From: mike 


Yes, that's what I said.

 /m

On Mon, 5 Mar 2007 15:50:55 -0800, "Rich"  wrote:

>   You said that the want not to use the standard for the PC CMOS clock (i.e.
localtime).  Your statement is highlighted below in red.
>
>Rich
>
>  "mike"  wrote in message
news:v78pu2tnkj7fjdk2mrr2u6gbu5h2lnqkf8{at}4ax.com...
>
>  I didn't say the Linux's and BSDs couldn't use the non-standard hardware
>  clock.
>
>   /m
>
>  On Sun, 4 Mar 2007 16:02:20 -0500, "Geo."
 wrote:
>
>  >When I boot knoppix, I don't need to do anything, it comes up with the
right
>  >time.
>  >
>  >Geo.
>  >
>  >"mike"  wrote in message
>  >news:bb2mu29p0p4eutgmhtns3dcgsnno3pecr0{at}4ax.com...
>  >>
>  >> Linux and the BSDs want to use UTC for the hardware clock.
>  >>
>  >> In fact, there is a program that allows Linux and the BSDs to
>  >> accommodate a Windows-based hardware clock that is set to local time.
>  >>
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=adjkerntz&apropos=0&sektion=0&ma
npath=FreeBSD+6.2-RELEASE&format=html
>  >>
>  >>
>  >> So the question remains, why does Windows insist on setting
the hardware
>  >> clock to local time?
>  >>
>  >>
>  >> /m
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >> On Sun, 4 Mar 2007 11:08:12 -0500, "Geo."
 wrote:
>  >>
>  >>>So that when you dual boot into Linux the time is correct.
>  >>>
>  >>>Geo.
>  >>>
>  >>>"mike"  wrote in message
>  >>>news:2aklu2pfe4oecu7fv4tiaorup0j1vfjb3u{at}4ax.com...
>  >>>> On Sun, 04 Mar 2007 07:16:58 -0500, Mike N.

>  >>>> wrote:
>  >>>>
>  >>>>>  NT uses UTC internally
>  >>>>
>  >>>> Then why does Windows insist on setting the hardware
clock to local
>  >>>> time?
>  >>>>
>  >>>> /m

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5