<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_02_1243237</id>
	<title>Qualcomm Demos Eee PC Running Android OS</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1243947960000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.goodgearguide.com.au/" rel="nofollow">angry tapir</a> writes <i>"Qualcomm has showed off a version of Asustek Computer's Eee PC based on its Snapdragon processor at the Computex exhibition, including <a href="http://www.goodgearguide.com.au/article/305316/qualcomm\_shows\_eee\_pc\_running\_android\_os">one running Google's Android operating system</a>. The new laptop &mdash; which Qualcomm calls a smartbook &mdash; is thinner and lighter than current members of Asustek's Eee PC netbook lineup because the 1GHz Snapdragon processor that it uses does not require a heat sink or a cooling fan."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>angry tapir writes " Qualcomm has showed off a version of Asustek Computer 's Eee PC based on its Snapdragon processor at the Computex exhibition , including one running Google 's Android operating system .
The new laptop    which Qualcomm calls a smartbook    is thinner and lighter than current members of Asustek 's Eee PC netbook lineup because the 1GHz Snapdragon processor that it uses does not require a heat sink or a cooling fan .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>angry tapir writes "Qualcomm has showed off a version of Asustek Computer's Eee PC based on its Snapdragon processor at the Computex exhibition, including one running Google's Android operating system.
The new laptop — which Qualcomm calls a smartbook — is thinner and lighter than current members of Asustek's Eee PC netbook lineup because the 1GHz Snapdragon processor that it uses does not require a heat sink or a cooling fan.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180983</id>
	<title>Keep an eye on google...</title>
	<author>mc1138</author>
	<datestamp>1243952400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>With their position at the top of the information world, and now branching out more and more everyday with products like android, and their new ebook venture, we're going to get to the point where google powers or integrates with just about everything. I both welcome this as their quality is usually top notch, and fear this as it means a potential breach of privacy by a private company that really no one will be able to stop...</htmltext>
<tokenext>With their position at the top of the information world , and now branching out more and more everyday with products like android , and their new ebook venture , we 're going to get to the point where google powers or integrates with just about everything .
I both welcome this as their quality is usually top notch , and fear this as it means a potential breach of privacy by a private company that really no one will be able to stop.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With their position at the top of the information world, and now branching out more and more everyday with products like android, and their new ebook venture, we're going to get to the point where google powers or integrates with just about everything.
I both welcome this as their quality is usually top notch, and fear this as it means a potential breach of privacy by a private company that really no one will be able to stop...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28182169</id>
	<title>Interesting...</title>
	<author>GameMaster</author>
	<datestamp>1243957260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If Asus ever decided to come out with a smart-phone they could call it the eeePhone and advertise it as "three 'e's are better than one 'i'"  Of course, then they could easily be trumped by the ieeePhone...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If Asus ever decided to come out with a smart-phone they could call it the eeePhone and advertise it as " three 'e 's are better than one 'i ' " Of course , then they could easily be trumped by the ieeePhone.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Asus ever decided to come out with a smart-phone they could call it the eeePhone and advertise it as "three 'e's are better than one 'i'"  Of course, then they could easily be trumped by the ieeePhone...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181461</id>
	<title>Re:Because Snapdragon Is an ARM Processor!</title>
	<author>Hal\_Porter</author>
	<datestamp>1243954860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Pare away the heat sink and all that junk, add super small RAM and flash storage and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... hand held computers (like the article notes from Toshiba).  Microsoft better not be resting on its laurels and should either be beefing up Windows Mobile or porting Windows 7 to ARM<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... or they're going to miss out big time again.</p></div><p>People keep saying this sort of thing, but I really don't see it being viable. A Snapdragon is probably going to end up being at best the same speed as an Atom for native code. Windows 7 is probably quite portable and from the tests I've done on the Beta on Atoms might run quite okish on an 1Ghz Snapdragon if it were ported. Even there we're talking about a 1Ghz in order core with a memory controller designed for cellphone SDRAM. High performance desktop memory is really different to the stuff used in cellphones - the buses are narrower and slower. Here's are the details for an Atom</p><p><a href="http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SLB73" title="intel.com" rel="nofollow">http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SLB73</a> [intel.com]</p><p>Note the bus speed, 533Mhz and the cache size, 512KB. By desktop standards the Atom is slow. Most Arm systems run memory much slower than this and have less cache. Look at the Snapdragon based Toshiba L01</p><p><a href="http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=specs&amp;id=1855&amp;view=1&amp;c=toshiba\_l01" title="pdadb.net" rel="nofollow">http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=specs&amp;id=1855&amp;view=1&amp;c=toshiba\_l01</a> [pdadb.net]</p><p>It uses "mobile DDR SDRAM". I don't know the clock speed, but look at this</p><p><a href="http://www.eetasia.com/ART\_8800457078\_499486\_NP\_197bb814.HTM" title="eetasia.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.eetasia.com/ART\_8800457078\_499486\_NP\_197bb814.HTM</a> [eetasia.com]<br>Hynix claims 'fastest' 512Mbit mobile DDR SDRAM with a 185Mhz clock speed.</p><p>See the thing is that the sort of memory you get in a cellphone is a lot slower than the stuff you get in a desktop because the power budget is so much less. If you want to run desktop applications or emulate an x86 that will really bite you.</p><p>Once you get past the OS it gets worse. Office is probably less portable than Windows and Office 200x runs terribly on an Atom and would be worse on Snapdragon given the lower performance memory. Most Windows applications will not be ported and will run even worse in emulation - a Snapdragon emulating x86 will be unusably slow.</p><p>Of course maybe ARM will do a Jazelle style extension where common x86 instructions are turned into ARM ones via an extra pipeline stage. I think that would mean a Snapdragon chip would run x86 code say 90\% as fast as an Atom at the same clockspeed. Still a 1Ghz Atom is not a quick chip.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Pare away the heat sink and all that junk , add super small RAM and flash storage and ... hand held computers ( like the article notes from Toshiba ) .
Microsoft better not be resting on its laurels and should either be beefing up Windows Mobile or porting Windows 7 to ARM ... or they 're going to miss out big time again.People keep saying this sort of thing , but I really do n't see it being viable .
A Snapdragon is probably going to end up being at best the same speed as an Atom for native code .
Windows 7 is probably quite portable and from the tests I 've done on the Beta on Atoms might run quite okish on an 1Ghz Snapdragon if it were ported .
Even there we 're talking about a 1Ghz in order core with a memory controller designed for cellphone SDRAM .
High performance desktop memory is really different to the stuff used in cellphones - the buses are narrower and slower .
Here 's are the details for an Atomhttp : //processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx ? sSpec = SLB73 [ intel.com ] Note the bus speed , 533Mhz and the cache size , 512KB .
By desktop standards the Atom is slow .
Most Arm systems run memory much slower than this and have less cache .
Look at the Snapdragon based Toshiba L01http : //pdadb.net/index.php ? m = specs&amp;id = 1855&amp;view = 1&amp;c = toshiba \ _l01 [ pdadb.net ] It uses " mobile DDR SDRAM " .
I do n't know the clock speed , but look at thishttp : //www.eetasia.com/ART \ _8800457078 \ _499486 \ _NP \ _197bb814.HTM [ eetasia.com ] Hynix claims 'fastest ' 512Mbit mobile DDR SDRAM with a 185Mhz clock speed.See the thing is that the sort of memory you get in a cellphone is a lot slower than the stuff you get in a desktop because the power budget is so much less .
If you want to run desktop applications or emulate an x86 that will really bite you.Once you get past the OS it gets worse .
Office is probably less portable than Windows and Office 200x runs terribly on an Atom and would be worse on Snapdragon given the lower performance memory .
Most Windows applications will not be ported and will run even worse in emulation - a Snapdragon emulating x86 will be unusably slow.Of course maybe ARM will do a Jazelle style extension where common x86 instructions are turned into ARM ones via an extra pipeline stage .
I think that would mean a Snapdragon chip would run x86 code say 90 \ % as fast as an Atom at the same clockspeed .
Still a 1Ghz Atom is not a quick chip .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pare away the heat sink and all that junk, add super small RAM and flash storage and ... hand held computers (like the article notes from Toshiba).
Microsoft better not be resting on its laurels and should either be beefing up Windows Mobile or porting Windows 7 to ARM ... or they're going to miss out big time again.People keep saying this sort of thing, but I really don't see it being viable.
A Snapdragon is probably going to end up being at best the same speed as an Atom for native code.
Windows 7 is probably quite portable and from the tests I've done on the Beta on Atoms might run quite okish on an 1Ghz Snapdragon if it were ported.
Even there we're talking about a 1Ghz in order core with a memory controller designed for cellphone SDRAM.
High performance desktop memory is really different to the stuff used in cellphones - the buses are narrower and slower.
Here's are the details for an Atomhttp://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SLB73 [intel.com]Note the bus speed, 533Mhz and the cache size, 512KB.
By desktop standards the Atom is slow.
Most Arm systems run memory much slower than this and have less cache.
Look at the Snapdragon based Toshiba L01http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=specs&amp;id=1855&amp;view=1&amp;c=toshiba\_l01 [pdadb.net]It uses "mobile DDR SDRAM".
I don't know the clock speed, but look at thishttp://www.eetasia.com/ART\_8800457078\_499486\_NP\_197bb814.HTM [eetasia.com]Hynix claims 'fastest' 512Mbit mobile DDR SDRAM with a 185Mhz clock speed.See the thing is that the sort of memory you get in a cellphone is a lot slower than the stuff you get in a desktop because the power budget is so much less.
