<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_18_1419227</id>
	<title>Opera Unite is a Hail Mary</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1245338280000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.infoworld.com/" rel="nofollow">snydeq</a> writes <i>"Rather than view it as a game-changer, Fatal Exception's Neil McAllister sees Opera Unite as a <a href="http://infoworld.com/d/developer-world/opera-unite-real-plan-put-software-in-control-again-902">Hail Mary bid for Opera to stay in the game</a>. After all, in an era when even <a href="http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/1998/08/14742">vending machines have Web servers on them</a>, a <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/06/16/1324225/Opera-100-Released-With-Integrated-Web-Server-Functionality?art\_pos=1">Web server on the Web browser</a> isn't really that groundbreaking. What Opera is attempting is to 'reintermediate' the Internet &mdash; 'directly linking people's personal computers together' by making them sign up for an account on Opera's servers and ensuring all of their exchanges pass through Opera's servers first. 'That's an effective way to get around technical difficulties like NAT firewalls, but more important, it makes Opera the intermediary in your social interactions &mdash; not Facebook, not MySpace, but Opera,' McAllister writes. In other words, Opera hopes to use social networking as a Trojan horse to put traditional apps back in charge."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>snydeq writes " Rather than view it as a game-changer , Fatal Exception 's Neil McAllister sees Opera Unite as a Hail Mary bid for Opera to stay in the game .
After all , in an era when even vending machines have Web servers on them , a Web server on the Web browser is n't really that groundbreaking .
What Opera is attempting is to 'reintermediate ' the Internet    'directly linking people 's personal computers together ' by making them sign up for an account on Opera 's servers and ensuring all of their exchanges pass through Opera 's servers first .
'That 's an effective way to get around technical difficulties like NAT firewalls , but more important , it makes Opera the intermediary in your social interactions    not Facebook , not MySpace , but Opera, ' McAllister writes .
In other words , Opera hopes to use social networking as a Trojan horse to put traditional apps back in charge .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>snydeq writes "Rather than view it as a game-changer, Fatal Exception's Neil McAllister sees Opera Unite as a Hail Mary bid for Opera to stay in the game.
After all, in an era when even vending machines have Web servers on them, a Web server on the Web browser isn't really that groundbreaking.
What Opera is attempting is to 'reintermediate' the Internet — 'directly linking people's personal computers together' by making them sign up for an account on Opera's servers and ensuring all of their exchanges pass through Opera's servers first.
'That's an effective way to get around technical difficulties like NAT firewalls, but more important, it makes Opera the intermediary in your social interactions — not Facebook, not MySpace, but Opera,' McAllister writes.
In other words, Opera hopes to use social networking as a Trojan horse to put traditional apps back in charge.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376057</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>frission</author>
	<datestamp>1245348060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>i wonder if those stats take into account the install base of opera on Wiis.

<a href="http://my.opera.com/community/wii/features/" title="opera.com">http://my.opera.com/community/wii/features/</a> [opera.com]

a lot of people got the browser for free, i think it's about $5 now (or however many wii points that is).</htmltext>
<tokenext>i wonder if those stats take into account the install base of opera on Wiis .
http : //my.opera.com/community/wii/features/ [ opera.com ] a lot of people got the browser for free , i think it 's about $ 5 now ( or however many wii points that is ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i wonder if those stats take into account the install base of opera on Wiis.
http://my.opera.com/community/wii/features/ [opera.com]

