<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_03_1817214</id>
	<title>Money For Nothing and the Codecs For Free</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1244055000000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Davis Freeberg writes <i>"In an <a href="http://davisfreeberg.com/2009/06/02/fear-of-a-mikrosovt-planet-a-conversation-with-dan-marlin/">in depth discussion on the codec industry</a>, CoreCodec CEO and Matroska Foundation board member Dan Marlin shares his thoughts on the growing popularity of the MKV container, confusion in the marketplace between X.264/MKV and DivXHD and weighs in on a controversial decision by Microsoft to block third party filter support in future versions of Windows media player.  His interview offers a behind the scenes look at an important piece of technology that is helping to power the P2P movement.  It also <a href="http://www.zatznotfunny.com/2009-06/fear-of-a-mikrosvft-planet/">raises the prickly question</a> of whether or not Microsoft is abusing their OS monopoly, in order to rein in competition within the codec industry."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Davis Freeberg writes " In an in depth discussion on the codec industry , CoreCodec CEO and Matroska Foundation board member Dan Marlin shares his thoughts on the growing popularity of the MKV container , confusion in the marketplace between X.264/MKV and DivXHD and weighs in on a controversial decision by Microsoft to block third party filter support in future versions of Windows media player .
His interview offers a behind the scenes look at an important piece of technology that is helping to power the P2P movement .
It also raises the prickly question of whether or not Microsoft is abusing their OS monopoly , in order to rein in competition within the codec industry .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Davis Freeberg writes "In an in depth discussion on the codec industry, CoreCodec CEO and Matroska Foundation board member Dan Marlin shares his thoughts on the growing popularity of the MKV container, confusion in the marketplace between X.264/MKV and DivXHD and weighs in on a controversial decision by Microsoft to block third party filter support in future versions of Windows media player.
His interview offers a behind the scenes look at an important piece of technology that is helping to power the P2P movement.
It also raises the prickly question of whether or not Microsoft is abusing their OS monopoly, in order to rein in competition within the codec industry.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28202977</id>
	<title>Re:MKV == critical mass?</title>
	<author>LanMan04</author>
	<datestamp>1244029800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have an extremely similar setup, but the main issue is BANDWIDTH CAPS. All my TV viewing for a month in HD goes well over the 250GB/month Comcast allots.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p><p>PS - God bless Astraweb!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have an extremely similar setup , but the main issue is BANDWIDTH CAPS .
All my TV viewing for a month in HD goes well over the 250GB/month Comcast allots .
: ( PS - God bless Astraweb !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have an extremely similar setup, but the main issue is BANDWIDTH CAPS.
All my TV viewing for a month in HD goes well over the 250GB/month Comcast allots.
:(PS - God bless Astraweb!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199825</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199731</id>
	<title>Hedgemaster 1.0</title>
	<author>mpapet</author>
	<datestamp>1244060880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a perfect example of salesmanship, optimism and double-speak.  Excerpts from TFA:</p><p><i>we do plan to open source pretty much our entire eco-system, </i><br>Pretty much eh?  That sounds interesting.  Where can I sign up for your newsletter?</p><p><i>if the business warrants it</i><br>If eh?  That's a pretty important article leading that phrase.   I could get really excited without that "if."</p><p><i>and right now it looks like does</i><br>Ohhh the winds are blowing your way eh?  Well, lets wait and see. Your investors might have another opinion on the matter.  Still kind of exciting.  I'm feeling a little wobbly in the knees and all!</p><p><i>We can still open source it and monetize it and also release our encoder as well, </i><br>You mean like how Sun tried to make Java free-ish?  History is working against you on this one.  But, you know, crazy things have happened before, so I'm even more excited.  Not only are my knees wobbly, but my stomach's got a few butterflies in it!</p><p><i>but at the same time we&#226;(TM)re very cautious about what we do.</i><br>Ohh there's the double-speak.  You were getting me all fired up imagining relatively simple playback on a plurality of devices until that line.  Was I supposed to ignore that one?</p><p><i>Like Matroska, the Haali media splitter may not be open source, but it is free</i><br>Coitus interuptus Mr. Streaming Codec dude.  Coitus interuptus.....<br>Ohhh you mean like those other binary blobs that work *so* well?   Is this free like so many 'free' applications I download off the internet that are supposed to speed up my windows machine? I get all these adverts popping up everywhere and that's just the beginning.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a perfect example of salesmanship , optimism and double-speak .
Excerpts from TFA : we do plan to open source pretty much our entire eco-system , Pretty much eh ?
That sounds interesting .
Where can I sign up for your newsletter ? if the business warrants itIf eh ?
That 's a pretty important article leading that phrase .
I could get really excited without that " if .
" and right now it looks like doesOhhh the winds are blowing your way eh ?
Well , lets wait and see .
Your investors might have another opinion on the matter .
Still kind of exciting .
I 'm feeling a little wobbly in the knees and all ! We can still open source it and monetize it and also release our encoder as well , You mean like how Sun tried to make Java free-ish ?
History is working against you on this one .
But , you know , crazy things have happened before , so I 'm even more excited .
Not only are my knees wobbly , but my stomach 's got a few butterflies in it ! but at the same time we   ( TM ) re very cautious about what we do.Ohh there 's the double-speak .
You were getting me all fired up imagining relatively simple playback on a plurality of devices until that line .
Was I supposed to ignore that one ? Like Matroska , the Haali media splitter may not be open source , but it is freeCoitus interuptus Mr. Streaming Codec dude .
Coitus interuptus.....Ohhh you mean like those other binary blobs that work * so * well ?
Is this free like so many 'free ' applications I download off the internet that are supposed to speed up my windows machine ?
I get all these adverts popping up everywhere and that 's just the beginning .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a perfect example of salesmanship, optimism and double-speak.
Excerpts from TFA:we do plan to open source pretty much our entire eco-system, Pretty much eh?
That sounds interesting.
Where can I sign up for your newsletter?if the business warrants itIf eh?
That's a pretty important article leading that phrase.
I could get really excited without that "if.
"and right now it looks like doesOhhh the winds are blowing your way eh?
Well, lets wait and see.
Your investors might have another opinion on the matter.
Still kind of exciting.
I'm feeling a little wobbly in the knees and all!We can still open source it and monetize it and also release our encoder as well, You mean like how Sun tried to make Java free-ish?
History is working against you on this one.
But, you know, crazy things have happened before, so I'm even more excited.
Not only are my knees wobbly, but my stomach's got a few butterflies in it!but at the same time weâ(TM)re very cautious about what we do.Ohh there's the double-speak.
You were getting me all fired up imagining relatively simple playback on a plurality of devices until that line.
Was I supposed to ignore that one?Like Matroska, the Haali media splitter may not be open source, but it is freeCoitus interuptus Mr. Streaming Codec dude.
Coitus interuptus.....Ohhh you mean like those other binary blobs that work *so* well?
Is this free like so many 'free' applications I download off the internet that are supposed to speed up my windows machine?
I get all these adverts popping up everywhere and that's just the beginning.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200005</id>
	<title>Re:MKV == critical mass?</title>
	<author>Big Boss</author>
	<datestamp>1244062080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hmmm... I REALLY like the look of that Plex software. I'm going to install that on my Mac Mini tonight and give it a go. How are you getting 5.1 sound out of the mini? I don't remember seeing an optical port on mine. Or is it part of the headphone just like the old Minidisc players did it?</p><p>I really like MythTV, but this looks really nice as well. Always nice to have options.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmmm... I REALLY like the look of that Plex software .
I 'm going to install that on my Mac Mini tonight and give it a go .
How are you getting 5.1 sound out of the mini ?
I do n't remember seeing an optical port on mine .
Or is it part of the headphone just like the old Minidisc players did it ? I really like MythTV , but this looks really nice as well .
Always nice to have options .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmmm... I REALLY like the look of that Plex software.
I'm going to install that on my Mac Mini tonight and give it a go.
How are you getting 5.1 sound out of the mini?
I don't remember seeing an optical port on mine.
Or is it part of the headphone just like the old Minidisc players did it?I really like MythTV, but this looks really nice as well.
Always nice to have options.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199825</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200079</id>
	<title>media player</title>
	<author>roc97007</author>
	<datestamp>1244062320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
&gt; and weighs in on a controversial decision by Microsoft to block third party filter support in future versions of Windows media player
</p><p>
Wait wait wait.  What??  How does this affect Windows Media Center? (I think it uses Media Player to play content, right?)  If I can no longer use third party codecs, I will have no choice but to switch to something like MythTV.  Wow, I'm glad I heard about this before upgrading to Windows 7.  If this is really the case, continuing with Windows in the media center is absolutely out of the question.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; and weighs in on a controversial decision by Microsoft to block third party filter support in future versions of Windows media player Wait wait wait .
What ? ? How does this affect Windows Media Center ?
( I think it uses Media Player to play content , right ?
) If I can no longer use third party codecs , I will have no choice but to switch to something like MythTV .
Wow , I 'm glad I heard about this before upgrading to Windows 7 .
If this is really the case , continuing with Windows in the media center is absolutely out of the question .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
&gt; and weighs in on a controversial decision by Microsoft to block third party filter support in future versions of Windows media player

Wait wait wait.
What??  How does this affect Windows Media Center?
(I think it uses Media Player to play content, right?
)  If I can no longer use third party codecs, I will have no choice but to switch to something like MythTV.
Wow, I'm glad I heard about this before upgrading to Windows 7.
If this is really the case, continuing with Windows in the media center is absolutely out of the question.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199649</id>
	<title>Re:More on Streaming? Interview?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244060340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I would have liked to hear more on how he plans to break into the streaming market when everyone is going proprietary on that for the sake of DRM.</p></div><p>Everyone ? Do you mean Dailymotion and Youtube going vorbis+theora for their streaming needs doesn't count ?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would have liked to hear more on how he plans to break into the streaming market when everyone is going proprietary on that for the sake of DRM.Everyone ?
Do you mean Dailymotion and Youtube going vorbis + theora for their streaming needs does n't count ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would have liked to hear more on how he plans to break into the streaming market when everyone is going proprietary on that for the sake of DRM.Everyone ?
Do you mean Dailymotion and Youtube going vorbis+theora for their streaming needs doesn't count ?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199357</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28201273</id>
	<title>Media player vs VLC</title>
	<author>bagsta</author>
	<datestamp>1244023620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>...weighs in on a controversial decision by Microsoft to block third party filter support in future versions of Windows media player."</p></div>
</blockquote><p>

For that reason lot's of people will stop using Window Media player and use <a href="http://www.videolan.org/vlc/" title="videolan.org" rel="nofollow">VLC</a> [videolan.org]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...weighs in on a controversial decision by Microsoft to block third party filter support in future versions of Windows media player .
" For that reason lot 's of people will stop using Window Media player and use VLC [ videolan.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...weighs in on a controversial decision by Microsoft to block third party filter support in future versions of Windows media player.
"


For that reason lot's of people will stop using Window Media player and use VLC [videolan.org]
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199597</id>
	<title>Re:Hack</title>
	<author>internerdj</author>
	<datestamp>1244060160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Here is one place I can act like an average user cause I don't have some pony in the race.  I don't care how my video is encoded, depending on how tired my eyes are I don't even care if the result even looks decent.  Why should I have to install 20 different codex for seeing a video?  I just want to see the moving pictures and hear the audio.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here is one place I can act like an average user cause I do n't have some pony in the race .
I do n't care how my video is encoded , depending on how tired my eyes are I do n't even care if the result even looks decent .
Why should I have to install 20 different codex for seeing a video ?
I just want to see the moving pictures and hear the audio .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here is one place I can act like an average user cause I don't have some pony in the race.
I don't care how my video is encoded, depending on how tired my eyes are I don't even care if the result even looks decent.
Why should I have to install 20 different codex for seeing a video?
I just want to see the moving pictures and hear the audio.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199483</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199483</id>
	<title>Re:Hack</title>
	<author>castironpigeon</author>
	<datestamp>1244059560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, but if it's not on there by default or if a wizard doesn't pop up to guide them through in five clicks or less, preferably with happy images and music, the average user won't install it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , but if it 's not on there by default or if a wizard does n't pop up to guide them through in five clicks or less , preferably with happy images and music , the average user wo n't install it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, but if it's not on there by default or if a wizard doesn't pop up to guide them through in five clicks or less, preferably with happy images and music, the average user won't install it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199379</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199825</id>
	<title>MKV == critical mass?</title>
	<author>fahrvergnugen</author>
	<datestamp>1244061240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We've been waiting for years for a killer video container, and it appears to me that mkv is probably going to be the one. It seems poised to become the mp3 of video. There's finally a container that can be played back in an acceptable number of hardware devices, with acceptable quality, at acceptable filesizes. The lack of file-embedded metadata in the container is still a problem, one that's been holding back online video distribution for years, but external sites such as imdb and thetvdb seem to be working around this well enough.</p><p>iPod / iTunes took off like a rocket imho because of a few key factors:<br>-They created hardware that followed the pipe dream of the mp3: A portable player capable of holding many gigs of music in the size of a deck of cards, with headphone out. This wasn't innovation, such solutions were already on the market, but theirs was the most beautiful.;<br>-They smoothed out the rough usability edges in existing portable hdd player solutions by offering great desktop software in iTunes, which took advantage of metadata to create not only a really compelling library system, but also provided very tight integration that was intuitively the same across the iPod &amp; iTunes.<br>-They offered a legal means of acquiring music on demand for their solution.<br>-They made it ridiculously easy to use their device with black market content.</p><p>Because Apple were the first with the sack to give people their dream device, with a sensible organized interface, a legal means of acquiring content, and full integration with illegal content, they dominated the marketplace.</p><p>Video has been held back, as I said above, by a couple of things. The first was the lack of file-embedded metadata (I can't search for all files in my library directed by James Cameron, for instance), but the ubiquity of always-on wireless connections has solved some of that, and external metadata references are now acceptable. Second, it's been held back by codecs &amp; containers that were way out of date, and don't deliver broadcast-quality (especially HDTV) at acceptable filesizes. The average mp4 vs a highly compressed digital cable channel might be equivalent, but the market wants DVD quality without any sacrifice from downloaded video.</p><p>Finally, video has also been held back by the lack of elegant playback solutions. Apple missed the boat with the AppleTV by failing to step up and partner with the black market, which is why the device hasn't been a wild success. Software solutions based on the xbmc core, such as boxee, plex, and uh.... xbmc, are doing much better, but they're still software solutions dependent on having a PC. People want a fully-integrated solution.</p><p>Mark my words: The first company with the temerity to market a device that will take a user's existing library and integrate it into an elegant set-top solution is going to CLEAN UP. They will dominate the set-top completely for years to come. It looks like TiVO is going to miss the boat, as is Apple. Are there any dark horses in this race?</p><p>Lest anyone think that I'm pipe dreaming, a working solution can be assembled out of off-the-shelf parts right now. Here's what I built in a weekend for about $700:</p><p>Hardware:<br>-Mac Mini c2d (winter '09)<br>-Harmony 720 remote<br>-DisplayPort --&gt; HDMI cable<br>-Optical Audio cable<br>-1TB firewire-800 external storage from pricewatch</p><p>Software:<br>-Plex<br>-SwitchResX (only necessary for SDTV or older HDTVs)<br>-RipIt<br>-SABNZBD+</p><p>Subscriptions:<br>-Usenet service ($11/mo)<br>-Unnamed usenet header indexer ($.75 / week, roughly)<br>-rss feed for TV show subscriptions (free)</p><p>With these pieces, I've built a DVR that automatically downloads the shows I like the same day they air. Downloads are FAST, maxing out my internet connection. I can play back 1080p blu-ray rips with full surround sound &amp; 0 dropped frames or stuttering. I can drop any DVD into the reader, and have it copied into the library and spit back out again once it's done. And it's all done with a universal remote in</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We 've been waiting for years for a killer video container , and it appears to me that mkv is probably going to be the one .