If you want to run desktop applications or emulate an x86 that will really bite you.Once you get past the OS it gets worse.
Office is probably less portable than Windows and Office 200x runs terribly on an Atom and would be worse on Snapdragon given the lower performance memory.
Most Windows applications will not be ported and will run even worse in emulation - a Snapdragon emulating x86 will be unusably slow.Of course maybe ARM will do a Jazelle style extension where common x86 instructions are turned into ARM ones via an extra pipeline stage.
I think that would mean a Snapdragon chip would run x86 code say 90\% as fast as an Atom at the same clockspeed.
Still a 1Ghz Atom is not a quick chip.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180933</id>
	<title>I still don't like netbooks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243952100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I ask for ARM UMPCs and get ARM netbooks.<br>Keep try!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ask for ARM UMPCs and get ARM netbooks.Keep try !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I ask for ARM UMPCs and get ARM netbooks.Keep try!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181105</id>
	<title>Re:Because Snapdragon Is an ARM Processor!</title>
	<author>psicop</author>
	<datestamp>1243953060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe consider something else besides Ubuntu and, learn to, you know...cross compile. Talk about resting on laurels...</p><p>Footnote #65 on Wikipedia's entry for Google Android returns an article from January 09, running Android on a eee PC 1000H.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe consider something else besides Ubuntu and , learn to , you know...cross compile .
Talk about resting on laurels...Footnote # 65 on Wikipedia 's entry for Google Android returns an article from January 09 , running Android on a eee PC 1000H .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe consider something else besides Ubuntu and, learn to, you know...cross compile.
Talk about resting on laurels...Footnote #65 on Wikipedia's entry for Google Android returns an article from January 09, running Android on a eee PC 1000H.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28216833</id>
	<title>Re:Because Snapdragon Is an ARM Processor!</title>
	<author>Patch86</author>
	<datestamp>1244120040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>MS already has an ARM OS, and it'd be relatively easy for them to make any of their OS's the base for a new ARM OS.</p><p>The reason they don't pursue it with gusto is because Windows on ARM lacks the one thing that makes Window worth using: the extensive software library. No programmes compiled to run on i86 Windows will run on ARM Windows.</p><p>Why else would anyone pick Windows over the competition, if not for the almost universal compatibility and endless back catalogue? Windows on ARM would be competing on a level playing field- not something MS are particularly wanting to devote themselves to.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>MS already has an ARM OS , and it 'd be relatively easy for them to make any of their OS 's the base for a new ARM OS.The reason they do n't pursue it with gusto is because Windows on ARM lacks the one thing that makes Window worth using : the extensive software library .
No programmes compiled to run on i86 Windows will run on ARM Windows.Why else would anyone pick Windows over the competition , if not for the almost universal compatibility and endless back catalogue ?
Windows on ARM would be competing on a level playing field- not something MS are particularly wanting to devote themselves to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MS already has an ARM OS, and it'd be relatively easy for them to make any of their OS's the base for a new ARM OS.The reason they don't pursue it with gusto is because Windows on ARM lacks the one thing that makes Window worth using: the extensive software library.
No programmes compiled to run on i86 Windows will run on ARM Windows.Why else would anyone pick Windows over the competition, if not for the almost universal compatibility and endless back catalogue?
Windows on ARM would be competing on a level playing field- not something MS are particularly wanting to devote themselves to.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181381</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28186725</id>
	<title>Re:Because Snapdragon Is an ARM Processor!</title>
	<author>BikeHelmet</author>
	<datestamp>1243975800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's worth noting that the ARM architecture has a different instruction set, which does a better job of not straining the memory. Often you can do things one byte at a time, or do multiple one byte things in a single clock.</p><p>ARM CPUs are usually packed with tons of registers(way more than x86), so short functions can be blazing fast, and not require cache or memory thrashing.</p><p>But these ways of reducing memory bandwidth consumption are counteracted by having everything share memory. GPU, Co-Processor, CPU, LCD, etc.</p><p>Just keep in mind that as you optimize your code, and reduce memory consumption, you probably also reduced the memory bandwidth used. Native ARM programs can be extremely fast.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's worth noting that the ARM architecture has a different instruction set , which does a better job of not straining the memory .
Often you can do things one byte at a time , or do multiple one byte things in a single clock.ARM CPUs are usually packed with tons of registers ( way more than x86 ) , so short functions can be blazing fast , and not require cache or memory thrashing.But these ways of reducing memory bandwidth consumption are counteracted by having everything share memory .
GPU , Co-Processor , CPU , LCD , etc.Just keep in mind that as you optimize your code , and reduce memory consumption , you probably also reduced the memory bandwidth used .
Native ARM programs can be extremely fast .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's worth noting that the ARM architecture has a different instruction set, which does a better job of not straining the memory.
Often you can do things one byte at a time, or do multiple one byte things in a single clock.ARM CPUs are usually packed with tons of registers(way more than x86), so short functions can be blazing fast, and not require cache or memory thrashing.But these ways of reducing memory bandwidth consumption are counteracted by having everything share memory.
GPU, Co-Processor, CPU, LCD, etc.Just keep in mind that as you optimize your code, and reduce memory consumption, you probably also reduced the memory bandwidth used.
Native ARM programs can be extremely fast.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181461</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28182027</id>
	<title>Interesting, I suppose</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243956780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just bought an EeePC last Thursday because I wanted to see what all the fuss was about and because I determined that there was a niche to fill between my Toshiba (which is always hooked up to an external monitor, speakers, mouse, graphics tablet and all sorts of other things), and my BlackBerry Storm.I got it at best buy, and so of course all I really had for an option was Windows XP, and I'm not sure how it'd really do with Linux (I suppose if they've been selling Linux versions the hardware should all be compatible, but I spend enough time fussing with Linux on the servers at work to really want to do Linux of FreeBSD for a hobby anymore).  I'm actually typing this on it now.</p><p>I have yet to really play with Android, even though one of my coworkers has a G1, I just haven't really felt the urge to take it for a spin.  The idea of having a "phone" OS on a "computer" seems a tad bit odd to me, but I suppose its just the opposite of the deal with the stripped-down OSX on the iPhone, which I have messed with a bit (I just don't feel like switching to AT&amp;T or I'd probably pick one up... the only thing my Storm really has going for it is the tactile feedback to the depressible touch screen).</p><p>Is there anything particularly special about Android over any other Linux distribution, other than the Google name, that makes it well suited for this type of application?  From what I've read, it seems to be just a Linux kernel combined with Java phone crap and not really anything particularly special, though as I must admit, I've not really been following it too closely.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just bought an EeePC last Thursday because I wanted to see what all the fuss was about and because I determined that there was a niche to fill between my Toshiba ( which is always hooked up to an external monitor , speakers , mouse , graphics tablet and all sorts of other things ) , and my BlackBerry Storm.I got it at best buy , and so of course all I really had for an option was Windows XP , and I 'm not sure how it 'd really do with Linux ( I suppose if they 've been selling Linux versions the hardware should all be compatible , but I spend enough time fussing with Linux on the servers at work to really want to do Linux of FreeBSD for a hobby anymore ) .
I 'm actually typing this on it now.I have yet to really play with Android , even though one of my coworkers has a G1 , I just have n't really felt the urge to take it for a spin .
The idea of having a " phone " OS on a " computer " seems a tad bit odd to me , but I suppose its just the opposite of the deal with the stripped-down OSX on the iPhone , which I have messed with a bit ( I just do n't feel like switching to AT&amp;T or I 'd probably pick one up... the only thing my Storm really has going for it is the tactile feedback to the depressible touch screen ) .Is there anything particularly special about Android over any other Linux distribution , other than the Google name , that makes it well suited for this type of application ?
From what I 've read , it seems to be just a Linux kernel combined with Java phone crap and not really anything particularly special , though as I must admit , I 've not really been following it too closely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just bought an EeePC last Thursday because I wanted to see what all the fuss was about and because I determined that there was a niche to fill between my Toshiba (which is always hooked up to an external monitor, speakers, mouse, graphics tablet and all sorts of other things), and my BlackBerry Storm.I got it at best buy, and so of course all I really had for an option was Windows XP, and I'm not sure how it'd really do with Linux (I suppose if they've been selling Linux versions the hardware should all be compatible, but I spend enough time fussing with Linux on the servers at work to really want to do Linux of FreeBSD for a hobby anymore).
I'm actually typing this on it now.I have yet to really play with Android, even though one of my coworkers has a G1, I just haven't really felt the urge to take it for a spin.
The idea of having a "phone" OS on a "computer" seems a tad bit odd to me, but I suppose its just the opposite of the deal with the stripped-down OSX on the iPhone, which I have messed with a bit (I just don't feel like switching to AT&amp;T or I'd probably pick one up... the only thing my Storm really has going for it is the tactile feedback to the depressible touch screen).Is there anything particularly special about Android over any other Linux distribution, other than the Google name, that makes it well suited for this type of application?
From what I've read, it seems to be just a Linux kernel combined with Java phone crap and not really anything particularly special, though as I must admit, I've not really been following it too closely.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28182277</id>
	<title>Re:Because Snapdragon Is an ARM Processor!</title>
	<author>Locutus</author>
	<datestamp>1243957680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you do not know Microsoft. They live and breath by Windows and the Windows APIs and that product is why they still exist. It would be a very small fraction of todays company that would promote the use of another OS instead of Windows. The Windows OS brings in most of their profits and the extents they go to protect that marketshare should be an indicator of how tied to it they are.<br>
&nbsp; </p><p>You'll see them making offers companies can't refuse and dumping billions into stopping the move to Linux before you'll see an MS Linux. They'll push Windows Mobile onto this platform or even port XP to ARM before there's an MS Linux or any MS nonWindows OS. IMO.<br>
&nbsp; </p><p>LoB</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you do not know Microsoft .
