For anyone who had this problem...

[CharlieChomper]

I'm still sorting through some tech articles--mostly focusing on current news to share.

However, in the meantime, what I'm about to post is something that I honestly don't know whether or not it was publicly published about given the actual nature of the problem (I did see some notices of types of devices affected by it, but as I was away during the time this happened, I honestly don't know how much exposure this issue received).

Some of you may have read about certain types of devices (Zunes being probably among the most notable, but far from the only devices affected by the problem given the actual nature of it and the massive scale of it) which became unusable or ceased functioning or else what's known as "brick-ified", etc. during New Year's, once the clock turned midnight.

This problem actually was far more wide scale than most people (consumers especially) would have had reason to even be aware of as it affected all embedded devices along with many countless servers--regardless of whatever operating system they happened to be running.

The actual cause of it for those curious (and again, this may have been mentioned in the mass media) had nothing to do with any "bad coding" or anything of the sort anymore than any blame can be put upon any one company or group, etc. given how universal it was.

It actually had to do with the "leap second" that was added during the change in years and certain low-level software involved being unable to comprehend the change (or very existence of a leap second). It was really more of an oversight than anything else that created the problems.

Most people within just the embedded industry did not realize the actual scale nor what the physical cause of the problem even was (as it affected every architecture--by that, I mean that while most people here would have reason to be familiar with PC/Mac processors, they're really only representative of one "family" or architecture of them out there) until after the fact.

However, the "good" news is that because it was a "generic" enough problem (in that every platform was affected by it in the same way), the remedy for it was also the same and that allowed many groups and companies to be able to issue patches to fix the problem without too much trouble--or else to prevent it from happening, in some cases.

[Moon]

Zunes? Brickified? I'm entirely lost, LOL.

Sounds like a neat little problem. But I guess I wouldn't find it so neat if it was happening to me.

[Whitnerd]

Wow, I never would have thought that the "leap second" would have caused such a problem.

[CharlieChomper]

Somehow, as I was typing all that up, I was afraid someone might get lost and I'm sorry about that.

Moon, "brickified" is the not-so-technical term (albeit, most commonly-used one) to describe a state with hardware devices (such as anything from a mobile device to a computer to basically anything electronic really) of where it becomes otherwise so thoroughly unusable (as in, you can't even get it to turn on/off or working in any shape for the most part), it basically like an expensive paperweight or (and this is where the term actually originates) like a brick--it just sits there and otherwise does nothing with your being unable to do anything with it.

It's one of those terms that tends to be very commonly used within the embedded realm as well as among tinkerers of areas of operating systems and hardware that most people would never think to attempt (one of the most widely used examples of the term's use and in this context came a few years ago when Apple made the switch to Intel processors and PC architecture, a very large number of tinkerers with varying levels of knowledge of working with embedded devices and hardware attempted to try and just get Windows working on them only to ignore certain low level and necessary things that Apple had made use of to prevent anyone from attempting it (mostly, in an attempt to keep certain things proprietary to Apple as that's mainly where their money comes from--the sale of hardware. The company was aware--and still is--that when they made the change in architectures over to standard PC architecture, it would then become possible for people to build similar computers for less and therefore undercut them in this area or it ran the risk that someone might attempt to replace or upgrade a component manufactured by Apple and sold at a higher cost for something less expensive made by a competitor. So, they tried to implement some very low level (although, still very possible to get around and quite legally). However they also engineered things in such a way as to implement DRM on the hardware end of things, which only appeared to further motivate people to want to find ways of getting around those restrictions...).

There is one area, specifically, however (especially after the instructions on how to go about this were made public) that some people either chose to ignore or else (mostly those unfamiliar with or with little experience in working with embedded devices or the internal workings of operating systems) thought "unimportant" and therefore passed by and found their brand new Macs turned into very expensive paperweights or "bricks" as a result (given that Apple historically had, up until that point, taken a very loathing view of the idea that anyone would want to install an operating system other than whatever they were shipping on their systems at the time, it also had a way of voiding the warranty back then--this is also where the existence of "Bootcamp" came out of, as there were far more people out there willing to take the risk to just get Windows running on these systems than those concerned about the warranty to where the company relented and made the program available).

However, it was possible to get around things to where OS X could be reinstalled--but it did take a bit more effort into things. It should also be noted that for anyone who ignored that area or bypassed it, there were many others (again, mostly those with some experience into the areas of embedded devices or working with internal workings of operating systems or just those with experience in getting "alternative" operating systems installed onto devices that were not designed to run them, etc.) who did succeed at it before Bootcamp.

Unfortunately, even in much of the techie press at that time, too often you would see misleading headlines about people turning their brand new Macs into "bricks" and "warnings" about them when the articles, themselves, pointed out this was not so much the case as it was a "user error" in the sense of someone ignoring that one step or area and therefore causing the problems--not due to Apple's engineering of things or the supposed "impossibility" of it (as there were many sites then and now with instructions on how to go about it, some with detailed instructions that took things step-by-step). Just as there were many more success stories that got ignored in favor of attempting to scare people from even trying it--however, again, it didn't appear to really stop anyone from attempting it.

More recently, it likewise hasn't stopped a company out there from creating and selling special "dongles" to get OS X running on a "standard" PC (that uses similar enough hardware to a Mac, however--there is even directions on how to go about it for those not wanting to spend the money on the dongle) or another company from creating essentially a lower-cost Mac "clone" for sale--in the latter instance, Apple had sued the company producing the "clones" (something that Apple has a long history of doing--suing companies that manufacture products that are close enough to their own in hopes of bankrupting the companies or just putting them out of business), but unlike in much of the past, the lawsuit went into settlement versus being dragged out and there had been some question from the start as to whether or not Apple even had any legal ground to really stand upon this time around in light of who actually owns the technologies or core technologies in use in Macs these days), which may be among the reasons behind why the lawsuit went into settlement instead of into court.

However, that's probably more than you may have wanted to know.

As to Zunes, they're Microsoft's entry into the portable music/multimedia market--think of them as being the company's "take" of an iPod. They have not been as successful as the company had hopes for.

The problem actually served as more of a near-panic moment and source of frustration within much of the embedded community as well as among some systems and network administrators who found themselves suddenly dealing with the havoc this was creating for them and in trying to find a solution. Fortunately, it was found quickly enough and was universal enough to where it generally could be fixed or addressed.