It seems poised to become the mp3 of video .
There 's finally a container that can be played back in an acceptable number of hardware devices , with acceptable quality , at acceptable filesizes .
The lack of file-embedded metadata in the container is still a problem , one that 's been holding back online video distribution for years , but external sites such as imdb and thetvdb seem to be working around this well enough.iPod / iTunes took off like a rocket imho because of a few key factors : -They created hardware that followed the pipe dream of the mp3 : A portable player capable of holding many gigs of music in the size of a deck of cards , with headphone out .
This was n't innovation , such solutions were already on the market , but theirs was the most beautiful .
; -They smoothed out the rough usability edges in existing portable hdd player solutions by offering great desktop software in iTunes , which took advantage of metadata to create not only a really compelling library system , but also provided very tight integration that was intuitively the same across the iPod &amp; iTunes.-They offered a legal means of acquiring music on demand for their solution.-They made it ridiculously easy to use their device with black market content.Because Apple were the first with the sack to give people their dream device , with a sensible organized interface , a legal means of acquiring content , and full integration with illegal content , they dominated the marketplace.Video has been held back , as I said above , by a couple of things .
The first was the lack of file-embedded metadata ( I ca n't search for all files in my library directed by James Cameron , for instance ) , but the ubiquity of always-on wireless connections has solved some of that , and external metadata references are now acceptable .
Second , it 's been held back by codecs &amp; containers that were way out of date , and do n't deliver broadcast-quality ( especially HDTV ) at acceptable filesizes .
The average mp4 vs a highly compressed digital cable channel might be equivalent , but the market wants DVD quality without any sacrifice from downloaded video.Finally , video has also been held back by the lack of elegant playback solutions .
Apple missed the boat with the AppleTV by failing to step up and partner with the black market , which is why the device has n't been a wild success .
Software solutions based on the xbmc core , such as boxee , plex , and uh.... xbmc , are doing much better , but they 're still software solutions dependent on having a PC .
People want a fully-integrated solution.Mark my words : The first company with the temerity to market a device that will take a user 's existing library and integrate it into an elegant set-top solution is going to CLEAN UP .
They will dominate the set-top completely for years to come .
It looks like TiVO is going to miss the boat , as is Apple .
Are there any dark horses in this race ? Lest anyone think that I 'm pipe dreaming , a working solution can be assembled out of off-the-shelf parts right now .
Here 's what I built in a weekend for about $ 700 : Hardware : -Mac Mini c2d ( winter '09 ) -Harmony 720 remote-DisplayPort -- &gt; HDMI cable-Optical Audio cable-1TB firewire-800 external storage from pricewatchSoftware : -Plex-SwitchResX ( only necessary for SDTV or older HDTVs ) -RipIt-SABNZBD + Subscriptions : -Usenet service ( $ 11/mo ) -Unnamed usenet header indexer ( $ .75 / week , roughly ) -rss feed for TV show subscriptions ( free ) With these pieces , I 've built a DVR that automatically downloads the shows I like the same day they air .
Downloads are FAST , maxing out my internet connection .
I can play back 1080p blu-ray rips with full surround sound &amp; 0 dropped frames or stuttering .
I can drop any DVD into the reader , and have it copied into the library and spit back out again once it 's done .
And it 's all done with a universal remote in</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We've been waiting for years for a killer video container, and it appears to me that mkv is probably going to be the one.
It seems poised to become the mp3 of video.
There's finally a container that can be played back in an acceptable number of hardware devices, with acceptable quality, at acceptable filesizes.
The lack of file-embedded metadata in the container is still a problem, one that's been holding back online video distribution for years, but external sites such as imdb and thetvdb seem to be working around this well enough.iPod / iTunes took off like a rocket imho because of a few key factors:-They created hardware that followed the pipe dream of the mp3: A portable player capable of holding many gigs of music in the size of a deck of cards, with headphone out.
This wasn't innovation, such solutions were already on the market, but theirs was the most beautiful.
;-They smoothed out the rough usability edges in existing portable hdd player solutions by offering great desktop software in iTunes, which took advantage of metadata to create not only a really compelling library system, but also provided very tight integration that was intuitively the same across the iPod &amp; iTunes.-They offered a legal means of acquiring music on demand for their solution.-They made it ridiculously easy to use their device with black market content.Because Apple were the first with the sack to give people their dream device, with a sensible organized interface, a legal means of acquiring content, and full integration with illegal content, they dominated the marketplace.Video has been held back, as I said above, by a couple of things.
The first was the lack of file-embedded metadata (I can't search for all files in my library directed by James Cameron, for instance), but the ubiquity of always-on wireless connections has solved some of that, and external metadata references are now acceptable.
Second, it's been held back by codecs &amp; containers that were way out of date, and don't deliver broadcast-quality (especially HDTV) at acceptable filesizes.
The average mp4 vs a highly compressed digital cable channel might be equivalent, but the market wants DVD quality without any sacrifice from downloaded video.Finally, video has also been held back by the lack of elegant playback solutions.
Apple missed the boat with the AppleTV by failing to step up and partner with the black market, which is why the device hasn't been a wild success.
Software solutions based on the xbmc core, such as boxee, plex, and uh.... xbmc, are doing much better, but they're still software solutions dependent on having a PC.
People want a fully-integrated solution.Mark my words: The first company with the temerity to market a device that will take a user's existing library and integrate it into an elegant set-top solution is going to CLEAN UP.
They will dominate the set-top completely for years to come.
It looks like TiVO is going to miss the boat, as is Apple.
Are there any dark horses in this race?Lest anyone think that I'm pipe dreaming, a working solution can be assembled out of off-the-shelf parts right now.
Here's what I built in a weekend for about $700:Hardware:-Mac Mini c2d (winter '09)-Harmony 720 remote-DisplayPort --&gt; HDMI cable-Optical Audio cable-1TB firewire-800 external storage from pricewatchSoftware:-Plex-SwitchResX (only necessary for SDTV or older HDTVs)-RipIt-SABNZBD+Subscriptions:-Usenet service ($11/mo)-Unnamed usenet header indexer ($.75 / week, roughly)-rss feed for TV show subscriptions (free)With these pieces, I've built a DVR that automatically downloads the shows I like the same day they air.
Downloads are FAST, maxing out my internet connection.
I can play back 1080p blu-ray rips with full surround sound &amp; 0 dropped frames or stuttering.
I can drop any DVD into the reader, and have it copied into the library and spit back out again once it's done.
And it's all done with a universal remote in</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200311</id>
	<title>Re:Hack</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244019960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maintaining, unit testing, system testing costs vs delta in income for support of said codecs.</p><p>If the costs in maintaining old code, ensuring you have proper test coverage of that old code, that it doesn't break anything else in the system, and fixing any breakages caused by (internal?) API changes or other bugs that surface in the new infrastructure are higher than any difference in income (after tax, physical media costs, etc.), then why <b>should</b> they support those older formats?</p><p>Not saying that's the reason, of course, just playing devil's advocate here.  (And since I'm advocating for MS, that's less figurative than normal...)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maintaining , unit testing , system testing costs vs delta in income for support of said codecs.If the costs in maintaining old code , ensuring you have proper test coverage of that old code , that it does n't break anything else in the system , and fixing any breakages caused by ( internal ?
) API changes or other bugs that surface in the new infrastructure are higher than any difference in income ( after tax , physical media costs , etc .
) , then why should they support those older formats ? Not saying that 's the reason , of course , just playing devil 's advocate here .
( And since I 'm advocating for MS , that 's less figurative than normal... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maintaining, unit testing, system testing costs vs delta in income for support of said codecs.If the costs in maintaining old code, ensuring you have proper test coverage of that old code, that it doesn't break anything else in the system, and fixing any breakages caused by (internal?
) API changes or other bugs that surface in the new infrastructure are higher than any difference in income (after tax, physical media costs, etc.
), then why should they support those older formats?Not saying that's the reason, of course, just playing devil's advocate here.
(And since I'm advocating for MS, that's less figurative than normal...)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199505</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28206687</id>
	<title>Re:Hack</title>
	<author>jonbryce</author>
	<datestamp>1244107440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, like use Media Player Classic or VLC to play their videos.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , like use Media Player Classic or VLC to play their videos .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, like use Media Player Classic or VLC to play their videos.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199379</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200569</id>
	<title>Re:More on Streaming? Interview?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244021160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>EBML is (almost) what XML always should have been.</p><p>XML:<br>
&nbsp; Pros: Human readable<br>
&nbsp; Cons: Slow to parse, inconvenient to write parsers for, space-inefficient.</p><p>Binary XML:<br>
&nbsp; Pros: Easy to write fast, simple parsers for, space efficient, allows easy random access into the file.<br>
&nbsp; Cons: Needs specialised editor (i.e. an 'XML editor' rather than any old text editor).</p><p>I'd much much much rather have the latter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>EBML is ( almost ) what XML always should have been.XML :   Pros : Human readable   Cons : Slow to parse , inconvenient to write parsers for , space-inefficient.Binary XML :   Pros : Easy to write fast , simple parsers for , space efficient , allows easy random access into the file .
  Cons : Needs specialised editor ( i.e .
an 'XML editor ' rather than any old text editor ) .I 'd much much much rather have the latter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>EBML is (almost) what XML always should have been.XML:
  Pros: Human readable
  Cons: Slow to parse, inconvenient to write parsers for, space-inefficient.Binary XML:
  Pros: Easy to write fast, simple parsers for, space efficient, allows easy random access into the file.
  Cons: Needs specialised editor (i.e.
an 'XML editor' rather than any old text editor).I'd much much much rather have the latter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200189</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200297</id>
	<title>Windows Media Player Classic?</title>
	<author>Crock23A</author>
	<datestamp>1244019900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Download it inside a codec pack.  I do it with every windows reformat.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Download it inside a codec pack .
I do it with every windows reformat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Download it inside a codec pack.
I do it with every windows reformat.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199517</id>
	<title>Minus 4, Troll)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244059680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">fu3king percent of Jesus Up The inventing excuses documents like a</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>fu3king percent of Jesus Up The inventing excuses documents like a [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>fu3king percent of Jesus Up The inventing excuses documents like a [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199399</id>
	<title>That ain't working - That's the way you do it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244059140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I want my... I want my... I want my<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.mkv...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I want my... I want my... I want my .mkv.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I want my... I want my... I want my .mkv...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200203</id>
	<title>Re:Fake codecs</title>
	<author>Amouth</author>
	<datestamp>1244062680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>there are some VLC doesn't run - or at least doesn't identify right.. for them i try MediaPlayerClasic..  if it fails both i assume it isn't worth watching or whom ever made it is a complete moron -</p><p>in which..  it isn't worth watching</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>there are some VLC does n't run - or at least does n't identify right.. for them i try MediaPlayerClasic.. if it fails both i assume it is n't worth watching or whom ever made it is a complete moron -in which.. it is n't worth watching</tokentext>
<sentencetext>there are some VLC doesn't run - or at least doesn't identify right.. for them i try MediaPlayerClasic..  if it fails both i assume it isn't worth watching or whom ever made it is a complete moron -in which..  it isn't worth watching</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199541</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199479</id>
	<title>Re:Hack</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244059500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>BTW, ts TFA just FUD or a guy promoting his own agenda??</p></div><p>He's probably disappointed that Microsoft won't license his codec from him and pay him lots of money for lots of installs that will rarely use it.</p></div><p>Wow, am I the only person that read the article?  From Matroska's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matroska#License" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Wikipedia entry</a> [wikipedia.org]:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Matroska is an open standards project. This means it is free to use, and that the technical specifications describing the bit stream are open to anybody, including companies that would like to support it in their products. The source code of the libraries developed by the Matroska Development Team is licensed under GNU LGPL. In addition to that, there are also free parsing and playback libraries available under the BSD license, for proprietary hardware and software adoption.</p></div><p>The only thing this guy's guilty of is trying to get everyone to use his LGPL developed stuff and lamenting on DRM and proprietary crap they have to deal with.  Get off his back.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>BTW , ts TFA just FUD or a guy promoting his own agenda ?
? He 's probably disappointed that Microsoft wo n't license his codec from him and pay him lots of money for lots of installs that will rarely use it.Wow , am I the only person that read the article ?
From Matroska 's Wikipedia entry [ wikipedia.org ] : Matroska is an open standards project .
This means it is free to use , and that the technical specifications describing the bit stream are open to anybody , including companies that would like to support it in their products .
The source code of the libraries developed by the Matroska Development Team is licensed under GNU LGPL .
In addition to that , there are also free parsing and playback libraries available under the BSD license , for proprietary hardware and software adoption.The only thing this guy 's guilty of is trying to get everyone to use his LGPL developed stuff and lamenting on DRM and proprietary crap they have to deal with .
Get off his back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>BTW, ts TFA just FUD or a guy promoting his own agenda?
?He's probably disappointed that Microsoft won't license his codec from him and pay him lots of money for lots of installs that will rarely use it.Wow, am I the only person that read the article?
From Matroska's Wikipedia entry [wikipedia.org]:Matroska is an open standards project.
This means it is free to use, and that the technical specifications describing the bit stream are open to anybody, including companies that would like to support it in their products.
The source code of the libraries developed by the Matroska Development Team is licensed under GNU LGPL.
In addition to that, there are also free parsing and playback libraries available under the BSD license, for proprietary hardware and software adoption.The only thing this guy's guilty of is trying to get everyone to use his LGPL developed stuff and lamenting on DRM and proprietary crap they have to deal with.
Get off his back.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199443</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28201291</id>
	<title>Re:MKV == critical mass?</title>
	<author>mako1138</author>
	<datestamp>1244023680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been using mkv for years, but never thought about its lack of support for metadata. That's an interesting point.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been using mkv for years , but never thought about its lack of support for metadata .
That 's an interesting point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been using mkv for years, but never thought about its lack of support for metadata.