They live and breath by Windows and the Windows APIs and that product is why they still exist .
It would be a very small fraction of todays company that would promote the use of another OS instead of Windows .
The Windows OS brings in most of their profits and the extents they go to protect that marketshare should be an indicator of how tied to it they are .
  You 'll see them making offers companies ca n't refuse and dumping billions into stopping the move to Linux before you 'll see an MS Linux .
They 'll push Windows Mobile onto this platform or even port XP to ARM before there 's an MS Linux or any MS nonWindows OS .
IMO .   LoB</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you do not know Microsoft.
They live and breath by Windows and the Windows APIs and that product is why they still exist.
It would be a very small fraction of todays company that would promote the use of another OS instead of Windows.
The Windows OS brings in most of their profits and the extents they go to protect that marketshare should be an indicator of how tied to it they are.
  You'll see them making offers companies can't refuse and dumping billions into stopping the move to Linux before you'll see an MS Linux.
They'll push Windows Mobile onto this platform or even port XP to ARM before there's an MS Linux or any MS nonWindows OS.
IMO.
  LoB</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181381</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28186283</id>
	<title>Re:Because Snapdragon Is an ARM Processor!</title>
	<author>bhtooefr</author>
	<datestamp>1243973880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The parent may not want to run x86 cruft, but the mass market wants to run Windows apps.</p><p>This means x86 cruft.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The parent may not want to run x86 cruft , but the mass market wants to run Windows apps.This means x86 cruft .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The parent may not want to run x86 cruft, but the mass market wants to run Windows apps.This means x86 cruft.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28183615</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28203723</id>
	<title>Re:Because Snapdragon Is an ARM Processor!</title>
	<author>LionMage</author>
	<datestamp>1244033100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Even more impressive, the <a href="http://www.qctconnect.com/products/snapdragon.html" title="qctconnect.com">next generation Snapdragon</a> [qctconnect.com] (the QSD8672) is dual core, running at 1.5 GHz.  I'd really like to get my hands on a netbook running <em>that</em> device!</p><blockquote><div><p>Has anyone found anything on how Android applications dependent on cell phone-ish hardware (like GPS location and the like) will be handled inside a device like the eee PC?</p></div></blockquote><p>Well, based on what I've been able to glean from the site linked in my previous paragraph, and a few other tidbits scattered elsewhere on the web, it looks as though this Snapdragon processor platform actually supplies all the logic to decode GPS and do most of the other cell phone-ish things that you'd care to do.  Of course, there's no guarantee that manufacturers will actually implement all those features, but it's not for lack of hardware support.  Just add antennas and support circuitry!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Even more impressive , the next generation Snapdragon [ qctconnect.com ] ( the QSD8672 ) is dual core , running at 1.5 GHz .
I 'd really like to get my hands on a netbook running that device ! Has anyone found anything on how Android applications dependent on cell phone-ish hardware ( like GPS location and the like ) will be handled inside a device like the eee PC ? Well , based on what I 've been able to glean from the site linked in my previous paragraph , and a few other tidbits scattered elsewhere on the web , it looks as though this Snapdragon processor platform actually supplies all the logic to decode GPS and do most of the other cell phone-ish things that you 'd care to do .
Of course , there 's no guarantee that manufacturers will actually implement all those features , but it 's not for lack of hardware support .
Just add antennas and support circuitry !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even more impressive, the next generation Snapdragon [qctconnect.com] (the QSD8672) is dual core, running at 1.5 GHz.
I'd really like to get my hands on a netbook running that device!Has anyone found anything on how Android applications dependent on cell phone-ish hardware (like GPS location and the like) will be handled inside a device like the eee PC?Well, based on what I've been able to glean from the site linked in my previous paragraph, and a few other tidbits scattered elsewhere on the web, it looks as though this Snapdragon processor platform actually supplies all the logic to decode GPS and do most of the other cell phone-ish things that you'd care to do.
Of course, there's no guarantee that manufacturers will actually implement all those features, but it's not for lack of hardware support.
Just add antennas and support circuitry!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847</id>
	<title>Because Snapdragon Is an ARM Processor!</title>
	<author>eldavojohn</author>
	<datestamp>1243951620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The new laptop -- which Qualcomm calls a smartbook -- is thinner and lighter than current members of Asustek's Eee PC netbook lineup because the 1GHz Snapdragon processor that it uses does not require a heat sink or a cooling fan.</p></div><p>Yes, of course, because of an important point in the article:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Qualcomm's Snapdragon includes a 1GHz <b>Arm</b> processor core, a 600MHz digital-signal processor and hardware video codecs. Currently, Asustek's Eee PC line of netbooks relies on Intel processors, in particular the low-cost, low-power Atom chip, which has an x86 processor core.</p> </div><p>Which makes complete sense, because of its low power consumption you're going to see less heat and longer battery life (why do you think OLPC <a href="http://mobile.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/03/12/1726253" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">moved to it</a> [slashdot.org]).  And for those of you skeptical of the speed:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>When the first Snapdragon-based devices hit the market later this year, they will have a 1GHz Arm processor core but that will increase to 1.3GHz next year, with the release of Qualcomm's Snapdragon 8650A, Pineda said.</p></div><p>Every single eee PC available (with Atom processors) on the market is x86, to my knowledge.  <br> <br>

This headline really got my hopes up as I just bout an eee PC 1000HE last weekend and have it dual booting to Windows XP &amp; Easy Peasy Ubuntu.  I love it.  It's totally replaced my 5 year old laptop.  I was hoping this meant I could partition out some space for Android but it looks like I'm left to emulating it (pretty much <i>not</i> an option considering the overhead).  Maybe Google just doesn't see a point of porting Android to x86 since it's probably pretty dependent on the power efficiency of ARM?  <br> <br>

Pare away the heat sink and all that junk, add super small RAM and flash storage and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... hand held computers (like the article notes from Toshiba).  Microsoft better not be resting on its laurels and should either be beefing up Windows Mobile or porting Windows 7 to ARM<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... or they're going to miss out big time again.  <br> <br>

Has anyone found anything on how Android applications dependent on cell phone-ish hardware (like GPS location and the like) will be handled inside a device like the eee PC?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The new laptop -- which Qualcomm calls a smartbook -- is thinner and lighter than current members of Asustek 's Eee PC netbook lineup because the 1GHz Snapdragon processor that it uses does not require a heat sink or a cooling fan.Yes , of course , because of an important point in the article : Qualcomm 's Snapdragon includes a 1GHz Arm processor core , a 600MHz digital-signal processor and hardware video codecs .
Currently , Asustek 's Eee PC line of netbooks relies on Intel processors , in particular the low-cost , low-power Atom chip , which has an x86 processor core .
Which makes complete sense , because of its low power consumption you 're going to see less heat and longer battery life ( why do you think OLPC moved to it [ slashdot.org ] ) .
And for those of you skeptical of the speed : When the first Snapdragon-based devices hit the market later this year , they will have a 1GHz Arm processor core but that will increase to 1.3GHz next year , with the release of Qualcomm 's Snapdragon 8650A , Pineda said.Every single eee PC available ( with Atom processors ) on the market is x86 , to my knowledge .
This headline really got my hopes up as I just bout an eee PC 1000HE last weekend and have it dual booting to Windows XP &amp; Easy Peasy Ubuntu .
I love it .
It 's totally replaced my 5 year old laptop .
I was hoping this meant I could partition out some space for Android but it looks like I 'm left to emulating it ( pretty much not an option considering the overhead ) .
Maybe Google just does n't see a point of porting Android to x86 since it 's probably pretty dependent on the power efficiency of ARM ?
Pare away the heat sink and all that junk , add super small RAM and flash storage and ... hand held computers ( like the article notes from Toshiba ) .
Microsoft better not be resting on its laurels and should either be beefing up Windows Mobile or porting Windows 7 to ARM ... or they 're going to miss out big time again .
Has anyone found anything on how Android applications dependent on cell phone-ish hardware ( like GPS location and the like ) will be handled inside a device like the eee PC ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The new laptop -- which Qualcomm calls a smartbook -- is thinner and lighter than current members of Asustek's Eee PC netbook lineup because the 1GHz Snapdragon processor that it uses does not require a heat sink or a cooling fan.Yes, of course, because of an important point in the article:Qualcomm's Snapdragon includes a 1GHz Arm processor core, a 600MHz digital-signal processor and hardware video codecs.
Currently, Asustek's Eee PC line of netbooks relies on Intel processors, in particular the low-cost, low-power Atom chip, which has an x86 processor core.
Which makes complete sense, because of its low power consumption you're going to see less heat and longer battery life (why do you think OLPC moved to it [slashdot.org]).
And for those of you skeptical of the speed:When the first Snapdragon-based devices hit the market later this year, they will have a 1GHz Arm processor core but that will increase to 1.3GHz next year, with the release of Qualcomm's Snapdragon 8650A, Pineda said.Every single eee PC available (with Atom processors) on the market is x86, to my knowledge.
This headline really got my hopes up as I just bout an eee PC 1000HE last weekend and have it dual booting to Windows XP &amp; Easy Peasy Ubuntu.
I love it.
It's totally replaced my 5 year old laptop.
I was hoping this meant I could partition out some space for Android but it looks like I'm left to emulating it (pretty much not an option considering the overhead).
Maybe Google just doesn't see a point of porting Android to x86 since it's probably pretty dependent on the power efficiency of ARM?