a lot of people got the browser for free, i think it's about $5 now (or however many wii points that is).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375329</id>
	<title>Re:Forgive my ignorance but..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245345300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is a balls out term referencing a play in American football.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is a balls out term referencing a play in American football .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is a balls out term referencing a play in American football.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375155</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376151</id>
	<title>Re:Not to mention security, bandwidth, etc.</title>
	<author>twidarkling</author>
	<datestamp>1245348360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It works with other browsers, you just need to have it running on the machine that's sharing. You don't need to have it on every computer you're using.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It works with other browsers , you just need to have it running on the machine that 's sharing .
You do n't need to have it on every computer you 're using .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It works with other browsers, you just need to have it running on the machine that's sharing.
You don't need to have it on every computer you're using.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374993</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374551</id>
	<title>free car?!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245342120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i thought this was about oprah</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i thought this was about oprah</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i thought this was about oprah</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375029</id>
	<title>You know you haven't had enough coffee when...</title>
	<author>smcn</author>
	<datestamp>1245344100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...it takes you a full 30 seconds to realize a story on Slashdot <i>isn't</i> talking about "Opera" as in a theater production.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...it takes you a full 30 seconds to realize a story on Slashdot is n't talking about " Opera " as in a theater production .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...it takes you a full 30 seconds to realize a story on Slashdot isn't talking about "Opera" as in a theater production.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375879</id>
	<title>Re:Epic Fail</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245347520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was hypercritical of the idea at first. My main problem is that browsers are WAY too bloated (read: firefox)</p><p>Then it occured to me that if the web server were in a separate process, with separate memory usage and the applications were also separate processes.</p><p>This might be an extremely effective way of reducing bloat.</p><p>If you could make the bookmark features, configuration, etc.. as web services that come in and go away, they wouldn't need to be loaded in the main binary. The web server could, in theory, be used as a way for back-end browser features to have an interface without introducing a lot of bloat.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was hypercritical of the idea at first .
My main problem is that browsers are WAY too bloated ( read : firefox ) Then it occured to me that if the web server were in a separate process , with separate memory usage and the applications were also separate processes.This might be an extremely effective way of reducing bloat.If you could make the bookmark features , configuration , etc.. as web services that come in and go away , they would n't need to be loaded in the main binary .
The web server could , in theory , be used as a way for back-end browser features to have an interface without introducing a lot of bloat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was hypercritical of the idea at first.
My main problem is that browsers are WAY too bloated (read: firefox)Then it occured to me that if the web server were in a separate process, with separate memory usage and the applications were also separate processes.This might be an extremely effective way of reducing bloat.If you could make the bookmark features, configuration, etc.. as web services that come in and go away, they wouldn't need to be loaded in the main binary.
The web server could, in theory, be used as a way for back-end browser features to have an interface without introducing a lot of bloat.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374555</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28377539</id>
	<title>Re:Not to mention security, bandwidth, etc.</title>
	<author>jp10558</author>
	<datestamp>1245353460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I assume it's the same reason that AddBlock Plus isn't a separate project, it was easier to leverage the existing technology in Opera for them. You can already minimize Opera to the system tray. And I think they want to advertise their browser as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I assume it 's the same reason that AddBlock Plus is n't a separate project , it was easier to leverage the existing technology in Opera for them .
You can already minimize Opera to the system tray .
And I think they want to advertise their browser as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I assume it's the same reason that AddBlock Plus isn't a separate project, it was easier to leverage the existing technology in Opera for them.
You can already minimize Opera to the system tray.
And I think they want to advertise their browser as well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374993</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375477</id>
	<title>opera is relevant and will stay relevant</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245345900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>why?</p><p>because we are nowhere near an endgame on internet-related innovation</p><p>the whole field has a long way to go before the technology is mature, and opera could capitalize on all sorts of missteps by competitors, and has plenty of chance to change the game itself. of course this observation also applies to all other game players, and some that don't even exist yet</p><p>if the internet were railroads, the year is 1840, and we're still arguing about track gauge and still using steam engines</p><p>lots of history yet to be written folks. beware anyone in drama queen mode declaring the imminent end of anything. a few years ago, internet explorer looked like it was on an inevitable path to complete and permanent dominance. then what happened?</p><p>anyone who is certain of anything about what will happen in internet innovation is basically telling you they are ignorant. anyone truly wise on the subject matter knows enough to wait and see</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>why ? because we are nowhere near an endgame on internet-related innovationthe whole field has a long way to go before the technology is mature , and opera could capitalize on all sorts of missteps by competitors , and has plenty of chance to change the game itself .
of course this observation also applies to all other game players , and some that do n't even exist yetif the internet were railroads , the year is 1840 , and we 're still arguing about track gauge and still using steam engineslots of history yet to be written folks .
beware anyone in drama queen mode declaring the imminent end of anything .
a few years ago , internet explorer looked like it was on an inevitable path to complete and permanent dominance .
then what happened ? anyone who is certain of anything about what will happen in internet innovation is basically telling you they are ignorant .
anyone truly wise on the subject matter knows enough to wait and see</tokentext>
<sentencetext>why?because we are nowhere near an endgame on internet-related innovationthe whole field has a long way to go before the technology is mature, and opera could capitalize on all sorts of missteps by competitors, and has plenty of chance to change the game itself.
of course this observation also applies to all other game players, and some that don't even exist yetif the internet were railroads, the year is 1840, and we're still arguing about track gauge and still using steam engineslots of history yet to be written folks.
beware anyone in drama queen mode declaring the imminent end of anything.
a few years ago, internet explorer looked like it was on an inevitable path to complete and permanent dominance.
then what happened?anyone who is certain of anything about what will happen in internet innovation is basically telling you they are ignorant.
anyone truly wise on the subject matter knows enough to wait and see</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375669</id>
	<title>I thought we were against cloud computing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245346620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is this Slashdot?  Is this the Slashdot that use to have every user complaining about having their files and information being held in "The Cloud"?  The place where people use to complain about the security and privacy of their pictures if they were on Flickr,their Email and their Docs if they were all located on Googles servers??