That's an interesting point.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199825</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28201501</id>
	<title>This guy is a dreamer, a stupid little dreamer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244024400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dreamer, you know you are a dreamer<br>Well can you put your hands in your head, oh no!<br>I said dreamer, you're nothing but a dreamer,<br>Well can you put your hands in your head, oh no!<br>I said "Far out, - What a day, a year, a life it is!"<br>You know, - Well you know you had it comin' to you,<br>Now there's not a lot I can do</p><p>Dreamer, you stupid little dreamer;<br>So now you put your head in your hands, oh no!<br>I said "Far out, - What a day, a year, a life it is!"<br>You know, - Well you know you had it comin' to you,<br>No there's not a lot I can do.</p><p>We'll work it out someday</p><p>If I could see something<br>You can see anything you want boy<br>If I could be someone-<br>You can be anyone,celebrate boy.<br>If I could do something-<br>Well you can do something,<br>If I could do anything-<br>Can you do something out of this world?</p><p>Take a dream on a Sunday<br>Take a life, take a holiday<br>Take a lie, take a dreamer<br>Dream, dream, dream, dream, dream along...</p><p>Dreamer, you know you are a dreamer<br>Well can you put your hands in your head, oh no!<br>I said dreamer, you're nothing but a dreamer<br>Well can you put your hands in your head, oh no!<br>OH NO!</p><p>Nothing this Marlin dude says comes true.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dreamer , you know you are a dreamerWell can you put your hands in your head , oh no ! I said dreamer , you 're nothing but a dreamer,Well can you put your hands in your head , oh no ! I said " Far out , - What a day , a year , a life it is !
" You know , - Well you know you had it comin ' to you,Now there 's not a lot I can doDreamer , you stupid little dreamer ; So now you put your head in your hands , oh no ! I said " Far out , - What a day , a year , a life it is !
" You know , - Well you know you had it comin ' to you,No there 's not a lot I can do.We 'll work it out somedayIf I could see somethingYou can see anything you want boyIf I could be someone-You can be anyone,celebrate boy.If I could do something-Well you can do something,If I could do anything-Can you do something out of this world ? Take a dream on a SundayTake a life , take a holidayTake a lie , take a dreamerDream , dream , dream , dream , dream along...Dreamer , you know you are a dreamerWell can you put your hands in your head , oh no ! I said dreamer , you 're nothing but a dreamerWell can you put your hands in your head , oh no ! OH NO ! Nothing this Marlin dude says comes true .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dreamer, you know you are a dreamerWell can you put your hands in your head, oh no!I said dreamer, you're nothing but a dreamer,Well can you put your hands in your head, oh no!I said "Far out, - What a day, a year, a life it is!
"You know, - Well you know you had it comin' to you,Now there's not a lot I can doDreamer, you stupid little dreamer;So now you put your head in your hands, oh no!I said "Far out, - What a day, a year, a life it is!
"You know, - Well you know you had it comin' to you,No there's not a lot I can do.We'll work it out somedayIf I could see somethingYou can see anything you want boyIf I could be someone-You can be anyone,celebrate boy.If I could do something-Well you can do something,If I could do anything-Can you do something out of this world?Take a dream on a SundayTake a life, take a holidayTake a lie, take a dreamerDream, dream, dream, dream, dream along...Dreamer, you know you are a dreamerWell can you put your hands in your head, oh no!I said dreamer, you're nothing but a dreamerWell can you put your hands in your head, oh no!OH NO!Nothing this Marlin dude says comes true.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28201637</id>
	<title>You are kidding arent you ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244024940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are you saying that this mkv can run on a computer without DVD underneath it, at all ? As in, without a video disk, without any purchasing, and without any ownership ?</p><p>That sounds preposterous to me.</p><p>If it were true (and I doubt it), then companies would be selling mkv without a DVD. This clearly is not happening, so there must be some error in your calculations. I hope you realise that DVD is more than just plastic ? Its a whole system that runs the video from start to finish, and that is a very difficult thing to acheive. A lot of people dont realise this.</p><p>Sony just spent $9 billion and many years to create Blu-Ray, so it does not sound reasonable that some new alternative could just snap into existence overnight like that. It would take billions of dollars and a massive effort to achieve. Toshiba tried, and spent a huge amount of money developing HD-DVD but could never keep up with Blu-Ray. ArVid tried to create their own system for years, but finally gave up recently and moved to DVD and Blu-Ray.</p><p>Its just not possible that a freeware like the mkv could be extended to the point where it runs the entire video fron start to finish, without using some of the more critical parts of DVD. Not possible.</p><p>I think you need to re-examine your assumptions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you saying that this mkv can run on a computer without DVD underneath it , at all ?
As in , without a video disk , without any purchasing , and without any ownership ? That sounds preposterous to me.If it were true ( and I doubt it ) , then companies would be selling mkv without a DVD .
This clearly is not happening , so there must be some error in your calculations .
I hope you realise that DVD is more than just plastic ?
Its a whole system that runs the video from start to finish , and that is a very difficult thing to acheive .
A lot of people dont realise this.Sony just spent $ 9 billion and many years to create Blu-Ray , so it does not sound reasonable that some new alternative could just snap into existence overnight like that .
It would take billions of dollars and a massive effort to achieve .
Toshiba tried , and spent a huge amount of money developing HD-DVD but could never keep up with Blu-Ray .
ArVid tried to create their own system for years , but finally gave up recently and moved to DVD and Blu-Ray.Its just not possible that a freeware like the mkv could be extended to the point where it runs the entire video fron start to finish , without using some of the more critical parts of DVD .
Not possible.I think you need to re-examine your assumptions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you saying that this mkv can run on a computer without DVD underneath it, at all ?
As in, without a video disk, without any purchasing, and without any ownership ?That sounds preposterous to me.If it were true (and I doubt it), then companies would be selling mkv without a DVD.
This clearly is not happening, so there must be some error in your calculations.
I hope you realise that DVD is more than just plastic ?
Its a whole system that runs the video from start to finish, and that is a very difficult thing to acheive.
A lot of people dont realise this.Sony just spent $9 billion and many years to create Blu-Ray, so it does not sound reasonable that some new alternative could just snap into existence overnight like that.
It would take billions of dollars and a massive effort to achieve.
Toshiba tried, and spent a huge amount of money developing HD-DVD but could never keep up with Blu-Ray.
ArVid tried to create their own system for years, but finally gave up recently and moved to DVD and Blu-Ray.Its just not possible that a freeware like the mkv could be extended to the point where it runs the entire video fron start to finish, without using some of the more critical parts of DVD.
Not possible.I think you need to re-examine your assumptions.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199427</id>
	<title>Monopoly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244059320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Isn't the whole point of being a Monopoly to abuse your power?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't the whole point of being a Monopoly to abuse your power ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't the whole point of being a Monopoly to abuse your power?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199913</id>
	<title>Not blocking, depricating</title>
	<author>netscan</author>
	<datestamp>1244061660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Depricating Direct Show in favor of their new Media Foundation isn't "blocking third party codecs".<br>
<br>
You can still use whatever codec you want, they just don't support it, same as always. Nothing has changed in regards to setting registry entries or using automated hacks to use third party codecs in Windows, the same as it was for Vista and XP.<br> <br>
This is a whole lotta FUD spreading.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Depricating Direct Show in favor of their new Media Foundation is n't " blocking third party codecs " .
You can still use whatever codec you want , they just do n't support it , same as always .
Nothing has changed in regards to setting registry entries or using automated hacks to use third party codecs in Windows , the same as it was for Vista and XP .
This is a whole lotta FUD spreading .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Depricating Direct Show in favor of their new Media Foundation isn't "blocking third party codecs".
You can still use whatever codec you want, they just don't support it, same as always.
Nothing has changed in regards to setting registry entries or using automated hacks to use third party codecs in Windows, the same as it was for Vista and XP.
This is a whole lotta FUD spreading.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28202811</id>
	<title>Re:MKV == critical mass?</title>
	<author>True Grit</author>
	<datestamp>1244029080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And it is a big part of what's going wrong with ODF.</p></div><p>The only thing "going wrong" with ODF is that MS is playing its usual games with anything they don't like, and at the top of their don't-like list is open standards they can't control.</p><p>I mean really, the claim that its ODF's fault might have had some credibility had <b>MS not already released</b> a plugin that provided perfectly valid, cross-application ODF support.  They already knew how to do things the "right" way, but when they later updated Office, they <b>deliberately chose not to</b>.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And it is a big part of what 's going wrong with ODF.The only thing " going wrong " with ODF is that MS is playing its usual games with anything they do n't like , and at the top of their do n't-like list is open standards they ca n't control.I mean really , the claim that its ODF 's fault might have had some credibility had MS not already released a plugin that provided perfectly valid , cross-application ODF support .
They already knew how to do things the " right " way , but when they later updated Office , they deliberately chose not to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And it is a big part of what's going wrong with ODF.The only thing "going wrong" with ODF is that MS is playing its usual games with anything they don't like, and at the top of their don't-like list is open standards they can't control.I mean really, the claim that its ODF's fault might have had some credibility had MS not already released a plugin that provided perfectly valid, cross-application ODF support.
They already knew how to do things the "right" way, but when they later updated Office, they deliberately chose not to.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200639</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199701</id>
	<title>What Monopoly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244060640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As Apple keeps growing it's hard to call Microsoft a Monopoly.</p><p>Also, restricting the codex will increase both security and stability.  I've had to rebuild after installing some open source codex a few years ago.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As Apple keeps growing it 's hard to call Microsoft a Monopoly.Also , restricting the codex will increase both security and stability .
I 've had to rebuild after installing some open source codex a few years ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As Apple keeps growing it's hard to call Microsoft a Monopoly.Also, restricting the codex will increase both security and stability.
I've had to rebuild after installing some open source codex a few years ago.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199665</id>
	<title>What Monopoly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244060460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A monopoly is when you have no competition. Sorry but all linux and mac do is spew out how great their numbers are growing. Abusing their OS? It's their piece of software, they can do what they want with it, it's YOUR choice to use it if you wish.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A monopoly is when you have no competition .
Sorry but all linux and mac do is spew out how great their numbers are growing .
Abusing their OS ?
It 's their piece of software , they can do what they want with it , it 's YOUR choice to use it if you wish .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A monopoly is when you have no competition.
Sorry but all linux and mac do is spew out how great their numbers are growing.
Abusing their OS?
It's their piece of software, they can do what they want with it, it's YOUR choice to use it if you wish.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28205081</id>
	<title>Re:MKV == critical mass?</title>
	<author>yuna49</author>
	<datestamp>1244043360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><em>My AppleTV, PS3, BlackBerry, DVD player and iPod will all play MPEG-4. None of them will play MKV. Can you give a few examples of popular hardware devices that'll play MKV?</em></p><p>Well, considering that all of those you list have a stake in closed architectures, I'm not too surprised.  Neither Apple nor Sony has ever shown much interest in supporting open standards. Have you yet discovered that your PS3 also <a href="http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=957732" title="avsforum.com">won't play all flavors of DivX/XviD</a> [avsforum.com] even in the AVI container?</p><p>While some DVD players support DivX and often won't cough with XviD, the manufacturers did so to enable you to play the now-defunct DivX discs.  I took back a Sony DVD player and replaced it with a Panny because the Sony had no DivX support and wouldn't play my XviD-encoded programs.  Sony wants everyone to conform to the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.mp4 container that they prefer.</p><p>In answer to your question, how about a <a href="http://www.cowonamerica.com/products/cowon/a3/" title="cowonamerica.com">COWON A3</a> [cowonamerica.com] for starters?  It even supports 720p/H.264 Matroska files (I have a lot of those).  Or maybe some of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matroska#Hardware\_support" title="wikipedia.org">these devices</a> [wikipedia.org]?</p><p>If you buy products that are designed to close off your options, then you can't really complain when you find your choices are more limited.  While it's possible to argue that hardware manufacturers have been slow to support Matroska because of its small market share, I think it's even more plausible that manufacturers prefer to support formats that give them more control.  Not to mention that large manufacturers are much more comfortable dealing with something like the <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/licensing/mpeg4faq.aspx" title="microsoft.com">MPEG LA</a> [microsoft.com] than with an open format like Matroska.  They probably have a hard time getting their heads around supporting something that doesn't required licensing fees.  (Like in the case of Linux, business types usually think "free" = "inferior".)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My AppleTV , PS3 , BlackBerry , DVD player and iPod will all play MPEG-4 .
None of them will play MKV .
Can you give a few examples of popular hardware devices that 'll play MKV ? Well , considering that all of those you list have a stake in closed architectures , I 'm not too surprised .
Neither Apple nor Sony has ever shown much interest in supporting open standards .
Have you yet discovered that your PS3 also wo n't play all flavors of DivX/XviD [ avsforum.com ] even in the AVI container ? While some DVD players support DivX and often wo n't cough with XviD , the manufacturers did so to enable you to play the now-defunct DivX discs .
I took back a Sony DVD player and replaced it with a Panny because the Sony had no DivX support and would n't play my XviD-encoded programs .
Sony wants everyone to conform to the .mp4 container that they prefer.In answer to your question , how about a COWON A3 [ cowonamerica.com ] for starters ?
It even supports 720p/H.264 Matroska files ( I have a lot of those ) .
Or maybe some of these devices [ wikipedia.org ] ? If you buy products that are designed to close off your options , then you ca n't really complain when you find your choices are more limited .
While it 's possible to argue that hardware manufacturers have been slow to support Matroska because of its small market share , I think it 's even more plausible that manufacturers prefer to support formats that give them more control .
Not to mention that large manufacturers are much more comfortable dealing with something like the MPEG LA [ microsoft.com ] than with an open format like Matroska .
They probably have a hard time getting their heads around supporting something that does n't required licensing fees .
( Like in the case of Linux , business types usually think " free " = " inferior " .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My AppleTV, PS3, BlackBerry, DVD player and iPod will all play MPEG-4.
None of them will play MKV.
Can you give a few examples of popular hardware devices that'll play MKV?Well, considering that all of those you list have a stake in closed architectures, I'm not too surprised.
Neither Apple nor Sony has ever shown much interest in supporting open standards.
Have you yet discovered that your PS3 also won't play all flavors of DivX/XviD [avsforum.com] even in the AVI container?While some DVD players support DivX and often won't cough with XviD, the manufacturers did so to enable you to play the now-defunct DivX discs.
I took back a Sony DVD player and replaced it with a Panny because the Sony had no DivX support and wouldn't play my XviD-encoded programs.
Sony wants everyone to conform to the .mp4 container that they prefer.In answer to your question, how about a COWON A3 [cowonamerica.com] for starters?
It even supports 720p/H.264 Matroska files (I have a lot of those).
Or maybe some of these devices [wikipedia.org]?If you buy products that are designed to close off your options, then you can't really complain when you find your choices are more limited.
While it's possible to argue that hardware manufacturers have been slow to support Matroska because of its small market share, I think it's even more plausible that manufacturers prefer to support formats that give them more control.