Pare away the heat sink and all that junk, add super small RAM and flash storage and ... hand held computers (like the article notes from Toshiba).
Microsoft better not be resting on its laurels and should either be beefing up Windows Mobile or porting Windows 7 to ARM ... or they're going to miss out big time again.
Has anyone found anything on how Android applications dependent on cell phone-ish hardware (like GPS location and the like) will be handled inside a device like the eee PC?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181969</id>
	<title>How will current apps cope?</title>
	<author>riflemann</author>
	<datestamp>1243956600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are ~3500 android apps out there now, virtually every one of them written assuming HTC Dream hardware.</p><p>It will be very interesting to see how they all cope when run on emerging hardware with vastly different characteristics and screens to the opening device.</p><p>My own <a href="http://android-target.google.com/" title="google.com">Android game</a> [google.com] is not exempt and will need better adaptability (yeah, hypocrite).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are ~ 3500 android apps out there now , virtually every one of them written assuming HTC Dream hardware.It will be very interesting to see how they all cope when run on emerging hardware with vastly different characteristics and screens to the opening device.My own Android game [ google.com ] is not exempt and will need better adaptability ( yeah , hypocrite ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are ~3500 android apps out there now, virtually every one of them written assuming HTC Dream hardware.It will be very interesting to see how they all cope when run on emerging hardware with vastly different characteristics and screens to the opening device.My own Android game [google.com] is not exempt and will need better adaptability (yeah, hypocrite).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180931</id>
	<title>That's great, but...</title>
	<author>DomNF15</author>
	<datestamp>1243952100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am less concerned with the OS than with the increased battery life/less weight in a device like this.  As long as the OS supports mobile broadband cards from the major wireless carriers and some basic apps like web browsing and an office suite, I'd be happy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am less concerned with the OS than with the increased battery life/less weight in a device like this .
As long as the OS supports mobile broadband cards from the major wireless carriers and some basic apps like web browsing and an office suite , I 'd be happy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am less concerned with the OS than with the increased battery life/less weight in a device like this.
As long as the OS supports mobile broadband cards from the major wireless carriers and some basic apps like web browsing and an office suite, I'd be happy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28182093</id>
	<title>Re:Because Snapdragon Is an ARM Processor!</title>
	<author>mhall119</author>
	<datestamp>1243957020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Most Windows applications will not be ported and will run even worse in emulation - a Snapdragon emulating x86 will be unusably slow.</p></div><p>This doesn't get said enough.  Microsoft could run WinMobile on these, or even port Win7 to ARM, but without the vast ecosystems of Win32/x86 applications and drivers it will be useless.</p><p>I expect that they will put their money into boosting development for WinMobile, as it already has an ARM-capable ecosystem, and probably pushing more pure<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.Net applications that would be portable across both architectures.</p><p>Still, they will be the underdog in the ARM race, and they're not known for speed and flexibility in their development cycle, so it will require some pretty drastic changes for them to compete.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Most Windows applications will not be ported and will run even worse in emulation - a Snapdragon emulating x86 will be unusably slow.This does n't get said enough .
Microsoft could run WinMobile on these , or even port Win7 to ARM , but without the vast ecosystems of Win32/x86 applications and drivers it will be useless.I expect that they will put their money into boosting development for WinMobile , as it already has an ARM-capable ecosystem , and probably pushing more pure .Net applications that would be portable across both architectures.Still , they will be the underdog in the ARM race , and they 're not known for speed and flexibility in their development cycle , so it will require some pretty drastic changes for them to compete .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most Windows applications will not be ported and will run even worse in emulation - a Snapdragon emulating x86 will be unusably slow.This doesn't get said enough.
Microsoft could run WinMobile on these, or even port Win7 to ARM, but without the vast ecosystems of Win32/x86 applications and drivers it will be useless.I expect that they will put their money into boosting development for WinMobile, as it already has an ARM-capable ecosystem, and probably pushing more pure .Net applications that would be portable across both architectures.Still, they will be the underdog in the ARM race, and they're not known for speed and flexibility in their development cycle, so it will require some pretty drastic changes for them to compete.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181461</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28183081</id>
	<title>Re:Because Snapdragon Is an ARM Processor!</title>
	<author>schon</author>
	<datestamp>1243960320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Its easier for Microsoft to just buy a company that has an ARM-compatible OS then to actually develop one.</p></div><p>I'm confused by this statement.  Why would they develop an ARM-compatable OS if they'd already bought one?</p><p>Wouldn't they just use the one they bought instead?</p><p>In any event, I find it hard to believe that MS's programmers would have such a hard time programming for ARM that they'd need an existing software base to copy from.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Its easier for Microsoft to just buy a company that has an ARM-compatible OS then to actually develop one.I 'm confused by this statement .
Why would they develop an ARM-compatable OS if they 'd already bought one ? Would n't they just use the one they bought instead ? In any event , I find it hard to believe that MS 's programmers would have such a hard time programming for ARM that they 'd need an existing software base to copy from .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its easier for Microsoft to just buy a company that has an ARM-compatible OS then to actually develop one.I'm confused by this statement.
Why would they develop an ARM-compatable OS if they'd already bought one?Wouldn't they just use the one they bought instead?In any event, I find it hard to believe that MS's programmers would have such a hard time programming for ARM that they'd need an existing software base to copy from.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181381</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28190951</id>
	<title>Re:Yes, but obvious question...</title>
	<author>rrohbeck</author>
	<datestamp>1243955520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sure. Just compile Qemu for ARM.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure .
Just compile Qemu for ARM .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure.
Just compile Qemu for ARM.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181457</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28185255</id>
	<title>This is the future.ter</title>
	<author>miffo.swe</author>
	<datestamp>1243969380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think that Snapdragon is a really interesting concept that could really fly if someone took it to Android. The ability to play video in 720i smooth and very good battery time is something that could really move smartbooks/netbooks. While im pretty convinced ASUS has gone into an agreemennt with Microsoft that forbids any linuxy stuff someone else will take the platform and run with it. The point of a netbook is not and has never been running a full desktop with all the bloat that brings. Thats Microsofts bastardisation of a netbook thats really more a small underpowered laptop.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think that Snapdragon is a really interesting concept that could really fly if someone took it to Android .
The ability to play video in 720i smooth and very good battery time is something that could really move smartbooks/netbooks .
While im pretty convinced ASUS has gone into an agreemennt with Microsoft that forbids any linuxy stuff someone else will take the platform and run with it .
The point of a netbook is not and has never been running a full desktop with all the bloat that brings .
Thats Microsofts bastardisation of a netbook thats really more a small underpowered laptop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think that Snapdragon is a really interesting concept that could really fly if someone took it to Android.
The ability to play video in 720i smooth and very good battery time is something that could really move smartbooks/netbooks.
While im pretty convinced ASUS has gone into an agreemennt with Microsoft that forbids any linuxy stuff someone else will take the platform and run with it.
The point of a netbook is not and has never been running a full desktop with all the bloat that brings.
Thats Microsofts bastardisation of a netbook thats really more a small underpowered laptop.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28183193</id>
	<title>So let me get this straight...</title>
	<author>ChaoticCoyote</author>
	<datestamp>1243960740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Android uses Linux, but isn't Linux (no standard libraries, for example).
</p><p>
Android uses Java, but it isn't standard Java nor is it compatible with most Java apps.
</p><p>
Android is open source, except for certain fiddly-bits they keep private.
</p><p>
This is not the competition for Windows we've been looking for.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Android uses Linux , but is n't Linux ( no standard libraries , for example ) .
Android uses Java , but it is n't standard Java nor is it compatible with most Java apps .
Android is open source , except for certain fiddly-bits they keep private .
This is not the competition for Windows we 've been looking for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Android uses Linux, but isn't Linux (no standard libraries, for example).
Android uses Java, but it isn't standard Java nor is it compatible with most Java apps.
Android is open source, except for certain fiddly-bits they keep private.
This is not the competition for Windows we've been looking for.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28182421</id>
	<title>Re:Keep an eye on google...</title>
	<author>cellurl</author>
	<datestamp>1243958100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everyone loves everyone while its free.</p><p>This minute you charge, people bitch.</p><p>Funny story: </p><p>My neighbor was playing sim-city.</p><p>He was the mayor.</p><p>If you have ever played it, you know that the city councilmen constant talk/complain to the mayor.</p><p>My friend (the mayor) lowered taxes to 0.0\%  </p><p>He said that even at 0-taxes, some councilmen still complained of high taxes!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone loves everyone while its free.This minute you charge , people bitch.Funny story : My neighbor was playing sim-city.He was the mayor.If you have ever played it , you know that the city councilmen constant talk/complain to the mayor.My friend ( the mayor ) lowered taxes to 0.0 \ % He said that even at 0-taxes , some councilmen still complained of high taxes !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone loves everyone while its free.This minute you charge, people bitch.Funny story: My neighbor was playing sim-city.He was the mayor.If you have ever played it, you know that the city councilmen constant talk/complain to the mayor.My friend (the mayor) lowered taxes to 0.0\%  He said that even at 0-taxes, some councilmen still complained of high taxes!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180983</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181457</id>
	<title>Yes, but obvious question...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243954800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does it run windows?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does it run windows ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does it run windows?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180953</id>
	<title>Like iPhone OS on iPod Touch, perhaps</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1243952220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Has anyone found anything on how Android applications dependent on cell phone-ish hardware (like GPS location and the like) will be handled inside a device like the eee PC?</p></div><p>Likewise, has anyone found anything on how iPhone OS applications dependent on cell phone-ish hardware (like GPS location and the like) will be handled inside a device like the iPod Touch?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Has anyone found anything on how Android applications dependent on cell phone-ish hardware ( like GPS location and the like ) will be handled inside a device like the eee PC ? Likewise , has anyone found anything on how iPhone OS applications dependent on cell phone-ish hardware ( like GPS location and the like ) will be handled inside a device like the iPod Touch ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Has anyone found anything on how Android applications dependent on cell phone-ish hardware (like GPS location and the like) will be handled inside a device like the eee PC?Likewise, has anyone found anything on how iPhone OS applications dependent on cell phone-ish hardware (like GPS location and the like) will be handled inside a device like the iPod Touch?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181401</id>
	<title>Does it have flash.</title>
	<author>LWATCDR</author>
	<datestamp>1243954560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is going to be a an issue for any netbook.  This with the android store could really make an interesting system.<br>Some people will say that it is just a big smart phone but there is no need to limit it to just smart phone like applications.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is going to be a an issue for any netbook .
