known by you then it was known by everyone, right?

Instead of bothering with a fix (5, Funny)

dmomo (256005) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313697)

Wouldn't it be faster for Microsoft to simply give each of the 8 users a call and walk them through the work-around? If their numbers change in the next four years, they can simply notify Zune support.

Draining battery all the way (4, Insightful)

postmortem (906676) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313823)

Can't be good.

I've seen this in laptops leading to drastically decreased storage capacity.

My Experience (4, Funny)

syntap (242090) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313883)

I hadn't turned on the Zune before I read about the problem, so I just left it off and turned it on the morning of Jan 1 and everything worked fine, no need to drain battery or anything.

The above is not an admission that I own a Zune, just what I theoretically would have done and the theoretical results, based on heavy pretend observations.

MS offers an alternative fix: (-1, Troll)

philspear (1142299) | more than 5 years ago | (#26313925)

Buy an Ipod!

Granted, they didn't actually say that, but it was implicit in their response.

Zune 80 (1)

rm999 (775449) | more than 5 years ago | (#26314127)

Does anyone know why the Zune 80s didn't crash? I assumed they ran the same software and similar hardware.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...