Not to mention that large manufacturers are much more comfortable dealing with something like the MPEG LA [microsoft.com] than with an open format like Matroska.
They probably have a hard time getting their heads around supporting something that doesn't required licensing fees.
(Like in the case of Linux, business types usually think "free" = "inferior".
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199941</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28210485</id>
	<title>Re:MKV == critical mass?</title>
	<author>metamatic</author>
	<datestamp>1244133900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Neither Apple nor Sony has ever shown much interest in supporting open standards.</p></div></blockquote><p>Nonsense. MPEG-4 is an open standard. It's just not royalty free.</p><p>Other open standards Apple supports, many of which *are* royalty-free, include OpenGL, HTTP, LDAP, X11, PDF, MPEG-1, UPnP, vCal, vCard, DAV, POSIX, NFS, SSH, SIP, XMPP, DHCP, IPv6, SNMP... and of course, they originated open standards like QuickTime and Zeroconf.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Neither Apple nor Sony has ever shown much interest in supporting open standards.Nonsense .
MPEG-4 is an open standard .
It 's just not royalty free.Other open standards Apple supports , many of which * are * royalty-free , include OpenGL , HTTP , LDAP , X11 , PDF , MPEG-1 , UPnP , vCal , vCard , DAV , POSIX , NFS , SSH , SIP , XMPP , DHCP , IPv6 , SNMP... and of course , they originated open standards like QuickTime and Zeroconf .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Neither Apple nor Sony has ever shown much interest in supporting open standards.Nonsense.
MPEG-4 is an open standard.
It's just not royalty free.Other open standards Apple supports, many of which *are* royalty-free, include OpenGL, HTTP, LDAP, X11, PDF, MPEG-1, UPnP, vCal, vCard, DAV, POSIX, NFS, SSH, SIP, XMPP, DHCP, IPv6, SNMP... and of course, they originated open standards like QuickTime and Zeroconf.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28205081</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200575</id>
	<title>Re:MKV == critical mass?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244021160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Can you give a few examples of popular hardware devices that'll play MKV?</p></div><p>The WD TV from Western Digital. I have no idea if it sells well or not, but it's from a well-known company.<br><a href="http://www.wdc.com/en/products/products.asp?DriveID=572" title="wdc.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.wdc.com/en/products/products.asp?DriveID=572</a> [wdc.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Can you give a few examples of popular hardware devices that 'll play MKV ? The WD TV from Western Digital .
I have no idea if it sells well or not , but it 's from a well-known company.http : //www.wdc.com/en/products/products.asp ? DriveID = 572 [ wdc.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can you give a few examples of popular hardware devices that'll play MKV?The WD TV from Western Digital.
I have no idea if it sells well or not, but it's from a well-known company.http://www.wdc.com/en/products/products.asp?DriveID=572 [wdc.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199941</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28208911</id>
	<title>Re:You are kidding arent you ?</title>
	<author>visible.frylock</author>
	<datestamp>1244127480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Remind me again, what story was that from? It was something about linux being used in a school right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Remind me again , what story was that from ?
It was something about linux being used in a school right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Remind me again, what story was that from?
It was something about linux being used in a school right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28201637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28207407</id>
	<title>How to promote MKV container: Lesson 1</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244117880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Dan Marlin shares his thoughts on the growing popularity of the MKV container" right, now we know there is such a thing as an MKV container. Well done, you have achieved your goal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Dan Marlin shares his thoughts on the growing popularity of the MKV container " right , now we know there is such a thing as an MKV container .
Well done , you have achieved your goal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Dan Marlin shares his thoughts on the growing popularity of the MKV container" right, now we know there is such a thing as an MKV container.
Well done, you have achieved your goal.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199505</id>
	<title>Re:Hack</title>
	<author>nizo</author>
	<datestamp>1244059620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>However, Microsoft is making the new versions of media player less useful by not playing 3rd party codecs.</i></p><p>I'm still trying to grok how Microsoft thinks that making newer players that play fewer things than older players is a brilliant business move. Unless they plan on making it impossible to install other players???</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>However , Microsoft is making the new versions of media player less useful by not playing 3rd party codecs.I 'm still trying to grok how Microsoft thinks that making newer players that play fewer things than older players is a brilliant business move .
Unless they plan on making it impossible to install other players ? ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>However, Microsoft is making the new versions of media player less useful by not playing 3rd party codecs.I'm still trying to grok how Microsoft thinks that making newer players that play fewer things than older players is a brilliant business move.
Unless they plan on making it impossible to install other players??
?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199443</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199869</id>
	<title>Re:Hack</title>
	<author>Corngood</author>
	<datestamp>1244061480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://sentry23.googlepages.com/" title="googlepages.com">http://sentry23.googlepages.com/</a> [googlepages.com] <br> <br>
Only for windows, but it converts to mp4 files which will play on the 360.  There are probably easier ways to do it with transcoding, but this one actually keeps the video stream intact bit-for-bit.  You just need to make sure<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.mp4 files are registered with media sharing in windows.
<br> <br>
Also if you have a newish ATI or nVidia GPU, it can probably do the decoding if you use mpc-hc or the standalone codecs from it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //sentry23.googlepages.com/ [ googlepages.com ] Only for windows , but it converts to mp4 files which will play on the 360 .
There are probably easier ways to do it with transcoding , but this one actually keeps the video stream intact bit-for-bit .
You just need to make sure .mp4 files are registered with media sharing in windows .
Also if you have a newish ATI or nVidia GPU , it can probably do the decoding if you use mpc-hc or the standalone codecs from it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://sentry23.googlepages.com/ [googlepages.com]  
Only for windows, but it converts to mp4 files which will play on the 360.
There are probably easier ways to do it with transcoding, but this one actually keeps the video stream intact bit-for-bit.
You just need to make sure .mp4 files are registered with media sharing in windows.
Also if you have a newish ATI or nVidia GPU, it can probably do the decoding if you use mpc-hc or the standalone codecs from it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199521</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28214443</id>
	<title>Subtitles</title>
	<author>DarthVain</author>
	<datestamp>1244107260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Give me a Codec that can handle subtitles/multiple language subtitles easily and properly!</p><p>Not only is it a pain in the ass to load about a billion Codecs just to have things "work" but you must do it in such a way that all the planets are aligned, and pray/hope that nothing has changed a whole lot since the last time you did it. This is seriously something that should be easy but it is not.</p><p>Back to the subtitle thing, nothing is worse than getting all excited to watch Das Boot or something, and then realizing that not knowing German may really effect your understanding of wtf is going on...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:) OK OK whatever, its me watching Anime TV shows from Japan. That's even more messed up trying to figure out without any subs!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Give me a Codec that can handle subtitles/multiple language subtitles easily and properly ! Not only is it a pain in the ass to load about a billion Codecs just to have things " work " but you must do it in such a way that all the planets are aligned , and pray/hope that nothing has changed a whole lot since the last time you did it .
This is seriously something that should be easy but it is not.Back to the subtitle thing , nothing is worse than getting all excited to watch Das Boot or something , and then realizing that not knowing German may really effect your understanding of wtf is going on... : ) OK OK whatever , its me watching Anime TV shows from Japan .
That 's even more messed up trying to figure out without any subs !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Give me a Codec that can handle subtitles/multiple language subtitles easily and properly!Not only is it a pain in the ass to load about a billion Codecs just to have things "work" but you must do it in such a way that all the planets are aligned, and pray/hope that nothing has changed a whole lot since the last time you did it.
This is seriously something that should be easy but it is not.Back to the subtitle thing, nothing is worse than getting all excited to watch Das Boot or something, and then realizing that not knowing German may really effect your understanding of wtf is going on... :) OK OK whatever, its me watching Anime TV shows from Japan.
That's even more messed up trying to figure out without any subs!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28203131</id>
	<title>Re:MKV == critical mass?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244030400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The first company with the temerity to market a device that will take a user's existing library and integrate it into an elegant set-top solution is going to CLEAN UP. They will dominate the set-top completely for years to come. It looks like TiVO is going to miss the boat, as is Apple. Are there any dark horses in this race?</i></p><p>Xbox 360 and PS3 work quite well at this, it just isn't widely advertised.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The first company with the temerity to market a device that will take a user 's existing library and integrate it into an elegant set-top solution is going to CLEAN UP .
They will dominate the set-top completely for years to come .
It looks like TiVO is going to miss the boat , as is Apple .
Are there any dark horses in this race ? Xbox 360 and PS3 work quite well at this , it just is n't widely advertised .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first company with the temerity to market a device that will take a user's existing library and integrate it into an elegant set-top solution is going to CLEAN UP.
They will dominate the set-top completely for years to come.
It looks like TiVO is going to miss the boat, as is Apple.
Are there any dark horses in this race?Xbox 360 and PS3 work quite well at this, it just isn't widely advertised.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199825</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199345</id>
	<title>Dire Straits?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244058900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>now look at them yo-yo's that's the way you do it</p><p>I fail to see what a Dire Straits song about a guy working in a department store has to do with this story, editors.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>now look at them yo-yo 's that 's the way you do itI fail to see what a Dire Straits song about a guy working in a department store has to do with this story , editors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>now look at them yo-yo's that's the way you do itI fail to see what a Dire Straits song about a guy working in a department store has to do with this story, editors.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199737</id>
	<title>Re:Unfortunately, this one may work</title>
	<author>MozeeToby</author>
	<datestamp>1244060940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem there is that locking out third party codecs doesn't do anything to solve the problem because 99\% of users won't know that the codec/plugin they're told to download won't work.  You could even find a way, I'm sure, to allow the video to play only after they've installed your malware if you wanted to be really sneaky about it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem there is that locking out third party codecs does n't do anything to solve the problem because 99 \ % of users wo n't know that the codec/plugin they 're told to download wo n't work .
You could even find a way , I 'm sure , to allow the video to play only after they 've installed your malware if you wanted to be really sneaky about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem there is that locking out third party codecs doesn't do anything to solve the problem because 99\% of users won't know that the codec/plugin they're told to download won't work.
You could even find a way, I'm sure, to allow the video to play only after they've installed your malware if you wanted to be really sneaky about it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199535</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28204273</id>
	<title>Re:More on Streaming? Interview?</title>
	<author>SanityInAnarchy</author>
	<datestamp>1244036760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Human readable also means human debuggable. It means when there's something wrong with the file, I can figure it out with a text editor. It also means textual, which means it can be stored in version control, among other things.</p><p>And slowness is completely irrelevant, when we're talking about tiny bits of script or menu layout. It only becomes relevant if you're encoding the entire file that way, and I guess I don't really see the point of that.</p><p>Anyway... I would probably choose something like JSON or Yaml as a starting point. On the other hand, XML namespaces are nice, too, and HTML+microformats will get you a long way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Human readable also means human debuggable .
It means when there 's something wrong with the file , I can figure it out with a text editor .
It also means textual , which means it can be stored in version control , among other things.And slowness is completely irrelevant , when we 're talking about tiny bits of script or menu layout .
It only becomes relevant if you 're encoding the entire file that way , and I guess I do n't really see the point of that.Anyway... I would probably choose something like JSON or Yaml as a starting point .
On the other hand , XML namespaces are nice , too , and HTML + microformats will get you a long way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Human readable also means human debuggable.
It means when there's something wrong with the file, I can figure it out with a text editor.
It also means textual, which means it can be stored in version control, among other things.And slowness is completely irrelevant, when we're talking about tiny bits of script or menu layout.
It only becomes relevant if you're encoding the entire file that way, and I guess I don't really see the point of that.Anyway... I would probably choose something like JSON or Yaml as a starting point.
On the other hand, XML namespaces are nice, too, and HTML+microformats will get you a long way.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200569</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28201853</id>
	<title>Re:Fake codecs</title>
	<author>MattskEE</author>
	<datestamp>1244025600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>VLC also needs an extremely fast computer to play high definition H.264 video without skipping and dropping tons of frames.  The CoreAVC codec seems to be the best available for watching hi-def media on typical computers, with CPU time to spare to do other things.</p><p>VLC is great and I use it frequently - but it has never had particularly well-optimized codecs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>VLC also needs an extremely fast computer to play high definition H.264 video without skipping and dropping tons of frames .
The CoreAVC codec seems to be the best available for watching hi-def media on typical computers , with CPU time to spare to do other things.VLC is great and I use it frequently - but it has never had particularly well-optimized codecs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>VLC also needs an extremely fast computer to play high definition H.264 video without skipping and dropping tons of frames.
The CoreAVC codec seems to be the best available for watching hi-def media on typical computers, with CPU time to spare to do other things.VLC is great and I use it frequently - but it has never had particularly well-optimized codecs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199541</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28203271</id>
	<title>Re:Hack</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244031060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Maintaining, unit testing, system testing costs vs delta in income for support of said codecs.</p></div><p>All things Microsoft must continue to do anyway, even given these changes. Further, for any specific codec surely most testing falls on the codec vendor, not on Microsoft.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maintaining , unit testing , system testing costs vs delta in income for support of said codecs.All things Microsoft must continue to do anyway , even given these changes .
Further , for any specific codec surely most testing falls on the codec vendor , not on Microsoft .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maintaining, unit testing, system testing costs vs delta in income for support of said codecs.All things Microsoft must continue to do anyway, even given these changes.
Further, for any specific codec surely most testing falls on the codec vendor, not on Microsoft.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28202739</id>
	<title>Re:Hack</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244028780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did you mean the *entire* article?  Every single syllable?</p><p>If that is what you meant, then yes, you were the only one to read the article.</p><p>I didn't make it more than a quarter of the way through.  The interviewee's comments were a mishmash of uncompleted sentences, run-ons, and generally un-parsable-as-English mud.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did you mean the * entire * article ?
Every single syllable ? If that is what you meant , then yes , you were the only one to read the article.I did n't make it more than a quarter of the way through .
The interviewee 's comments were a mishmash of uncompleted sentences , run-ons , and generally un-parsable-as-English mud .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did you mean the *entire* article?
Every single syllable?If that is what you meant, then yes, you were the only one to read the article.I didn't make it more than a quarter of the way through.
The interviewee's comments were a mishmash of uncompleted sentences, run-ons, and generally un-parsable-as-English mud.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199479</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199303</id>
	<title>Hans Reiser fucked me in the butt!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244058660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have a question for my fellow Slashdot brethren.  Is it okay to use my iPhone 3G as an anal dildo as long as I use a good amount of lube?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a question for my fellow Slashdot brethren .
Is it okay to use my iPhone 3G as an anal dildo as long as I use a good amount of lube ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a question for my fellow Slashdot brethren.
Is it okay to use my iPhone 3G as an anal dildo as long as I use a good amount of lube?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199443</id>
	<title>Re:Hack</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244059320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think that if VLC runs on windows 7, 3rd party codecs will too. However, Microsoft is making the new versions of media player less useful by not playing 3rd party codecs.<p><div class="quote"><p>BTW, ts TFA just FUD or a guy promoting his own agenda??</p></div><p>He's probably disappointed that Microsoft won't license his codec from him and pay him lots of money for lots of installs that will rarely use it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think that if VLC runs on windows 7 , 3rd party codecs will too .