This with the android store could really make an interesting system.Some people will say that it is just a big smart phone but there is no need to limit it to just smart phone like applications .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is going to be a an issue for any netbook.
This with the android store could really make an interesting system.Some people will say that it is just a big smart phone but there is no need to limit it to just smart phone like applications.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28188029</id>
	<title>Re:Because Snapdragon Is an ARM Processor!</title>
	<author>sgt scrub</author>
	<datestamp>1243937820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Like Dos.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Like Dos .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like Dos.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181381</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28182481</id>
	<title>Re:Because Snapdragon Is an ARM Processor!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243958340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://www.androidx86.org/ Android will make it to x86, just not there yet.</p><p>I think Google is going after Microsoft's soft belly.. (WindowsME sucks, and Windows XP-Vista-7 hardware requirements are higher than optimal for low power devices).</p><p>So instead of competing with Microsoft on the high end PC front, where you can't get a foothold, they are starting at the bottom and moving up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.androidx86.org/ Android will make it to x86 , just not there yet.I think Google is going after Microsoft 's soft belly.. ( WindowsME sucks , and Windows XP-Vista-7 hardware requirements are higher than optimal for low power devices ) .So instead of competing with Microsoft on the high end PC front , where you ca n't get a foothold , they are starting at the bottom and moving up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.androidx86.org/ Android will make it to x86, just not there yet.I think Google is going after Microsoft's soft belly.. (WindowsME sucks, and Windows XP-Vista-7 hardware requirements are higher than optimal for low power devices).So instead of competing with Microsoft on the high end PC front, where you can't get a foothold, they are starting at the bottom and moving up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28182329</id>
	<title>Re:Because Snapdragon Is an ARM Processor!</title>
	<author>Bert64</author>
	<datestamp>1243957800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is why Linux really stands to benefit...<br>Even if windows were ported to arm, all of the applications would still need to be ported by their respective vendors, many of which wouldn't bother, or would release a castrated "mobile" version instead..</p><p>Most commercial vendors won't port to a platform unless there is a sufficient market for it, and most customers won't buy a product unless there is already sufficient software availability.. A catch 22 that's already killed Itanium.</p><p>Linux on the other hand, is already ported to arm, and most of the applications you would use on a typical linux desktop are also already ported... And any new open source applications being written would be trivially portable between various different processors too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is why Linux really stands to benefit...Even if windows were ported to arm , all of the applications would still need to be ported by their respective vendors , many of which would n't bother , or would release a castrated " mobile " version instead..Most commercial vendors wo n't port to a platform unless there is a sufficient market for it , and most customers wo n't buy a product unless there is already sufficient software availability.. A catch 22 that 's already killed Itanium.Linux on the other hand , is already ported to arm , and most of the applications you would use on a typical linux desktop are also already ported... And any new open source applications being written would be trivially portable between various different processors too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is why Linux really stands to benefit...Even if windows were ported to arm, all of the applications would still need to be ported by their respective vendors, many of which wouldn't bother, or would release a castrated "mobile" version instead..Most commercial vendors won't port to a platform unless there is a sufficient market for it, and most customers won't buy a product unless there is already sufficient software availability.. A catch 22 that's already killed Itanium.Linux on the other hand, is already ported to arm, and most of the applications you would use on a typical linux desktop are also already ported... And any new open source applications being written would be trivially portable between various different processors too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181461</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181577</id>
	<title>They put Xandros on ARM??</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243955340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That seems like a waste of effort.<br>That pile is the worst Linux dist I have seen.<br>Why haven't they given up on this thing?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That seems like a waste of effort.That pile is the worst Linux dist I have seen.Why have n't they given up on this thing ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That seems like a waste of effort.That pile is the worst Linux dist I have seen.Why haven't they given up on this thing?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28183615</id>
	<title>Re:Because Snapdragon Is an ARM Processor!</title>
	<author>horza</author>
	<datestamp>1243962360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why would you want to hobble an ARM processor by trying to run x86 cruft on it? A 1GHz ARM processor will blow away an equivalent x86 when running apps natively. If I was running desktop apps on a netbook I wouldn't even want something as heavy as OpenOffice, let alone a monolith like MS Office, I would want something like Abiword but with the OO import/export filters. As bert64 says, there is a wealth of Linux apps, and with Ubuntu netbook-friendly version coming you can bet their repository will fill quickly with ARM versions of all the apps.</p><p>Phillip.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would you want to hobble an ARM processor by trying to run x86 cruft on it ?
A 1GHz ARM processor will blow away an equivalent x86 when running apps natively .
If I was running desktop apps on a netbook I would n't even want something as heavy as OpenOffice , let alone a monolith like MS Office , I would want something like Abiword but with the OO import/export filters .
As bert64 says , there is a wealth of Linux apps , and with Ubuntu netbook-friendly version coming you can bet their repository will fill quickly with ARM versions of all the apps.Phillip .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would you want to hobble an ARM processor by trying to run x86 cruft on it?
A 1GHz ARM processor will blow away an equivalent x86 when running apps natively.
If I was running desktop apps on a netbook I wouldn't even want something as heavy as OpenOffice, let alone a monolith like MS Office, I would want something like Abiword but with the OO import/export filters.
As bert64 says, there is a wealth of Linux apps, and with Ubuntu netbook-friendly version coming you can bet their repository will fill quickly with ARM versions of all the apps.Phillip.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181461</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28182529</id>
	<title>I've only got one more point on my list unsolved</title>
	<author>Qbertino</author>
	<datestamp>1243958460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As far as modern day handheld computers go, I have to say that the Asus EEE induced second coming of the <a href="http://golfism.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/netbook1.jpg" title="wordpress.com">Netbook</a> [wordpress.com] and its <a href="http://www.computermuseumgroningen.nl/sharp/pc-3000big.jpg" title="computermu...oningen.nl">liklings</a> [computermu...oningen.nl] has had extremley positive side effects on the market in the last two years.</p><p>Portability? Check.<br>Openess and flexibility of plattform? Check.<br>Price? Check.<br>Versatility? Check.</p><p>However, there is just one more thing I want before I can say they are on par with the mid-nineties PC handhelds that where available back then and could easyly keep up with their big desktop brothers in terms of getting the job done: Battery Uptime and/or easy replacement of battery.</p><p>Let me explain: The <a href="http://www.stefan-zugowski.gmxhome.de/hp200lx.gif" title="gmxhome.de">HP 200LX</a> [gmxhome.de], Sharp PC 3000, 3100 and its non-name rebrands ran on AA cells. And while the off-grid uptime was a meager 3,5 hours at max, you could easyly replace them with rechargeables or - in an emergency - with fresh AA cells from the next gas station or convenience store.<br>I want that kind of battery time or convenience from todays handhelds aswell. If convenience is not an option, I want the same uptime I could get from my old Palm m105 with folding keyboard attached or from the original Psion Netbook: 40 hours.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... On the Palm that uptime came from 3 or 4 AAA cells btw - but that's another story.</p><p>Substancially increased battery uptime without outlandish pricing - then handhelds are back in the game for me. It would be about time.</p><p>My 2 cents.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As far as modern day handheld computers go , I have to say that the Asus EEE induced second coming of the Netbook [ wordpress.com ] and its liklings [ computermu...oningen.nl ] has had extremley positive side effects on the market in the last two years.Portability ?
Check.Openess and flexibility of plattform ?
Check.Price ? Check.Versatility ?
Check.However , there is just one more thing I want before I can say they are on par with the mid-nineties PC handhelds that where available back then and could easyly keep up with their big desktop brothers in terms of getting the job done : Battery Uptime and/or easy replacement of battery.Let me explain : The HP 200LX [ gmxhome.de ] , Sharp PC 3000 , 3100 and its non-name rebrands ran on AA cells .
And while the off-grid uptime was a meager 3,5 hours at max , you could easyly replace them with rechargeables or - in an emergency - with fresh AA cells from the next gas station or convenience store.I want that kind of battery time or convenience from todays handhelds aswell .
If convenience is not an option , I want the same uptime I could get from my old Palm m105 with folding keyboard attached or from the original Psion Netbook : 40 hours .
... On the Palm that uptime came from 3 or 4 AAA cells btw - but that 's another story.Substancially increased battery uptime without outlandish pricing - then handhelds are back in the game for me .
It would be about time.My 2 cents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As far as modern day handheld computers go, I have to say that the Asus EEE induced second coming of the Netbook [wordpress.com] and its liklings [computermu...oningen.nl] has had extremley positive side effects on the market in the last two years.Portability?
Check.Openess and flexibility of plattform?
Check.Price? Check.Versatility?