However , Microsoft is making the new versions of media player less useful by not playing 3rd party codecs.BTW , ts TFA just FUD or a guy promoting his own agenda ?
? He 's probably disappointed that Microsoft wo n't license his codec from him and pay him lots of money for lots of installs that will rarely use it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think that if VLC runs on windows 7, 3rd party codecs will too.
However, Microsoft is making the new versions of media player less useful by not playing 3rd party codecs.BTW, ts TFA just FUD or a guy promoting his own agenda?
?He's probably disappointed that Microsoft won't license his codec from him and pay him lots of money for lots of installs that will rarely use it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199379</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199789</id>
	<title>Surprising.</title>
	<author>Nekomusume</author>
	<datestamp>1244061120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm just surprised to hear that anyone uses the windows media player. I'll stick to CCCP+Zoomplayer with VLC as a backup.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm just surprised to hear that anyone uses the windows media player .
I 'll stick to CCCP + Zoomplayer with VLC as a backup .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm just surprised to hear that anyone uses the windows media player.
I'll stick to CCCP+Zoomplayer with VLC as a backup.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199541</id>
	<title>Fake codecs</title>
	<author>Alari</author>
	<datestamp>1244059800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fake "codecs" are one of the main ways windows PCs currently get infected with spyware/viruses. This comes from all the people who install Limewire with no AV and then download the first thousand results for "porn".</p><p>VLC - has all codecs built-in. Use it.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fake " codecs " are one of the main ways windows PCs currently get infected with spyware/viruses .
This comes from all the people who install Limewire with no AV and then download the first thousand results for " porn " .VLC - has all codecs built-in .
Use it .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fake "codecs" are one of the main ways windows PCs currently get infected with spyware/viruses.
This comes from all the people who install Limewire with no AV and then download the first thousand results for "porn".VLC - has all codecs built-in.
Use it.
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28210557</id>
	<title>Re:MKV == critical mass?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244134260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>While some DVD players support DivX and often won't cough with XviD, the manufacturers did so to enable you to play the now-defunct DivX discs.</p>  </div><p>Bullshit.<br>
&nbsp; DivX<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;) the codec has no relation whatsoever to Divx-the-disposable-disc-that-helped-bankrupt-Circuit-City.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>While some DVD players support DivX and often wo n't cough with XviD , the manufacturers did so to enable you to play the now-defunct DivX discs .
Bullshit .   DivX ; ) the codec has no relation whatsoever to Divx-the-disposable-disc-that-helped-bankrupt-Circuit-City .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While some DVD players support DivX and often won't cough with XviD, the manufacturers did so to enable you to play the now-defunct DivX discs.
Bullshit.
  DivX ;) the codec has no relation whatsoever to Divx-the-disposable-disc-that-helped-bankrupt-Circuit-City.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28205081</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28202541</id>
	<title>Re:MKV == critical mass?</title>
	<author>feepness</author>
	<datestamp>1244027940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've been curious about building one as well, but quick question... will it do kids shows?
<br> <br>
With a two and four year old in the house, Mickey Mouse is a must.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been curious about building one as well , but quick question... will it do kids shows ?
With a two and four year old in the house , Mickey Mouse is a must .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been curious about building one as well, but quick question... will it do kids shows?
With a two and four year old in the house, Mickey Mouse is a must.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199825</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28201123</id>
	<title>Not streaming, progressive download</title>
	<author>benwaggoner</author>
	<datestamp>1244023080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>YouTube and DailyMotion use progressive download, not streaming.</p><p>The experience is similar as long as you have a lot of bandwidth and shorter content. But doing progressive download of a 2 hour 4 Mbps HD movie is not a good experience.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>YouTube and DailyMotion use progressive download , not streaming.The experience is similar as long as you have a lot of bandwidth and shorter content .
But doing progressive download of a 2 hour 4 Mbps HD movie is not a good experience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>YouTube and DailyMotion use progressive download, not streaming.The experience is similar as long as you have a lot of bandwidth and shorter content.
But doing progressive download of a 2 hour 4 Mbps HD movie is not a good experience.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199649</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199521</id>
	<title>Re:Hack</title>
	<author>Killer Orca</author>
	<datestamp>1244059740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I believe it is called VLC, although my hardware is currently unable to play 1080p<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.mkvs, as I discovered last week.  On a not unrelated note anyone know how to play aforementioned files on the 360?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe it is called VLC , although my hardware is currently unable to play 1080p .mkvs , as I discovered last week .
On a not unrelated note anyone know how to play aforementioned files on the 360 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe it is called VLC, although my hardware is currently unable to play 1080p .mkvs, as I discovered last week.
On a not unrelated note anyone know how to play aforementioned files on the 360?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199379</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199535</id>
	<title>Unfortunately, this one may work</title>
	<author>querist</author>
	<datestamp>1244059800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unfortunately, Microsoft may get away with this under the guise of concern for security. There was a time (and perhaps these are still out there) when links to fake codec were used to compromise the victim's computer. (For an analysis of one of these, please see <a href="http://www.lavasoftsupport.com/index.php?showtopic=5302" title="lavasoftsupport.com">http://www.lavasoftsupport.com/index.php?showtopic=5302</a> [lavasoftsupport.com] )</p><p>Most of us here know how this scenario unfolds: user is trying to view some form of media, often of "questionable" morality (either pr0n or "pirated" video) and the site claims that the user must install a new codec or upgrade to a new version of Flash or Quicktime or whatever and "kindly" has the link right there. It may even have the simple "click here" puzzle-piece link to install the proper codec/player so you can see the multimedia clip. Victim clicks, wanting simply to see the media clip, and <em>presto!</em>, the victim's machine is now a spam-spewing zombie.</p><p>Of course, the link could install other things, too, but the point is that the "fake codec" ploy is common enough that Microsoft could easily claim that they are only allowing "approved" or "signed" codecs out of concern for security. They may state that third party codecs are allowed, and will permit Quicktime (for fear of a suit and driving people to Apple) and Flash/Shockwave, but other third-party codecs could be blocked through some combination of testing and/or certificate/signing fees.</p><p>This one is too easy, and it just might work.</p><p>(I find it strangely amusing that the captcha, given that these fake codecs are often seen in relation to pr0n sites, is "explicit".)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately , Microsoft may get away with this under the guise of concern for security .
There was a time ( and perhaps these are still out there ) when links to fake codec were used to compromise the victim 's computer .
( For an analysis of one of these , please see http : //www.lavasoftsupport.com/index.php ? showtopic = 5302 [ lavasoftsupport.com ] ) Most of us here know how this scenario unfolds : user is trying to view some form of media , often of " questionable " morality ( either pr0n or " pirated " video ) and the site claims that the user must install a new codec or upgrade to a new version of Flash or Quicktime or whatever and " kindly " has the link right there .
It may even have the simple " click here " puzzle-piece link to install the proper codec/player so you can see the multimedia clip .
Victim clicks , wanting simply to see the media clip , and presto ! , the victim 's machine is now a spam-spewing zombie.Of course , the link could install other things , too , but the point is that the " fake codec " ploy is common enough that Microsoft could easily claim that they are only allowing " approved " or " signed " codecs out of concern for security .
They may state that third party codecs are allowed , and will permit Quicktime ( for fear of a suit and driving people to Apple ) and Flash/Shockwave , but other third-party codecs could be blocked through some combination of testing and/or certificate/signing fees.This one is too easy , and it just might work .
( I find it strangely amusing that the captcha , given that these fake codecs are often seen in relation to pr0n sites , is " explicit " .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately, Microsoft may get away with this under the guise of concern for security.
There was a time (and perhaps these are still out there) when links to fake codec were used to compromise the victim's computer.
(For an analysis of one of these, please see http://www.lavasoftsupport.com/index.php?showtopic=5302 [lavasoftsupport.com] )Most of us here know how this scenario unfolds: user is trying to view some form of media, often of "questionable" morality (either pr0n or "pirated" video) and the site claims that the user must install a new codec or upgrade to a new version of Flash or Quicktime or whatever and "kindly" has the link right there.
It may even have the simple "click here" puzzle-piece link to install the proper codec/player so you can see the multimedia clip.
Victim clicks, wanting simply to see the media clip, and presto!, the victim's machine is now a spam-spewing zombie.Of course, the link could install other things, too, but the point is that the "fake codec" ploy is common enough that Microsoft could easily claim that they are only allowing "approved" or "signed" codecs out of concern for security.
They may state that third party codecs are allowed, and will permit Quicktime (for fear of a suit and driving people to Apple) and Flash/Shockwave, but other third-party codecs could be blocked through some combination of testing and/or certificate/signing fees.This one is too easy, and it just might work.
(I find it strangely amusing that the captcha, given that these fake codecs are often seen in relation to pr0n sites, is "explicit".
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28208813</id>
	<title>Re:MKV == critical mass?</title>
	<author>visible.frylock</author>
	<datestamp>1244127060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> <tt>The average mp4 vs a highly compressed digital cable channel might be equivalent, but the market wants DVD quality without any sacrifice from downloaded video.</tt></p></div> </blockquote><p>As far as the audio situation being different from video, one of the reasons is that audio has been distributed (very near) DRM free and damn good quality ever since cds. So there was made an infrastructure for people putting up pirated versions ripped from the high quality originals.</p><p>Video is different. DVD is mpeg2, which isn't all that great, but much of the pirated video out there is reencoded with this as the original source. So to keep a decent amount of quality, you have to use larger file size, even with these superior codecs, because the original isn't exactly spectacular in terms of quality/size. And the industry refuses to put stuff out in anything better than mpeg2 without making it a royal PITA to use. So we're not taking full advantage of new codecs and getting the mileage out of them that we should be. This is changing, but takes time.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The average mp4 vs a highly compressed digital cable channel might be equivalent , but the market wants DVD quality without any sacrifice from downloaded video .
As far as the audio situation being different from video , one of the reasons is that audio has been distributed ( very near ) DRM free and damn good quality ever since cds .
So there was made an infrastructure for people putting up pirated versions ripped from the high quality originals.Video is different .
DVD is mpeg2 , which is n't all that great , but much of the pirated video out there is reencoded with this as the original source .
So to keep a decent amount of quality , you have to use larger file size , even with these superior codecs , because the original is n't exactly spectacular in terms of quality/size .
And the industry refuses to put stuff out in anything better than mpeg2 without making it a royal PITA to use .
So we 're not taking full advantage of new codecs and getting the mileage out of them that we should be .
This is changing , but takes time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> The average mp4 vs a highly compressed digital cable channel might be equivalent, but the market wants DVD quality without any sacrifice from downloaded video.
As far as the audio situation being different from video, one of the reasons is that audio has been distributed (very near) DRM free and damn good quality ever since cds.
So there was made an infrastructure for people putting up pirated versions ripped from the high quality originals.Video is different.
DVD is mpeg2, which isn't all that great, but much of the pirated video out there is reencoded with this as the original source.
So to keep a decent amount of quality, you have to use larger file size, even with these superior codecs, because the original isn't exactly spectacular in terms of quality/size.
And the industry refuses to put stuff out in anything better than mpeg2 without making it a royal PITA to use.
So we're not taking full advantage of new codecs and getting the mileage out of them that we should be.
This is changing, but takes time.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199825</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199357</id>
	<title>More on Streaming?  Interview?</title>
	<author>eldavojohn</author>
	<datestamp>1244059020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>From their <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matroska#Goals" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">goals</a> [wikipedia.org]:

<ul>
<li>creating a modern, flexible, extensible, cross-platform multimedia container format;</li><li> <b>developing robust streaming support;</b> </li><li>developing a menu system similar to that of DVDs based on EBML;</li><li>developing a set of tools for the creation and editing of Matroska files;</li><li>developing libraries that can be used to allow developers to add Matroska support to their applications;</li><li>working with hardware manufacturers to include Matroska support in embedded multimedia devices;</li><li>working to provide native Matroska support in various operating systems.</li></ul><p>

I would have liked to hear more on how he plans to break into the streaming market when everyone is going proprietary on that for the sake of DRM.  He mentions it briefly but does he have any definite plans?  <br> <br>

Davis Freeberg, if you're reading this could you introduce Marlin to the editors for a <a href="http://slashdot.org/faq/interviews.shtml" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">Slashdot Interview</a> [slashdot.org]?  I can think of a lot things to ask him as I'm sure other users could<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From their goals [ wikipedia.org ] : creating a modern , flexible , extensible , cross-platform multimedia container format ; developing robust streaming support ; developing a menu system similar to that of DVDs based on EBML ; developing a set of tools for the creation and editing of Matroska files ; developing libraries that can be used to allow developers to add Matroska support to their applications ; working with hardware manufacturers to include Matroska support in embedded multimedia devices ; working to provide native Matroska support in various operating systems .
I would have liked to hear more on how he plans to break into the streaming market when everyone is going proprietary on that for the sake of DRM .
He mentions it briefly but does he have any definite plans ?
Davis Freeberg , if you 're reading this could you introduce Marlin to the editors for a Slashdot Interview [ slashdot.org ] ?
I can think of a lot things to ask him as I 'm sure other users could .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From their goals [wikipedia.org]:


creating a modern, flexible, extensible, cross-platform multimedia container format; developing robust streaming support; developing a menu system similar to that of DVDs based on EBML;developing a set of tools for the creation and editing of Matroska files;developing libraries that can be used to allow developers to add Matroska support to their applications;working with hardware manufacturers to include Matroska support in embedded multimedia devices;working to provide native Matroska support in various operating systems.
I would have liked to hear more on how he plans to break into the streaming market when everyone is going proprietary on that for the sake of DRM.
He mentions it briefly but does he have any definite plans?
Davis Freeberg, if you're reading this could you introduce Marlin to the editors for a Slashdot Interview [slashdot.org]?
I can think of a lot things to ask him as I'm sure other users could ...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28202433</id>
	<title>Re:Hack</title>
	<author>tdelaney</author>
	<datestamp>1244027580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Interestingly, if you install ffdshow-tryouts, its codecs <b>are</b> used except if there's already a Media Foundation codec installed for that media type (at least in Media Centre - don't know about WMP). So they're not "blocking" per-se - they're making Media Foundation codecs preferred over DirectShow codecs. I'm not sure exactly what MF codecs come with Windows 7, but I know that the ffdshow-tryouts XviD codec was used without any additional configuration.</p><p>If you install Haali's splitter, you can play back MKV in Media Centre.</p><p>Also interesting - even if you don't use the hack to make MF non-preferred, DirectShow filters will still be used e.g. VobSub.</p><p>Now, I think it's pretty scummy that MS has made MF codecs preferred over DirectShow, effectively blocking third-party codecs for that media type, but there's a lot of mis-information going around about what the situation actually is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Interestingly , if you install ffdshow-tryouts , its codecs are used except if there 's already a Media Foundation codec installed for that media type ( at least in Media Centre - do n't know about WMP ) .
So they 're not " blocking " per-se - they 're making Media Foundation codecs preferred over DirectShow codecs .
I 'm not sure exactly what MF codecs come with Windows 7 , but I know that the ffdshow-tryouts XviD codec was used without any additional configuration.If you install Haali 's splitter , you can play back MKV in Media Centre.Also interesting - even if you do n't use the hack to make MF non-preferred , DirectShow filters will still be used e.g .
VobSub.Now , I think it 's pretty scummy that MS has made MF codecs preferred over DirectShow , effectively blocking third-party codecs for that media type , but there 's a lot of mis-information going around about what the situation actually is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interestingly, if you install ffdshow-tryouts, its codecs are used except if there's already a Media Foundation codec installed for that media type (at least in Media Centre - don't know about WMP).
So they're not "blocking" per-se - they're making Media Foundation codecs preferred over DirectShow codecs.
I'm not sure exactly what MF codecs come with Windows 7, but I know that the ffdshow-tryouts XviD codec was used without any additional configuration.If you install Haali's splitter, you can play back MKV in Media Centre.Also interesting - even if you don't use the hack to make MF non-preferred, DirectShow filters will still be used e.g.
VobSub.Now, I think it's pretty scummy that MS has made MF codecs preferred over DirectShow, effectively blocking third-party codecs for that media type, but there's a lot of mis-information going around about what the situation actually is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199505</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200661</id>
	<title>Re:Hack</title>
	<author>mzs</author>
	<datestamp>1244021460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think that a work around was already discovered. It entailed to first use setacl to modify the permissions on some registry entries and then to modify those and other registry entries.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think that a work around was already discovered .
It entailed to first use setacl to modify the permissions on some registry entries and then to modify those and other registry entries .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think that a work around was already discovered.
It entailed to first use setacl to modify the permissions on some registry entries and then to modify those and other registry entries.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199379</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199451</id>
	<title>What the hell is X.264?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244059380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why do people keep calling it X.264, the name is H.264.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do people keep calling it X.264 , the name is H.264 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why do people keep calling it X.264, the name is H.264.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200639</id>
	<title>Re:MKV == critical mass?</title>
	<author>YesIAmAScript</author>
	<datestamp>1244021340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>MKV cannot become the mp3 of video, because MKV is only a container, while mp3 is a codec.</p><p>The problem with container formats is that it is difficult to explain to the customer what they are. For example, say my device supports MKV. But then a customer puts an MKV on with a TrueHD audio stream in it and it doesn't play. The customer gets confused. This has been a problem since the TIFF days. And it is a big part of what's going wrong with ODF. Sure, anyone can write one, but you can't necessarily read anyone else's!</p><p>mp3 is mp3. Any mp3 player can play any mp3 file. That's the power of it and a big part of why it is successful. MKV cannot fulfill the same function.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>MKV can not become the mp3 of video , because MKV is only a container , while mp3 is a codec.The problem with container formats is that it is difficult to explain to the customer what they are .
For example , say my device supports MKV .
But then a customer puts an MKV on with a TrueHD audio stream in it and it does n't play .
The customer gets confused .
This has been a problem since the TIFF days .
And it is a big part of what 's going wrong with ODF .
Sure , anyone can write one , but you ca n't necessarily read anyone else 's ! mp3 is mp3 .
Any mp3 player can play any mp3 file .
That 's the power of it and a big part of why it is successful .
MKV can not fulfill the same function .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MKV cannot become the mp3 of video, because MKV is only a container, while mp3 is a codec.The problem with container formats is that it is difficult to explain to the customer what they are.
For example, say my device supports MKV.
But then a customer puts an MKV on with a TrueHD audio stream in it and it doesn't play.
The customer gets confused.
This has been a problem since the TIFF days.
And it is a big part of what's going wrong with ODF.
Sure, anyone can write one, but you can't necessarily read anyone else's!mp3 is mp3.
Any mp3 player can play any mp3 file.
That's the power of it and a big part of why it is successful.
MKV cannot fulfill the same function.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199825</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28204929</id>
	<title>Re:Fake codecs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244042100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If it isn't using a free codec it probably isn't worth watching... period.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If it is n't using a free codec it probably is n't worth watching... period .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it isn't using a free codec it probably isn't worth watching... period.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200203</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199839</id>
	<title>Safety thing</title>
	<author>Saint Stephen</author>
	<datestamp>1244061300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How much malware could be stopped if Porn sites couldn't prompt you to install a special codec just to view this free porn?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How much malware could be stopped if Porn sites could n't prompt you to install a special codec just to view this free porn ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How much malware could be stopped if Porn sites couldn't prompt you to install a special codec just to view this free porn?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199807</id>
	<title>Re:What the hell is X.264?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244061240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>X.264 must be the new standard for porn.</htmltext>
<tokenext>X.264 must be the new standard for porn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>X.264 must be the new standard for porn.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199451</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28212029</id>
	<title>Re:Hack</title>
	<author>Hal\_Porter</author>
	<datestamp>1244140380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They don't need to</p><p><a href="http://windows7center.com/news/rumor-smash-windows-7-to-support-third-party-codecs/" title="windows7center.com" rel="nofollow">http://windows7center.com/news/rumor-smash-windows-7-to-support-third-party-codecs/</a> [windows7center.com] </p><p><div class="quote"><p>Rafael from WithinWindows investigated and found that this "blocking" behaviour does exist, but it seems to be functioning in a way that indicates it is there temporarily. This was Microsoft's comment on the issue:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>As we move toward the release of Windows 7, we have worked to add more codecs and file types to allow for a better user experience. We also allow Microsoft experiences to use codecs and other format technologies from third-party companies, just as we always have.  Third party applications can use the Microsoft codecs or their own.  Microsoft does not restrict the use of third-party codecs. - Microsoft Spokesperson</p></div><p>The possibility of Microsoft imposing such a strange restriction and alienating its many users seemed unlikely anyway.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They do n't need tohttp : //windows7center.com/news/rumor-smash-windows-7-to-support-third-party-codecs/ [ windows7center.com ] Rafael from WithinWindows investigated and found that this " blocking " behaviour does exist , but it seems to be functioning in a way that indicates it is there temporarily .
This was Microsoft 's comment on the issue : As we move toward the release of Windows 7 , we have worked to add more codecs and file types to allow for a better user experience .
We also allow Microsoft experiences to use codecs and other format technologies from third-party companies , just as we always have .
Third party applications can use the Microsoft codecs or their own .
Microsoft does not restrict the use of third-party codecs .
- Microsoft SpokespersonThe possibility of Microsoft imposing such a strange restriction and alienating its many users seemed unlikely anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They don't need tohttp://windows7center.com/news/rumor-smash-windows-7-to-support-third-party-codecs/ [windows7center.com] Rafael from WithinWindows investigated and found that this "blocking" behaviour does exist, but it seems to be functioning in a way that indicates it is there temporarily.
This was Microsoft's comment on the issue:As we move toward the release of Windows 7, we have worked to add more codecs and file types to allow for a better user experience.
We also allow Microsoft experiences to use codecs and other format technologies from third-party companies, just as we always have.
Third party applications can use the Microsoft codecs or their own.
Microsoft does not restrict the use of third-party codecs.
- Microsoft SpokespersonThe possibility of Microsoft imposing such a strange restriction and alienating its many users seemed unlikely anyway.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199379</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200375</id>
	<title>Re:Hans Reiser fucked me in the butt!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244020260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>To answer your question, goon sir, yes. Yes it is okay to use your iPhone 3G as an anal dildo. The lube is actually optional, as I have found out from first hand experience. Plus, there's a new iPhone coming out soon, so you'll be able to replace your 3G with a newer model with (here's hoping!) a more powerful vibrate function.</htmltext>
<tokenext>To answer your question , goon sir , yes .
Yes it is okay to use your iPhone 3G as an anal dildo .
The lube is actually optional , as I have found out from first hand experience .
Plus , there 's a new iPhone coming out soon , so you 'll be able to replace your 3G with a newer model with ( here 's hoping !
) a more powerful vibrate function .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To answer your question, goon sir, yes.
Yes it is okay to use your iPhone 3G as an anal dildo.
The lube is actually optional, as I have found out from first hand experience.
Plus, there's a new iPhone coming out soon, so you'll be able to replace your 3G with a newer model with (here's hoping!
) a more powerful vibrate function.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199303</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199851</id>
	<title>I want..</title>
	<author>NervousNerd</author>
	<datestamp>1244061360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I want my.. I want my mod points.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I want my.. I want my mod points .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I want my.. I want my mod points.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28206865</id>
	<title>Re:You are kidding arent you ?</title>
	<author>Jesus\_666</author>
	<datestamp>1244109900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, but as far as I know MKV uses the V component of DVD - which is actually an open standard. It's the Ds that are expensive to license. You'll notice that Blu-Ray (or, as it's known in technical parlance, BD) doesn't contain the V component at all, which is one reason it was so expensive to develop: They had to completely redo the whole infrastructure themselves just so they could drop the V and one D (that backfired, though, as their replacement B component is just as expensive).<br>
<br>
MKV avoids that hassle by being a virtual container format (in fact, the K stands for "kontainer", which is Russian for container). The whole "plastic disc with microscopic pits that gets read with a laser" part gets pushed into software where much of it can be optimized away (in fact, the whole plastic substrate layer occupies a whole of three bytes in an MKV file; five bytes for the gold master). That way they can avoid having to license the Ds - they just made their own DVD drive-like software device that's just different enough to not require royalties.<br>
<br>
Once the MKV core is loaded into cache, it's like having a DVD player built into your CPU. As CPUs are blazingly fast today, you see no performance penalty in the emulation. It's really quite ingenious.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , but as far as I know MKV uses the V component of DVD - which is actually an open standard .
It 's the Ds that are expensive to license .
You 'll notice that Blu-Ray ( or , as it 's known in technical parlance , BD ) does n't contain the V component at all , which is one reason it was so expensive to develop : They had to completely redo the whole infrastructure themselves just so they could drop the V and one D ( that backfired , though , as their replacement B component is just as expensive ) .
MKV avoids that hassle by being a virtual container format ( in fact , the K stands for " kontainer " , which is Russian for container ) .
The whole " plastic disc with microscopic pits that gets read with a laser " part gets pushed into software where much of it can be optimized away ( in fact , the whole plastic substrate layer occupies a whole of three bytes in an MKV file ; five bytes for the gold master ) .
That way they can avoid having to license the Ds - they just made their own DVD drive-like software device that 's just different enough to not require royalties .
Once the MKV core is loaded into cache , it 's like having a DVD player built into your CPU .
As CPUs are blazingly fast today , you see no performance penalty in the emulation .
It 's really quite ingenious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, but as far as I know MKV uses the V component of DVD - which is actually an open standard.
It's the Ds that are expensive to license.
You'll notice that Blu-Ray (or, as it's known in technical parlance, BD) doesn't contain the V component at all, which is one reason it was so expensive to develop: They had to completely redo the whole infrastructure themselves just so they could drop the V and one D (that backfired, though, as their replacement B component is just as expensive).
MKV avoids that hassle by being a virtual container format (in fact, the K stands for "kontainer", which is Russian for container).
The whole "plastic disc with microscopic pits that gets read with a laser" part gets pushed into software where much of it can be optimized away (in fact, the whole plastic substrate layer occupies a whole of three bytes in an MKV file; five bytes for the gold master).
That way they can avoid having to license the Ds - they just made their own DVD drive-like software device that's just different enough to not require royalties.
Once the MKV core is loaded into cache, it's like having a DVD player built into your CPU.
As CPUs are blazingly fast today, you see no performance penalty in the emulation.
It's really quite ingenious.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28201637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199941</id>
	<title>Re:MKV == critical mass?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244061780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>We've been waiting for years for a killer video container, and it appears to me that mkv is probably going to be the one. It seems poised to become the mp3 of video. There's finally a container that can be played back in an acceptable number of hardware devices, with acceptable quality, at acceptable filesizes.</p></div></blockquote><p>My AppleTV, PS3, BlackBerry, DVD player and iPod will all play MPEG-4. None of them will play MKV.</p><p>Can you give a few examples of popular hardware devices that'll play MKV?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We 've been waiting for years for a killer video container , and it appears to me that mkv is probably going to be the one .
It seems poised to become the mp3 of video .
There 's finally a container that can be played back in an acceptable number of hardware devices , with acceptable quality , at acceptable filesizes.My AppleTV , PS3 , BlackBerry , DVD player and iPod will all play MPEG-4 .
None of them will play MKV.Can you give a few examples of popular hardware devices that 'll play MKV ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We've been waiting for years for a killer video container, and it appears to me that mkv is probably going to be the one.
It seems poised to become the mp3 of video.
There's finally a container that can be played back in an acceptable number of hardware devices, with acceptable quality, at acceptable filesizes.My AppleTV, PS3, BlackBerry, DVD player and iPod will all play MPEG-4.
None of them will play MKV.Can you give a few examples of popular hardware devices that'll play MKV?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199825</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28210309</id>
	<title>Re:MKV == critical mass?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244133240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>PROTIP:  NONE OF WHAT YOU'VE DESCRIBED HERE HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH MATROSKA.  WHATSOEVER.</p><p>&gt;&gt;We've been waiting for years for a killer video container, and it appears to me that mkv is probably going to be the one.</p><p>Really?  Cause to me and those who watch anime on a weekly basis, it seems like a format that's stagnated with faulty, flaky inconsistent support for everything and the kitchen sink for OVER FIVE YEARS.  'Oh hey, here's the latest, greatest feep you didn't need or want that only slows the playback down and makes it crash on even more PCs.'  We can't watch them on my nephew's $99 portable DVD player, and I can't play them on my $149 HDD media player.. so what f***ing good are they if the only thing you can play them on is the $1000+ bleeding-edge PC?  I've heard Matroska referred to as 'open-sores software' - because it hurts you to use it and the proponents of it are not helpful, they're SMUG about their technical superiority even as the failings of it are readily apparent to any end user.</p><p>I'm sad to have to quote Rich Unca Steve, but audio and video are the two elements of modern computing that I want to 'just work'.  I don't give a damn about metatags, that's what proper sorting and naming are for.  I like subtitles, I like multiple audio tracks.. and those things JUST WORK in Divx-supported AVIs and MP4 containers.  And those files JUST WORK on all kinds of non-PC devices.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>PROTIP : NONE OF WHAT YOU 'VE DESCRIBED HERE HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH MATROSKA .
WHATSOEVER. &gt; &gt; We 've been waiting for years for a killer video container , and it appears to me that mkv is probably going to be the one.Really ?
Cause to me and those who watch anime on a weekly basis , it seems like a format that 's stagnated with faulty , flaky inconsistent support for everything and the kitchen sink for OVER FIVE YEARS .