Check.However, there is just one more thing I want before I can say they are on par with the mid-nineties PC handhelds that where available back then and could easyly keep up with their big desktop brothers in terms of getting the job done: Battery Uptime and/or easy replacement of battery.Let me explain: The HP 200LX [gmxhome.de], Sharp PC 3000, 3100 and its non-name rebrands ran on AA cells.
And while the off-grid uptime was a meager 3,5 hours at max, you could easyly replace them with rechargeables or - in an emergency - with fresh AA cells from the next gas station or convenience store.I want that kind of battery time or convenience from todays handhelds aswell.
If convenience is not an option, I want the same uptime I could get from my old Palm m105 with folding keyboard attached or from the original Psion Netbook: 40 hours.
... On the Palm that uptime came from 3 or 4 AAA cells btw - but that's another story.Substancially increased battery uptime without outlandish pricing - then handhelds are back in the game for me.
It would be about time.My 2 cents.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181979</id>
	<title>Re:I still don't like netbooks</title>
	<author>Locutus</author>
	<datestamp>1243956600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Nokia n810 is based on ARM and I thought a new model was supposed to be based on TI's OMAP3530 chip. That Pandora device is based on that chip and it's gonna scream. The Cortex-A8 design really boosted performance and still keeps much of the low power usage features.</p><p>LoB</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Nokia n810 is based on ARM and I thought a new model was supposed to be based on TI 's OMAP3530 chip .
That Pandora device is based on that chip and it 's gon na scream .
The Cortex-A8 design really boosted performance and still keeps much of the low power usage features.LoB</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Nokia n810 is based on ARM and I thought a new model was supposed to be based on TI's OMAP3530 chip.
That Pandora device is based on that chip and it's gonna scream.
The Cortex-A8 design really boosted performance and still keeps much of the low power usage features.LoB</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181455</id>
	<title>I want one!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243954800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The ultimate, nerdy, but very very useful boy-toy.
</p><p>I have the EEE 701 and I love it except for the smallish screen and too short battery life (can squeeze out 3-4 hrs by dimming the screen but that's it). 8-10 hrs sounds quite OK to me, getting usable. And built-in 3G radio: ultimate connectivity.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The ultimate , nerdy , but very very useful boy-toy .
I have the EEE 701 and I love it except for the smallish screen and too short battery life ( can squeeze out 3-4 hrs by dimming the screen but that 's it ) .
8-10 hrs sounds quite OK to me , getting usable .
And built-in 3G radio : ultimate connectivity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The ultimate, nerdy, but very very useful boy-toy.
I have the EEE 701 and I love it except for the smallish screen and too short battery life (can squeeze out 3-4 hrs by dimming the screen but that's it).
8-10 hrs sounds quite OK to me, getting usable.
And built-in 3G radio: ultimate connectivity.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181797</id>
	<title>Re:Because Snapdragon Is an ARM Processor!</title>
	<author>Tenebrousedge</author>
	<datestamp>1243956120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Every single eee PC available (with Atom processors) on the market is x86, to my knowledge.</p> </div><p>That is correct, but I can't imagine why it's relevant. Did you mean to distinguish them from x86-64 or IA64? Or are you saying that all Atom-powered Eee's are not powered by ARM processors? That seems to be a vacuous truth.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>And for those of you skeptical of the speed:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>When the first Snapdragon-based devices hit the market later this year, they will have a 1GHz Arm processor core but that will increase to 1.3GHz next year, with the release of Qualcomm's Snapdragon 8650A, Pineda said.</p></div></div><p>If the Netburst architecture taught us anything, it was that clock speed isn't everything.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Has anyone found anything on how Android applications dependent on cell phone-ish hardware (like GPS location and the like) will be handled inside a device like the eee PC?</p></div><p>Why would this would be any different than how it's handled in any other linux-based OS?</p><p>You seem excited by the thought of a handheld computer. I have to ask, why do you want one? I don't think there's any market for them. We've had PDAs and many other more specialized handheld devices before, and there is certainly a niche for the 'smartphone' class of devices, but what would be the point of a general-purpose computer smaller than an Eee? Touchscreen or no, anything with a keyboard smaller than about seven inches is useful for SMS-length messages only. So unless you're going to invent a radically new method of user input, the market is already segmented based on that design decision. We either already have what you're talking about as far as a 'handheld computer', or it's not likely to happen.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Every single eee PC available ( with Atom processors ) on the market is x86 , to my knowledge .
That is correct , but I ca n't imagine why it 's relevant .
Did you mean to distinguish them from x86-64 or IA64 ?
Or are you saying that all Atom-powered Eee 's are not powered by ARM processors ?
That seems to be a vacuous truth.And for those of you skeptical of the speed : When the first Snapdragon-based devices hit the market later this year , they will have a 1GHz Arm processor core but that will increase to 1.3GHz next year , with the release of Qualcomm 's Snapdragon 8650A , Pineda said.If the Netburst architecture taught us anything , it was that clock speed is n't everything.Has anyone found anything on how Android applications dependent on cell phone-ish hardware ( like GPS location and the like ) will be handled inside a device like the eee PC ? Why would this would be any different than how it 's handled in any other linux-based OS ? You seem excited by the thought of a handheld computer .
I have to ask , why do you want one ?
I do n't think there 's any market for them .
We 've had PDAs and many other more specialized handheld devices before , and there is certainly a niche for the 'smartphone ' class of devices , but what would be the point of a general-purpose computer smaller than an Eee ?
Touchscreen or no , anything with a keyboard smaller than about seven inches is useful for SMS-length messages only .
So unless you 're going to invent a radically new method of user input , the market is already segmented based on that design decision .
We either already have what you 're talking about as far as a 'handheld computer ' , or it 's not likely to happen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Every single eee PC available (with Atom processors) on the market is x86, to my knowledge.
That is correct, but I can't imagine why it's relevant.
Did you mean to distinguish them from x86-64 or IA64?
Or are you saying that all Atom-powered Eee's are not powered by ARM processors?
That seems to be a vacuous truth.And for those of you skeptical of the speed:When the first Snapdragon-based devices hit the market later this year, they will have a 1GHz Arm processor core but that will increase to 1.3GHz next year, with the release of Qualcomm's Snapdragon 8650A, Pineda said.If the Netburst architecture taught us anything, it was that clock speed isn't everything.Has anyone found anything on how Android applications dependent on cell phone-ish hardware (like GPS location and the like) will be handled inside a device like the eee PC?Why would this would be any different than how it's handled in any other linux-based OS?You seem excited by the thought of a handheld computer.
I have to ask, why do you want one?
I don't think there's any market for them.
We've had PDAs and many other more specialized handheld devices before, and there is certainly a niche for the 'smartphone' class of devices, but what would be the point of a general-purpose computer smaller than an Eee?
Touchscreen or no, anything with a keyboard smaller than about seven inches is useful for SMS-length messages only.
So unless you're going to invent a radically new method of user input, the market is already segmented based on that design decision.
We either already have what you're talking about as far as a 'handheld computer', or it's not likely to happen.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180941</id>
	<title>More smartphone than PC</title>
	<author>InterBigs</author>
	<datestamp>1243952160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well the <a href="http://www.hellosmartbook.com/" title="hellosmartbook.com" rel="nofollow">hip introduction video</a> [hellosmartbook.com] looks cool, but I'm afraid this will be more of a smartphone (sans the phone) than a laptop. But I guess that's OK if they can sell it below the price of the current eee's.<br>
I think I'd rather wait for Moblin before going the Android route.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well the hip introduction video [ hellosmartbook.com ] looks cool , but I 'm afraid this will be more of a smartphone ( sans the phone ) than a laptop .
But I guess that 's OK if they can sell it below the price of the current eee 's .
I think I 'd rather wait for Moblin before going the Android route .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well the hip introduction video [hellosmartbook.com] looks cool, but I'm afraid this will be more of a smartphone (sans the phone) than a laptop.
But I guess that's OK if they can sell it below the price of the current eee's.
I think I'd rather wait for Moblin before going the Android route.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181121</id>
	<title>Re:Because Snapdragon Is an ARM Processor!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243953120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Which makes complete sense, because of its low power consumption you're going to see less heat and longer battery life (why do you think OLPC moved to it).</p></div><p>OLPC was formerly using Geode LX, which while not a speed demon by ANY stretch <em>is</em> very low-power. TDP for the CPU+Chipset is under 10 watts.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Which makes complete sense , because of its low power consumption you 're going to see less heat and longer battery life ( why do you think OLPC moved to it ) .OLPC was formerly using Geode LX , which while not a speed demon by ANY stretch is very low-power .
TDP for the CPU + Chipset is under 10 watts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which makes complete sense, because of its low power consumption you're going to see less heat and longer battery life (why do you think OLPC moved to it).OLPC was formerly using Geode LX, which while not a speed demon by ANY stretch is very low-power.
TDP for the CPU+Chipset is under 10 watts.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181737</id>
	<title>'Asustek puts Android netbook on ice'</title>
	<author>snydeq</author>
	<datestamp>1243955940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Asustek appears to have <a href="http://infoworld.com/d/mobilize/asustek-puts-android-netbook-ice-728" title="infoworld.com">already scuttled this project</a> [infoworld.com], calling the technology 'not mature' and disavowing any pressure from Microsoft and Intel over the use of Android and Snapdragon in the Eee PC. <br> <br>
Of course, the Android-based Eee was demonstrated by Qualcomm, not Asustek. Yet, Asustek's distancing itself from the machine while competitors like <a href="http://infoworld.com/d/mobilize/acer-may-be-first-android-netbook-700" title="infoworld.com">Acer are announcing Android plans</a> [infoworld.com] is a little bit intriguing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Asustek appears to have already scuttled this project [ infoworld.com ] , calling the technology 'not mature ' and disavowing any pressure from Microsoft and Intel over the use of Android and Snapdragon in the Eee PC .