'Oh hey , here 's the latest , greatest feep you did n't need or want that only slows the playback down and makes it crash on even more PCs .
' We ca n't watch them on my nephew 's $ 99 portable DVD player , and I ca n't play them on my $ 149 HDD media player.. so what f * * * ing good are they if the only thing you can play them on is the $ 1000 + bleeding-edge PC ?
I 've heard Matroska referred to as 'open-sores software ' - because it hurts you to use it and the proponents of it are not helpful , they 're SMUG about their technical superiority even as the failings of it are readily apparent to any end user.I 'm sad to have to quote Rich Unca Steve , but audio and video are the two elements of modern computing that I want to 'just work' .
I do n't give a damn about metatags , that 's what proper sorting and naming are for .
I like subtitles , I like multiple audio tracks.. and those things JUST WORK in Divx-supported AVIs and MP4 containers .
And those files JUST WORK on all kinds of non-PC devices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PROTIP:  NONE OF WHAT YOU'VE DESCRIBED HERE HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH MATROSKA.
WHATSOEVER.&gt;&gt;We've been waiting for years for a killer video container, and it appears to me that mkv is probably going to be the one.Really?
Cause to me and those who watch anime on a weekly basis, it seems like a format that's stagnated with faulty, flaky inconsistent support for everything and the kitchen sink for OVER FIVE YEARS.
'Oh hey, here's the latest, greatest feep you didn't need or want that only slows the playback down and makes it crash on even more PCs.
'  We can't watch them on my nephew's $99 portable DVD player, and I can't play them on my $149 HDD media player.. so what f***ing good are they if the only thing you can play them on is the $1000+ bleeding-edge PC?
I've heard Matroska referred to as 'open-sores software' - because it hurts you to use it and the proponents of it are not helpful, they're SMUG about their technical superiority even as the failings of it are readily apparent to any end user.I'm sad to have to quote Rich Unca Steve, but audio and video are the two elements of modern computing that I want to 'just work'.
I don't give a damn about metatags, that's what proper sorting and naming are for.
I like subtitles, I like multiple audio tracks.. and those things JUST WORK in Divx-supported AVIs and MP4 containers.
And those files JUST WORK on all kinds of non-PC devices.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199825</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200315</id>
	<title>Re: Poorly coded codecs</title>
	<author>b4dc0d3r</author>
	<datestamp>1244020020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sure it's just a reaction to crappy codecs making it look like WMP is crashing.  Normal users will be able to play their normal mainstream media files, and even have DRM operate silently in the background with very little notice paid.</p><p>Users who require anything outside of mainstream codec support are not the typical use case, nor are they the targeted user base.  They aren't trying to prevent people using certain codecs, just making the typical path easier.</p><p>People panned Vista for crashes and unexpected things, and I'm sure they are trying to eliminate as much potential for crashes since a crash can usually be turned into a vulnerability as well.  Media players, especially ones which embed into browsers, are an easy target for hacking.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure it 's just a reaction to crappy codecs making it look like WMP is crashing .
Normal users will be able to play their normal mainstream media files , and even have DRM operate silently in the background with very little notice paid.Users who require anything outside of mainstream codec support are not the typical use case , nor are they the targeted user base .
They are n't trying to prevent people using certain codecs , just making the typical path easier.People panned Vista for crashes and unexpected things , and I 'm sure they are trying to eliminate as much potential for crashes since a crash can usually be turned into a vulnerability as well .
Media players , especially ones which embed into browsers , are an easy target for hacking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure it's just a reaction to crappy codecs making it look like WMP is crashing.
Normal users will be able to play their normal mainstream media files, and even have DRM operate silently in the background with very little notice paid.Users who require anything outside of mainstream codec support are not the typical use case, nor are they the targeted user base.
They aren't trying to prevent people using certain codecs, just making the typical path easier.People panned Vista for crashes and unexpected things, and I'm sure they are trying to eliminate as much potential for crashes since a crash can usually be turned into a vulnerability as well.
Media players, especially ones which embed into browsers, are an easy target for hacking.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199505</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28202849</id>
	<title>$700 WTF? Maybe for everything but the Mac.</title>
	<author>danielsfca2</author>
	<datestamp>1244029200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>WTF? The Mac Mini costs that much by itself after tax. I call bs. I would never use a mac for anything TV related. In that department, a PC can do the same job for half the cost. After all, you're going to use some kind of 10-foot interface anyway so it doesn't matter that Windows looks like a piece of crap. What's the point of a Mac in your living room unless you plan to buy every TV show for $2 a pop?!!</p><p>PS: I wrote this on one of my two MacBooks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>WTF ?
The Mac Mini costs that much by itself after tax .
I call bs .
I would never use a mac for anything TV related .
In that department , a PC can do the same job for half the cost .
After all , you 're going to use some kind of 10-foot interface anyway so it does n't matter that Windows looks like a piece of crap .
What 's the point of a Mac in your living room unless you plan to buy every TV show for $ 2 a pop ? !
! PS : I wrote this on one of my two MacBooks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WTF?
The Mac Mini costs that much by itself after tax.
I call bs.
I would never use a mac for anything TV related.
In that department, a PC can do the same job for half the cost.
After all, you're going to use some kind of 10-foot interface anyway so it doesn't matter that Windows looks like a piece of crap.
What's the point of a Mac in your living room unless you plan to buy every TV show for $2 a pop?!
!PS: I wrote this on one of my two MacBooks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199825</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200189</id>
	<title>Re:More on Streaming? Interview?</title>
	<author>SanityInAnarchy</author>
	<datestamp>1244062680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>everyone is going proprietary</p></div><p>It seems Youtube is going <a href="http://www.youtube.com/html5" title="youtube.com">somewhat open</a> [youtube.com].</p><p>No, the more interesting problem to me is:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>developing a menu system similar to that of DVDs based on EBML;</p></div><p>I still don't get why MKV bothers with EBML at all, instead of using compressed XML, or a better format like JSON. It seems to me that as soon as you go binary, you lose a major point for XML in the first place.</p><p>I'd also be really curious to know what they plan for this. Seems to me an obvious choice might be to just do html. With video tags, canvas, and all that other good stuff, you have most of what you need -- just add an API to change tracks, subs, etc, and a URI scheme for accessing chapters, titles, etc...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>everyone is going proprietaryIt seems Youtube is going somewhat open [ youtube.com ] .No , the more interesting problem to me is : developing a menu system similar to that of DVDs based on EBML ; I still do n't get why MKV bothers with EBML at all , instead of using compressed XML , or a better format like JSON .
It seems to me that as soon as you go binary , you lose a major point for XML in the first place.I 'd also be really curious to know what they plan for this .
Seems to me an obvious choice might be to just do html .
With video tags , canvas , and all that other good stuff , you have most of what you need -- just add an API to change tracks , subs , etc , and a URI scheme for accessing chapters , titles , etc.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>everyone is going proprietaryIt seems Youtube is going somewhat open [youtube.com].No, the more interesting problem to me is:developing a menu system similar to that of DVDs based on EBML;I still don't get why MKV bothers with EBML at all, instead of using compressed XML, or a better format like JSON.
It seems to me that as soon as you go binary, you lose a major point for XML in the first place.I'd also be really curious to know what they plan for this.
Seems to me an obvious choice might be to just do html.
With video tags, canvas, and all that other good stuff, you have most of what you need -- just add an API to change tracks, subs, etc, and a URI scheme for accessing chapters, titles, etc...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199357</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28202109</id>
	<title>Re:Count me out.</title>
	<author>atamido</author>
	<datestamp>1244026440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Strange, I never come across one that doesn't play correctly.  I'm a particularly big fan of subtitles that can be rendered in the font/color of my choosing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Strange , I never come across one that does n't play correctly .
I 'm a particularly big fan of subtitles that can be rendered in the font/color of my choosing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Strange, I never come across one that doesn't play correctly.
I'm a particularly big fan of subtitles that can be rendered in the font/color of my choosing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200171</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200341</id>
	<title>Re:Unfortunately, this one may work</title>
	<author>nine-times</author>
	<datestamp>1244020140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think there's a good point in the article about the monopolistic problems at stake:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>When J.D. Rockefeller set out to monopolize the oil industry, there were several crucial areas where he attacked. He knew that he couldn&#226;(TM)t control all of the oil fields because it was literally bubbling out of the ground, but what he could control was the distribution method for getting oil to the end customer.</p></div><p>It's also particularly noteworthy when talking about media.  For example, what do we tend to call those companies that control the music business?  "Record companies".  All those companies essentially started out as just the companies that manufactured the records, but it was the control of the distribution media of music that put them in control of the entire music industry.  That's why record companies are so afraid of people buying music online.  Online sales give transfer a lot of control over distribution from the record companies to the online retailers, which could eventually make record companies completely obsolete.
</p><p>I know this sounds like I'm going off-topic, but it's very important to know this when you're talking about Microsoft and media formats.  Microsoft spent a lot of money developing their own media formats and DRM, and then pushing those formats and DRM on everyone.  From the record companies' point of view, this was a good thing because it gave them increased control over online distribution, but what they may not have noticed is that it also gave Microsoft a foot in the door.  It's pretty obvious that Microsoft stood to gain a piece of the action in the media industry, as well as another monopoly that could reenforce their OS monopoly.
</p><p>What seems to have tripped them up is (a) the most popular portable media player not supporting their media formats; and (b) the music industry finally dropping DRM.  If not for those two things, we might be in a real nightmare situation by now.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think there 's a good point in the article about the monopolistic problems at stake : When J.D .
Rockefeller set out to monopolize the oil industry , there were several crucial areas where he attacked .
He knew that he couldn   ( TM ) t control all of the oil fields because it was literally bubbling out of the ground , but what he could control was the distribution method for getting oil to the end customer.It 's also particularly noteworthy when talking about media .
For example , what do we tend to call those companies that control the music business ?
" Record companies " .
All those companies essentially started out as just the companies that manufactured the records , but it was the control of the distribution media of music that put them in control of the entire music industry .
That 's why record companies are so afraid of people buying music online .
Online sales give transfer a lot of control over distribution from the record companies to the online retailers , which could eventually make record companies completely obsolete .
I know this sounds like I 'm going off-topic , but it 's very important to know this when you 're talking about Microsoft and media formats .
Microsoft spent a lot of money developing their own media formats and DRM , and then pushing those formats and DRM on everyone .
From the record companies ' point of view , this was a good thing because it gave them increased control over online distribution , but what they may not have noticed is that it also gave Microsoft a foot in the door .
It 's pretty obvious that Microsoft stood to gain a piece of the action in the media industry , as well as another monopoly that could reenforce their OS monopoly .
What seems to have tripped them up is ( a ) the most popular portable media player not supporting their media formats ; and ( b ) the music industry finally dropping DRM .
If not for those two things , we might be in a real nightmare situation by now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think there's a good point in the article about the monopolistic problems at stake:When J.D.
Rockefeller set out to monopolize the oil industry, there were several crucial areas where he attacked.
He knew that he couldnâ(TM)t control all of the oil fields because it was literally bubbling out of the ground, but what he could control was the distribution method for getting oil to the end customer.It's also particularly noteworthy when talking about media.
For example, what do we tend to call those companies that control the music business?
"Record companies".
All those companies essentially started out as just the companies that manufactured the records, but it was the control of the distribution media of music that put them in control of the entire music industry.
That's why record companies are so afraid of people buying music online.
Online sales give transfer a lot of control over distribution from the record companies to the online retailers, which could eventually make record companies completely obsolete.
I know this sounds like I'm going off-topic, but it's very important to know this when you're talking about Microsoft and media formats.
Microsoft spent a lot of money developing their own media formats and DRM, and then pushing those formats and DRM on everyone.
From the record companies' point of view, this was a good thing because it gave them increased control over online distribution, but what they may not have noticed is that it also gave Microsoft a foot in the door.
It's pretty obvious that Microsoft stood to gain a piece of the action in the media industry, as well as another monopoly that could reenforce their OS monopoly.
What seems to have tripped them up is (a) the most popular portable media player not supporting their media formats; and (b) the music industry finally dropping DRM.
If not for those two things, we might be in a real nightmare situation by now.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199535</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200109</id>
	<title>Really though</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244062380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It isn't like WMP losing support for third party codecs is anything big. When can you ever view videos in there correctly anyway? 90\% of the time theres an error message, or theres no audio, or theres no video. I only use WiMP for mp3s, because of the toolbar, and I havn't even been using it for that since I got itunes, because itunes has the same thing, and does not suck.<br> <br>
Yeah, seriously, VLC is the only option for media file playback IMO.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is n't like WMP losing support for third party codecs is anything big .
When can you ever view videos in there correctly anyway ?
90 \ % of the time theres an error message , or theres no audio , or theres no video .
I only use WiMP for mp3s , because of the toolbar , and I hav n't even been using it for that since I got itunes , because itunes has the same thing , and does not suck .
Yeah , seriously , VLC is the only option for media file playback IMO .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It isn't like WMP losing support for third party codecs is anything big.
When can you ever view videos in there correctly anyway?
90\% of the time theres an error message, or theres no audio, or theres no video.
I only use WiMP for mp3s, because of the toolbar, and I havn't even been using it for that since I got itunes, because itunes has the same thing, and does not suck.
Yeah, seriously, VLC is the only option for media file playback IMO.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199379</id>
	<title>Hack</title>
	<author>rodrigoandrade</author>
	<datestamp>1244059080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm sure devs will figure out a way to run 3rd party codecs on Win7 and future Windows.<br><br>BTW, ts TFA just FUD or a guy promoting his own agenda??</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure devs will figure out a way to run 3rd party codecs on Win7 and future Windows.BTW , ts TFA just FUD or a guy promoting his own agenda ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure devs will figure out a way to run 3rd party codecs on Win7 and future Windows.BTW, ts TFA just FUD or a guy promoting his own agenda?
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28206185</id>
	<title>How could they be?</title>
	<author>Lord Bitman</author>
	<datestamp>1244057640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If Microsoft is abusing their monopoly by including the features of their competitors (Mozilla, RealPlayer) by default, how could they possibly be abusing their monopoly by NOT including the features of their competitors (Mozilla, RealPlayer, Apple)?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If Microsoft is abusing their monopoly by including the features of their competitors ( Mozilla , RealPlayer ) by default , how could they possibly be abusing their monopoly by NOT including the features of their competitors ( Mozilla , RealPlayer , Apple ) ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Microsoft is abusing their monopoly by including the features of their competitors (Mozilla, RealPlayer) by default, how could they possibly be abusing their monopoly by NOT including the features of their competitors (Mozilla, RealPlayer, Apple)?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28201827</id>
	<title>Codec wars</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244025480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The reason that there isn't a single container standard is the competition between big companies (Apple, microsoft, Sony etc.) in controlling the market and the licensing. Maybe it doesn't matter for all the software players, but it matters for hardware players. As a manufacturer has to pay a license. And in that case they are restricted to use it with video codecs that those media companies mandate. Fortunately, it didn't go that way. Noone was able to create a "mp3" for the video, instead people adopted semi open standards (mpeg4, avc...), that are patented, but still not owned by only one monopoly. Anyway, the black market creates popular formats, and that is where both divx, xvid codecs and mkv format have their strongholds.  Microsoft actually missed a huge chance at the time they were hit by their own WMV-pushing boomerang - when first DivX was created out of hacked microsoft implementation.</p><p>Maybe Microsoft is catching up with time in shipping divx/xvid support and a couple of other formats popular in this decade. But not including state of art stuff (for their popular installed-by-default media player) that is being adopted right now means that they still want WMV and VC-1 to be preferred playback formats on Windows, as much as they still hope for windows media/vc1 to be the most popular codec. It of course seems destined to fail  because there are workarounds and a myriad of alternative players. People won't start creating wmv content just because microsoft decided to ignore everything else. There is certain inertia, because people have their video collections, and because ripping groups don't seem care about MS formats just because of lockdowns.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The reason that there is n't a single container standard is the competition between big companies ( Apple , microsoft , Sony etc .