Of course , the Android-based Eee was demonstrated by Qualcomm , not Asustek .
Yet , Asustek 's distancing itself from the machine while competitors like Acer are announcing Android plans [ infoworld.com ] is a little bit intriguing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Asustek appears to have already scuttled this project [infoworld.com], calling the technology 'not mature' and disavowing any pressure from Microsoft and Intel over the use of Android and Snapdragon in the Eee PC.
Of course, the Android-based Eee was demonstrated by Qualcomm, not Asustek.
Yet, Asustek's distancing itself from the machine while competitors like Acer are announcing Android plans [infoworld.com] is a little bit intriguing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28183233</id>
	<title>Native mode</title>
	<author>Corson</author>
	<datestamp>1243960800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>For Android OS to really take off an alternate window manager (native, non-Dalvik/Java-based) is required that would allow applications to run in native mode, even if Google don't support it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For Android OS to really take off an alternate window manager ( native , non-Dalvik/Java-based ) is required that would allow applications to run in native mode , even if Google do n't support it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For Android OS to really take off an alternate window manager (native, non-Dalvik/Java-based) is required that would allow applications to run in native mode, even if Google don't support it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181421</id>
	<title>Re:Because Snapdragon Is an ARM Processor!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243954620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, that's not the important point at all...at least not the most important point.</p><p>1. Android is "free" (unlike XP or Vista or Windows 7 or even Ubuntu on ARM)<br>2. ARM is considerably cheaper than Intel processors<br>3. Longer battery life from power consumption benefits (obviously a nice bonus but the big guns are going for a cheaper way to make netbooks)</p><p>I work for one of the companies that is making software for these new devices and Asus is going to bring out netbook based devices as well. Oh there is Android for x86 as well (again cost cutting measures) but whether that comes out for the public remains to be seen. I've installed and used Android on several netbooks and this is <a href="http://www.talkandroid.com/888-compal-android-netbooks/" title="talkandroid.com" rel="nofollow">old news</a> [talkandroid.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , that 's not the important point at all...at least not the most important point.1 .
Android is " free " ( unlike XP or Vista or Windows 7 or even Ubuntu on ARM ) 2 .
ARM is considerably cheaper than Intel processors3 .
Longer battery life from power consumption benefits ( obviously a nice bonus but the big guns are going for a cheaper way to make netbooks ) I work for one of the companies that is making software for these new devices and Asus is going to bring out netbook based devices as well .
Oh there is Android for x86 as well ( again cost cutting measures ) but whether that comes out for the public remains to be seen .
I 've installed and used Android on several netbooks and this is old news [ talkandroid.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, that's not the important point at all...at least not the most important point.1.
Android is "free" (unlike XP or Vista or Windows 7 or even Ubuntu on ARM)2.
ARM is considerably cheaper than Intel processors3.
Longer battery life from power consumption benefits (obviously a nice bonus but the big guns are going for a cheaper way to make netbooks)I work for one of the companies that is making software for these new devices and Asus is going to bring out netbook based devices as well.
Oh there is Android for x86 as well (again cost cutting measures) but whether that comes out for the public remains to be seen.
I've installed and used Android on several netbooks and this is old news [talkandroid.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28184627</id>
	<title>Re:Keep an eye on google...</title>
	<author>bogeuh</author>
	<datestamp>1243966740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Google perhaps doesn't share private data with others, but they sure as hell look at it themselves
worldwide monopoly on targetted advertising brings in the big bucks
im fine with it
but if they don't already do it, you can be pretty sure that at some thime they will</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google perhaps does n't share private data with others , but they sure as hell look at it themselves worldwide monopoly on targetted advertising brings in the big bucks im fine with it but if they do n't already do it , you can be pretty sure that at some thime they will</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google perhaps doesn't share private data with others, but they sure as hell look at it themselves
worldwide monopoly on targetted advertising brings in the big bucks
im fine with it
but if they don't already do it, you can be pretty sure that at some thime they will</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180983</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28182085</id>
	<title>Re:Because Snapdragon Is an ARM Processor!</title>
	<author>bzzfzz</author>
	<datestamp>1243956960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>
Has anyone found anything on how Android applications dependent on cell phone-ish hardware (like GPS location and the like) will be handled inside a device like the eee PC?</p></div><p>Well, the Android developers' kit includes emulation software so you can punch in whatever coordinates you like for testing, and there are plenty of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SiRFstar\_III" title="wikipedia.org">cheap, small GPS modules</a> [wikipedia.org] on the market.  I would imagine that application compatibility problems will manifest in other areas, like display size and performance, since software developers who initially targeted the G1 have not had an opportunity to test on unrelated devices until recently.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Has anyone found anything on how Android applications dependent on cell phone-ish hardware ( like GPS location and the like ) will be handled inside a device like the eee PC ? Well , the Android developers ' kit includes emulation software so you can punch in whatever coordinates you like for testing , and there are plenty of cheap , small GPS modules [ wikipedia.org ] on the market .
I would imagine that application compatibility problems will manifest in other areas , like display size and performance , since software developers who initially targeted the G1 have not had an opportunity to test on unrelated devices until recently .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Has anyone found anything on how Android applications dependent on cell phone-ish hardware (like GPS location and the like) will be handled inside a device like the eee PC?Well, the Android developers' kit includes emulation software so you can punch in whatever coordinates you like for testing, and there are plenty of cheap, small GPS modules [wikipedia.org] on the market.
I would imagine that application compatibility problems will manifest in other areas, like display size and performance, since software developers who initially targeted the G1 have not had an opportunity to test on unrelated devices until recently.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28182493</id>
	<title>Re:Because Snapdragon Is an ARM Processor!</title>
	<author>rickb928</author>
	<datestamp>1243958400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>"Has anyone found anything on how Android applications dependent on cell phone-ish hardware (like GPS location and the like) will be handled inside a device like the eee PC?"</i></p><p>Um, applications dependent on cellphone-ish hardware would probably not be installed on a device like the eeePC.  Who needs SMS when you don't have cell service?</p><p>Of course, a dialer would be cool if you implement UMA. Which would be cool on my G1.  So I should root my G1 and install Ubuntu?  Works for me.  Right after I get the Cupcake stuff into a Ubuntu release.  Why would I give up A2DP?  Or does Ubuntu's BT stack have that already?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Has anyone found anything on how Android applications dependent on cell phone-ish hardware ( like GPS location and the like ) will be handled inside a device like the eee PC ?
" Um , applications dependent on cellphone-ish hardware would probably not be installed on a device like the eeePC .
Who needs SMS when you do n't have cell service ? Of course , a dialer would be cool if you implement UMA .
Which would be cool on my G1 .
So I should root my G1 and install Ubuntu ?
Works for me .
Right after I get the Cupcake stuff into a Ubuntu release .
Why would I give up A2DP ?
Or does Ubuntu 's BT stack have that already ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Has anyone found anything on how Android applications dependent on cell phone-ish hardware (like GPS location and the like) will be handled inside a device like the eee PC?
"Um, applications dependent on cellphone-ish hardware would probably not be installed on a device like the eeePC.
Who needs SMS when you don't have cell service?Of course, a dialer would be cool if you implement UMA.
Which would be cool on my G1.
So I should root my G1 and install Ubuntu?
Works for me.
Right after I get the Cupcake stuff into a Ubuntu release.
Why would I give up A2DP?
Or does Ubuntu's BT stack have that already?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28188139</id>
	<title>Re:Because Snapdragon Is an ARM Processor!</title>
	<author>sgt scrub</author>
	<datestamp>1243938360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I didn't think anyone was equating the devices to full blown laptops.  Does anyone really want to work on a document on that small of a device?  I'd have to be really jones'n to make an edit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't think anyone was equating the devices to full blown laptops .
Does anyone really want to work on a document on that small of a device ?
I 'd have to be really jones'n to make an edit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't think anyone was equating the devices to full blown laptops.
Does anyone really want to work on a document on that small of a device?
I'd have to be really jones'n to make an edit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181461</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28185135</id>
	<title>Re:Because Snapdragon Is an ARM Processor!</title>
	<author>PRMan</author>
	<datestamp>1243968780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Windows 2000 runs pretty snappy on an Atom processor.</p><p>I'm using it because Office doesn't come with MSDN anymore.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows 2000 runs pretty snappy on an Atom processor.I 'm using it because Office does n't come with MSDN anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows 2000 runs pretty snappy on an Atom processor.I'm using it because Office doesn't come with MSDN anymore.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181461</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28183801</id>
	<title>I want it NOW!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243963200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So when can I get my snapdragon powered mini-itx motherboard? It would make an ideal media centre.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So when can I get my snapdragon powered mini-itx motherboard ?
It would make an ideal media centre .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So when can I get my snapdragon powered mini-itx motherboard?
It would make an ideal media centre.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28190143</id>
	<title>Re:Because Snapdragon Is an ARM Processor!</title>
	<author>radarsat1</author>
	<datestamp>1243949040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anyone else interested in the fact that it has an embedded DSP?  I wonder what else that could be used for...  hard real-time audio processing, for example?<br>I wonder how much it is exposed to the system and through connectors..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone else interested in the fact that it has an embedded DSP ?
I wonder what else that could be used for... hard real-time audio processing , for example ? I wonder how much it is exposed to the system and through connectors. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone else interested in the fact that it has an embedded DSP?