) in controlling the market and the licensing .
Maybe it does n't matter for all the software players , but it matters for hardware players .
As a manufacturer has to pay a license .
And in that case they are restricted to use it with video codecs that those media companies mandate .
Fortunately , it did n't go that way .
Noone was able to create a " mp3 " for the video , instead people adopted semi open standards ( mpeg4 , avc... ) , that are patented , but still not owned by only one monopoly .
Anyway , the black market creates popular formats , and that is where both divx , xvid codecs and mkv format have their strongholds .
Microsoft actually missed a huge chance at the time they were hit by their own WMV-pushing boomerang - when first DivX was created out of hacked microsoft implementation.Maybe Microsoft is catching up with time in shipping divx/xvid support and a couple of other formats popular in this decade .
But not including state of art stuff ( for their popular installed-by-default media player ) that is being adopted right now means that they still want WMV and VC-1 to be preferred playback formats on Windows , as much as they still hope for windows media/vc1 to be the most popular codec .
It of course seems destined to fail because there are workarounds and a myriad of alternative players .
People wo n't start creating wmv content just because microsoft decided to ignore everything else .
There is certain inertia , because people have their video collections , and because ripping groups do n't seem care about MS formats just because of lockdowns .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The reason that there isn't a single container standard is the competition between big companies (Apple, microsoft, Sony etc.
) in controlling the market and the licensing.
Maybe it doesn't matter for all the software players, but it matters for hardware players.
As a manufacturer has to pay a license.
And in that case they are restricted to use it with video codecs that those media companies mandate.
Fortunately, it didn't go that way.
Noone was able to create a "mp3" for the video, instead people adopted semi open standards (mpeg4, avc...), that are patented, but still not owned by only one monopoly.
Anyway, the black market creates popular formats, and that is where both divx, xvid codecs and mkv format have their strongholds.
Microsoft actually missed a huge chance at the time they were hit by their own WMV-pushing boomerang - when first DivX was created out of hacked microsoft implementation.Maybe Microsoft is catching up with time in shipping divx/xvid support and a couple of other formats popular in this decade.
But not including state of art stuff (for their popular installed-by-default media player) that is being adopted right now means that they still want WMV and VC-1 to be preferred playback formats on Windows, as much as they still hope for windows media/vc1 to be the most popular codec.
It of course seems destined to fail  because there are workarounds and a myriad of alternative players.
People won't start creating wmv content just because microsoft decided to ignore everything else.
There is certain inertia, because people have their video collections, and because ripping groups don't seem care about MS formats just because of lockdowns.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28201863</id>
	<title>Nonsense</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244025600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>MS does not block you from developing decoder for WMP. They were just too lazy to implement one. Or, they were just waiting and waiting for some dumb programmers to write an open source one for them, and then package it for sale.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>MS does not block you from developing decoder for WMP .
They were just too lazy to implement one .
Or , they were just waiting and waiting for some dumb programmers to write an open source one for them , and then package it for sale .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MS does not block you from developing decoder for WMP.
They were just too lazy to implement one.
Or, they were just waiting and waiting for some dumb programmers to write an open source one for them, and then package it for sale.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28201373</id>
	<title>Professional containers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244023920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Society for Motion Picture Engineers has already gone to great lengths (in coordination with the EBU) to create some containers, such as <a href="http://www.ebu.ch/en/technical/trev/trev\_291-edge.pdf" title="www.ebu.ch">GXF</a> [www.ebu.ch], and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MXF" title="wikipedia.org">MXF</a> [wikipedia.org].</p><p>MXF is already being used as part of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital\_Cinema\_Initiatives" title="wikipedia.org">Digital Cinema Initiative (DCI)</a> [wikipedia.org] spec that delivers standardized digital cinema content to theaters.   There is already a registered <a href="http://www.rfc-archive.org/getrfc.php?rfc=4539" title="rfc-archive.org">MIME type for MXF</a> [rfc-archive.org].</p><p>By the way, you can be mad at Microsoft and their love of Windows Media, but then there is Apple Final Cut Pro and QuickTime (ack!).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Society for Motion Picture Engineers has already gone to great lengths ( in coordination with the EBU ) to create some containers , such as GXF [ www.ebu.ch ] , and MXF [ wikipedia.org ] .MXF is already being used as part of the Digital Cinema Initiative ( DCI ) [ wikipedia.org ] spec that delivers standardized digital cinema content to theaters .
There is already a registered MIME type for MXF [ rfc-archive.org ] .By the way , you can be mad at Microsoft and their love of Windows Media , but then there is Apple Final Cut Pro and QuickTime ( ack !
) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Society for Motion Picture Engineers has already gone to great lengths (in coordination with the EBU) to create some containers, such as GXF [www.ebu.ch], and MXF [wikipedia.org].MXF is already being used as part of the Digital Cinema Initiative (DCI) [wikipedia.org] spec that delivers standardized digital cinema content to theaters.
There is already a registered MIME type for MXF [rfc-archive.org].By the way, you can be mad at Microsoft and their love of Windows Media, but then there is Apple Final Cut Pro and QuickTime (ack!
).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28210563</id>
	<title>Re:Count me out.</title>
	<author>Tweenk</author>
	<datestamp>1244134320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They work 100\% of the time for me, it must be your system.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They work 100 \ % of the time for me , it must be your system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They work 100\% of the time for me, it must be your system.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200171</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28201773</id>
	<title>Re:MKV == critical mass?</title>
	<author>TheRealSlimShady</author>
	<datestamp>1244025360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Only a short comment - calling iTunes "great desktop software" might be considered delusional in some places<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:).  iTunes is fairly average at best, it's media management is pretty poor, and it's library functionality is pretty bad.  MediaMonkey is a far far better piece of software for managing your media.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Only a short comment - calling iTunes " great desktop software " might be considered delusional in some places : ) .
iTunes is fairly average at best , it 's media management is pretty poor , and it 's library functionality is pretty bad .
MediaMonkey is a far far better piece of software for managing your media .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only a short comment - calling iTunes "great desktop software" might be considered delusional in some places :).
iTunes is fairly average at best, it's media management is pretty poor, and it's library functionality is pretty bad.
MediaMonkey is a far far better piece of software for managing your media.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199825</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28201049</id>
	<title>Re:Hack</title>
	<author>PitaBred</author>
	<datestamp>1244022840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Does your hardware include a two or more core CPU? CoreAVC is a multi-threaded decoder that doesn't require GPU support, and if you're using a *nix, you can build mplayer from source and get pretty good multi-threaded performance. The mplayer-mt + the new tear-free Xv in the open-source radeon drivers has made my media center awesome (mmmm, 61" 1080p...)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does your hardware include a two or more core CPU ?
CoreAVC is a multi-threaded decoder that does n't require GPU support , and if you 're using a * nix , you can build mplayer from source and get pretty good multi-threaded performance .
The mplayer-mt + the new tear-free Xv in the open-source radeon drivers has made my media center awesome ( mmmm , 61 " 1080p... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does your hardware include a two or more core CPU?
CoreAVC is a multi-threaded decoder that doesn't require GPU support, and if you're using a *nix, you can build mplayer from source and get pretty good multi-threaded performance.
The mplayer-mt + the new tear-free Xv in the open-source radeon drivers has made my media center awesome (mmmm, 61" 1080p...)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199521</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28204883</id>
	<title>Re:Unfortunately, this one may work</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244041680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe next you could tell us all about the dream you had last night involving porn. It's just as relevant as posting your captcha.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe next you could tell us all about the dream you had last night involving porn .
It 's just as relevant as posting your captcha .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe next you could tell us all about the dream you had last night involving porn.
It's just as relevant as posting your captcha.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199535</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200171</id>
	<title>Count me out.</title>
	<author>geckipede</author>
	<datestamp>1244062620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have tried to play plenty of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.mkv files, and have yet to see a single one that was encoded correctly. I don't care if the container is technically excellent, if the software people are using to make the damn things is not going to let them make working files I'm not going to want the files, I'm not going to want the format.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have tried to play plenty of .mkv files , and have yet to see a single one that was encoded correctly .
I do n't care if the container is technically excellent , if the software people are using to make the damn things is not going to let them make working files I 'm not going to want the files , I 'm not going to want the format .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have tried to play plenty of .mkv files, and have yet to see a single one that was encoded correctly.
I don't care if the container is technically excellent, if the software people are using to make the damn things is not going to let them make working files I'm not going to want the files, I'm not going to want the format.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28203689</id>
	<title>APPEND THE CODECS!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244032920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Append the codecs to the beginning or the end of the media.</p><p>Lose a TINY percentage of space. Gain a MASSIVE amount of convenience.</p><p>No more codec packs.<br>No more fiddly updates for generic players.</p><p>Create an open and documented container format.<br>Set its standards in stone.<br>Set SOME flexibility in the standard via a single optional configuration file.<br>Media + codec + subtitles + whatever else.</p><p>Then you can use whatever codec/encryption you like and never have a problem. Ever.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Append the codecs to the beginning or the end of the media.Lose a TINY percentage of space .
Gain a MASSIVE amount of convenience.No more codec packs.No more fiddly updates for generic players.Create an open and documented container format.Set its standards in stone.Set SOME flexibility in the standard via a single optional configuration file.Media + codec + subtitles + whatever else.Then you can use whatever codec/encryption you like and never have a problem .
Ever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Append the codecs to the beginning or the end of the media.Lose a TINY percentage of space.
Gain a MASSIVE amount of convenience.No more codec packs.No more fiddly updates for generic players.Create an open and documented container format.Set its standards in stone.Set SOME flexibility in the standard via a single optional configuration file.Media + codec + subtitles + whatever else.Then you can use whatever codec/encryption you like and never have a problem.
Ever.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200499</id>
	<title>Re:Hans Reiser fucked me in the butt!!</title>
	<author>Endo13</author>
	<datestamp>1244020920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sure, as long as you don't accidentally the whole thing. That could be dangerous.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure , as long as you do n't accidentally the whole thing .
That could be dangerous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure, as long as you don't accidentally the whole thing.
That could be dangerous.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199303</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28207267</id>
	<title>Re:MKV == critical mass?</title>
	<author>identity0</author>
	<datestamp>1244116080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Okay, I am totally not trolling.</p><p>Can you(or someone else) explain what the point of container formats is?</p><p>I mean, either your player can decode the codec or not. Why not just have different file extentions for each codec? At least with codec file extentions, I can tell at a glance what software I need to play a file. With containers like<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.mkv or<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.qt or<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.wmv, I've had problems in the past when I found out a file I thought I had 'the software to play it' turns out not to have the right codec.</p><p>Having a player that can understand the container doesn't help at all when the codec isn't understood, so again, what's the point of container formats? (insert Seinfeld shrug here)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Okay , I am totally not trolling.Can you ( or someone else ) explain what the point of container formats is ? I mean , either your player can decode the codec or not .
Why not just have different file extentions for each codec ?
At least with codec file extentions , I can tell at a glance what software I need to play a file .
With containers like .mkv or .qt or .wmv , I 've had problems in the past when I found out a file I thought I had 'the software to play it ' turns out not to have the right codec.Having a player that can understand the container does n't help at all when the codec is n't understood , so again , what 's the point of container formats ?
( insert Seinfeld shrug here )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Okay, I am totally not trolling.Can you(or someone else) explain what the point of container formats is?I mean, either your player can decode the codec or not.
Why not just have different file extentions for each codec?
At least with codec file extentions, I can tell at a glance what software I need to play a file.
With containers like .mkv or .qt or .wmv, I've had problems in the past when I found out a file I thought I had 'the software to play it' turns out not to have the right codec.Having a player that can understand the container doesn't help at all when the codec isn't understood, so again, what's the point of container formats?
(insert Seinfeld shrug here)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199825</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28204883
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199535
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199303
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28201773
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199825
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28202811
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200639
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199825
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28203131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199825
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28204273
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200569
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200189
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199357
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28206865
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28201637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28203271
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199505
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199443
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199379
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200661
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199379
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28201123
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199649
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199357
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28210485
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28205081
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199941
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199825
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28207267
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199825
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28202977
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199825
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199737
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199535
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28210557
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28205081
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199941
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199825
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28202849
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199825
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199941
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199825
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200315
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199505
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199443
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199379
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28208911
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28201637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199807
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199451
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28210309
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199825
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199303
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200341
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199535
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28208813
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199825
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28202433
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199505
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199443
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199379
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199597
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199483
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199379
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28201049
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199521
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199379
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28202739
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199479
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199443
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199379
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28201853
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199541
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28210563
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200171
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28206687
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199379
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28204929
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200203
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199541
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199869
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199521
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199379
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28212029
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199379
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28202541
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199825
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28201291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199825
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28202109
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200171
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1817214_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200005
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199825
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1817214.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199825
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199941
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28205081
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28210485
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28210557
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200575
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28208813
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28202849
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28201291
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28203131
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200639
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28202811
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28202977
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28210309
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28202541
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200005
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28207267
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28201773
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1817214.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199839
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1817214.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199541
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200203
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28204929
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28201853
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1817214.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199665
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1817214.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199427
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1817214.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199345
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1817214.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28201273
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1817214.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199517
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1817214.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200109
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1817214.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199789
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1817214.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199399
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1817214.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199357
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200189
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200569
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28204273
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199649
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28201123
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1817214.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28201373
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1817214.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199701
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1817214.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28201637
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28208911
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28206865
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1817214.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199379
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199483
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199597
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199443
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199479
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28202739
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199505
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200311
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28203271
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200315
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28202433
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199521
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28201049
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199869
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200661
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28212029
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28206687
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1817214.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200171
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28202109
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28210563
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1817214.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200297
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1817214.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28203689
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1817214.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199303
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200375
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200499
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1817214.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199731
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1817214.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199451
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199807
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1817214.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199535
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28199737
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28204883
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200341
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1817214.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1817214.28200079
</commentlist>
</conversation>