I wonder what else that could be used for...  hard real-time audio processing, for example?I wonder how much it is exposed to the system and through connectors..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181381</id>
	<title>Re:Because Snapdragon Is an ARM Processor!</title>
	<author>Vu1turEMaN</author>
	<datestamp>1243954500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Its easier for Microsoft to just buy a company that has an ARM-compatible OS then to actually develop one. Just throw an XP theme on it and everyone will start using it like MS was saving this for the right moment.</p><p>"Skinning is easier than Winning" - someone on the winamp forums complaining about no new features being added in a while</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Its easier for Microsoft to just buy a company that has an ARM-compatible OS then to actually develop one .
Just throw an XP theme on it and everyone will start using it like MS was saving this for the right moment .
" Skinning is easier than Winning " - someone on the winamp forums complaining about no new features being added in a while</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its easier for Microsoft to just buy a company that has an ARM-compatible OS then to actually develop one.
Just throw an XP theme on it and everyone will start using it like MS was saving this for the right moment.
"Skinning is easier than Winning" - someone on the winamp forums complaining about no new features being added in a while</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28183199</id>
	<title>Re:Because Snapdragon Is an ARM Processor!</title>
	<author>IGnatius T Foobar</author>
	<datestamp>1243960740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> <i>Microsoft better not be resting on its laurels and should either be beefing up Windows Mobile or porting Windows 7 to ARM<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... or they're going to miss out big time again.</i></p></div> </blockquote><p>Even if Microsoft were to port Windows to ARM, they would still lose.  Windows on ARM has the same perceived disadvantage as Linux: it won't run the existing catalog of Windows x86 applications.  Microsoft cheated its way into the netbook market by strongarming Asus and others into bulking up their netbooks until they were basically underpowered laptops that were barely good enough to run Windows XP.  This time around they won't be able to do that.  Even worse: customers who buy Windows-powered ARM netbooks thinking that they'll be able to load their favorite PC-Windows applications, are going to be returning them to the stores in big numbers.<br> <br>Linux and Android are well positioned to take advantage of ARM-based netbooks.  This will be the generation of netbooks that actually look and act like netbooks (very small, very light, many hours of operation on a single charge) rather than underpowered laptops.  Netbooks are higher-functioning smartphones, not lower-functioning laptops.<br> <br>Microsoft's fortunes are tied to x86, period.  Microsoft's only hope of getting back into the game at this point is if Intel builds an Atom chip that sips power as daintily as an ARM.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft better not be resting on its laurels and should either be beefing up Windows Mobile or porting Windows 7 to ARM ... or they 're going to miss out big time again .
Even if Microsoft were to port Windows to ARM , they would still lose .
Windows on ARM has the same perceived disadvantage as Linux : it wo n't run the existing catalog of Windows x86 applications .
Microsoft cheated its way into the netbook market by strongarming Asus and others into bulking up their netbooks until they were basically underpowered laptops that were barely good enough to run Windows XP .
This time around they wo n't be able to do that .
Even worse : customers who buy Windows-powered ARM netbooks thinking that they 'll be able to load their favorite PC-Windows applications , are going to be returning them to the stores in big numbers .
Linux and Android are well positioned to take advantage of ARM-based netbooks .
This will be the generation of netbooks that actually look and act like netbooks ( very small , very light , many hours of operation on a single charge ) rather than underpowered laptops .
Netbooks are higher-functioning smartphones , not lower-functioning laptops .
Microsoft 's fortunes are tied to x86 , period .
Microsoft 's only hope of getting back into the game at this point is if Intel builds an Atom chip that sips power as daintily as an ARM .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Microsoft better not be resting on its laurels and should either be beefing up Windows Mobile or porting Windows 7 to ARM ... or they're going to miss out big time again.
Even if Microsoft were to port Windows to ARM, they would still lose.
Windows on ARM has the same perceived disadvantage as Linux: it won't run the existing catalog of Windows x86 applications.
Microsoft cheated its way into the netbook market by strongarming Asus and others into bulking up their netbooks until they were basically underpowered laptops that were barely good enough to run Windows XP.
This time around they won't be able to do that.
Even worse: customers who buy Windows-powered ARM netbooks thinking that they'll be able to load their favorite PC-Windows applications, are going to be returning them to the stores in big numbers.
Linux and Android are well positioned to take advantage of ARM-based netbooks.
This will be the generation of netbooks that actually look and act like netbooks (very small, very light, many hours of operation on a single charge) rather than underpowered laptops.
Netbooks are higher-functioning smartphones, not lower-functioning laptops.
Microsoft's fortunes are tied to x86, period.
Microsoft's only hope of getting back into the game at this point is if Intel builds an Atom chip that sips power as daintily as an ARM.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181303</id>
	<title>Re:Because Snapdragon Is an ARM Processor!</title>
	<author>xonar</author>
	<datestamp>1243954020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I would hope google would go the debian route and port it to every architecture conceivable.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would hope google would go the debian route and port it to every architecture conceivable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would hope google would go the debian route and port it to every architecture conceivable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181161</id>
	<title>Wait for Pandora</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243953360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I ask for ARM UMPCs and get ARM netbooks.</p></div><p>Is an "ARM UMPC" essentially a PDA with a keyboard? If so, then wait for <a href="http://www.openpandora.org/" title="openpandora.org">Pandora</a> [openpandora.org] to enter mass production.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I ask for ARM UMPCs and get ARM netbooks.Is an " ARM UMPC " essentially a PDA with a keyboard ?
If so , then wait for Pandora [ openpandora.org ] to enter mass production .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I ask for ARM UMPCs and get ARM netbooks.Is an "ARM UMPC" essentially a PDA with a keyboard?
If so, then wait for Pandora [openpandora.org] to enter mass production.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28186331</id>
	<title>Re:Because Snapdragon Is an ARM Processor!</title>
	<author>bhtooefr</author>
	<datestamp>1243974120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Microsoft is big enough to push a migration to ARM, though. If Apple can pull it off, Microsoft sure as hell can.</p><p>Just push out a silent update to Visual Studio that makes an ARM/IA32/AMD64 fat binary by default.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft is big enough to push a migration to ARM , though .
If Apple can pull it off , Microsoft sure as hell can.Just push out a silent update to Visual Studio that makes an ARM/IA32/AMD64 fat binary by default .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft is big enough to push a migration to ARM, though.
If Apple can pull it off, Microsoft sure as hell can.Just push out a silent update to Visual Studio that makes an ARM/IA32/AMD64 fat binary by default.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28183199</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28194277</id>
	<title>Re:I've only got one more point on my list unsolve</title>
	<author>sznupi</author>
	<datestamp>1244036820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...the Asus EEE induced second coming of the Netbook and its liklings...</p></div><p>Wasn't it really induced by OLPC XO-1? Have we forgotten about it already?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...the Asus EEE induced second coming of the Netbook and its liklings...Was n't it really induced by OLPC XO-1 ?
Have we forgotten about it already ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...the Asus EEE induced second coming of the Netbook and its liklings...Wasn't it really induced by OLPC XO-1?
Have we forgotten about it already?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28182529</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181879</id>
	<title>heat</title>
	<author>Kvasio</author>
	<datestamp>1243956300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>because the 1GHz Snapdragon processor that it uses does not require a heat sink or a cooling fan.</p></div><p>Notebook also comes with sliced bread slot to make toasts.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>because the 1GHz Snapdragon processor that it uses does not require a heat sink or a cooling fan.Notebook also comes with sliced bread slot to make toasts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>because the 1GHz Snapdragon processor that it uses does not require a heat sink or a cooling fan.Notebook also comes with sliced bread slot to make toasts.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_02_1243237_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28182329
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181461
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_02_1243237_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28203723
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_02_1243237_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28194277
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28182529
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_02_1243237_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28185135
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181461
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_02_1243237_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28182277
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181381
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_02_1243237_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28190143
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_02_1243237_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28182085
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_02_1243237_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28182421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180983
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_02_1243237_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181303
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_02_1243237_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180953
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_02_1243237_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28183081
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181381
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_02_1243237_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28182093
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181461
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_02_1243237_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28186331
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28183199
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_02_1243237_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_02_1243237_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181979
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180933
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_02_1243237_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181797
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_02_1243237_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28188029
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181381
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_02_1243237_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181121
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_02_1243237_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_02_1243237_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28186725
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181461
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_02_1243237_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181105
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_02_1243237_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28190951
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181457
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_02_1243237_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28182493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_02_1243237_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28182481
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_02_1243237_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28188139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181461
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_02_1243237_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28216833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181381
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_02_1243237_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28184627
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180983
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_02_1243237_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181161
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180933
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_02_1243237_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28186283
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28183615
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181461
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_02_1243237.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181737
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_02_1243237.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181457
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28190951
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_02_1243237.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180847
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28182493
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180931
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181797
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181421
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28183199
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28186331
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28203723
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28182481
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180953
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181303
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181461
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28188139
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28182329
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28183615
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28186283
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28182093
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28186725
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28185135
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28190143
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181121
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181105
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28182085
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181381
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28182277
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28188029
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28216833
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28183081
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_02_1243237.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180941
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_02_1243237.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180983
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28184627
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28182421
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_02_1243237.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28180933
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181979
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181161
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_02_1243237.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28182529
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28194277
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_02_1243237.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28183193
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_02_1243237.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181969
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_02_1243237.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181455
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_02_1243237.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28182027
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_02_1243237.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181401
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_02_1243237.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_02_1243237.28181879
</commentlist>
</conversation>