<br> <br>

What happen to all the 'get of my lawn' types that said, "I'll never put my information in the 'Cloud'.  They can take my physical hard drives when they pry them from my cold dead fingers!!"
<br> <br>
Now you are provided with (one of many) alternatives to have your files on YOUR computer AND the advantages of them being in the cloud (like you can access your files no matter what location your at and be able to share files with other people)

<br> <br>
This seems like a case of you can't please any of the people any of the time kinda thing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is this Slashdot ?
Is this the Slashdot that use to have every user complaining about having their files and information being held in " The Cloud " ?
The place where people use to complain about the security and privacy of their pictures if they were on Flickr,their Email and their Docs if they were all located on Googles servers ? ?
What happen to all the 'get of my lawn ' types that said , " I 'll never put my information in the 'Cloud' .
They can take my physical hard drives when they pry them from my cold dead fingers ! !
" Now you are provided with ( one of many ) alternatives to have your files on YOUR computer AND the advantages of them being in the cloud ( like you can access your files no matter what location your at and be able to share files with other people ) This seems like a case of you ca n't please any of the people any of the time kinda thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is this Slashdot?
Is this the Slashdot that use to have every user complaining about having their files and information being held in "The Cloud"?
The place where people use to complain about the security and privacy of their pictures if they were on Flickr,their Email and their Docs if they were all located on Googles servers??
What happen to all the 'get of my lawn' types that said, "I'll never put my information in the 'Cloud'.
They can take my physical hard drives when they pry them from my cold dead fingers!!
"
 
Now you are provided with (one of many) alternatives to have your files on YOUR computer AND the advantages of them being in the cloud (like you can access your files no matter what location your at and be able to share files with other people)

 
This seems like a case of you can't please any of the people any of the time kinda thing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375091</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>jellomizer</author>
	<datestamp>1245344340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Traditional apps back in charge</i><br>That is my favorite part. Lets go back to tape and punch-cards.  I think we have forgotten all the pain of the good old days of your PC full of crappy Apps. Sorry but these Web Applications independent on the web browser has made life so much easier for us. Windows users who's system isn't full of random crap. Linux/Unix/Mac users who have access to a slew of services that we wouldn't otherwise.</p><p>We need lighter Browsers that are more standard compliment then heavy ones adding new features that we don't need.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Traditional apps back in chargeThat is my favorite part .
Lets go back to tape and punch-cards .
I think we have forgotten all the pain of the good old days of your PC full of crappy Apps .
Sorry but these Web Applications independent on the web browser has made life so much easier for us .
Windows users who 's system is n't full of random crap .
Linux/Unix/Mac users who have access to a slew of services that we would n't otherwise.We need lighter Browsers that are more standard compliment then heavy ones adding new features that we do n't need .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Traditional apps back in chargeThat is my favorite part.
Lets go back to tape and punch-cards.
I think we have forgotten all the pain of the good old days of your PC full of crappy Apps.
Sorry but these Web Applications independent on the web browser has made life so much easier for us.
Windows users who's system isn't full of random crap.
Linux/Unix/Mac users who have access to a slew of services that we wouldn't otherwise.We need lighter Browsers that are more standard compliment then heavy ones adding new features that we don't need.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28381635</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1245323640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Opera don't make money from their desktop browser (at least not directly), so it's not too much of a problem.</p><p><i>As for the mobile market, it is being surpassed by iPhone.</i></p><p>Heh.</p><p>The Iphone is a niche player. A good phone sure, but there a <i>2 billion Java phones</i> out there. It's not dominating the market, or even anywhere near close, no matter what some people seem to think. All the while that the Iphone is only a minority of the market, Opera have nothing to worry about. Even if it were to suddenly be true that their usage of the Opera Mobile and Mini browsers fell less to that of Safari on the Iphone, since they each run on different phones, this wouldn't be a result of competition from the Iphone, rather just that Opera aren't doing well in general.</p><p>(Of course, perhaps I misread you, and you mean in the sense of "It's doing so bad now that it is even being surpassed by iPhone", in which case fair enough, though I would still be curious to see hard evidence.)</p><p><i>See the arstechnica analysis of misleading statcounter results here</i></p><p>Wait - you plead that the stats are invalid, yet claim Opera's share is low based on some other stats? Right. There are many reasons why the stats for desktops are unreliable too, and in particular Opera is worse off: firstly it reuses cached content without resending requests to server, secondly, up until version 9, it defaulted to identifying as IE. Furthermore, I sometimes have to identify as IE even now, because of dumbass websites that block anything identifying as Opera.</p><p>Personally I don't care how many people use it - if that was what we should care about, then we'd all be using IE, right? Opera has served me fine long before it became trendy to switch from IE (it infuriates me when some Firefox-fan tries to get me to switch to his browser, as if it matters, when I was using "tabs" long before, when he was still struggling in IE), and has continued to offer me great features first. And it Just Works great out of the box. If they die, it'll be a shame as innovation will be gone, but that won't mean my Opera installation stops working.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera do n't make money from their desktop browser ( at least not directly ) , so it 's not too much of a problem.As for the mobile market , it is being surpassed by iPhone.Heh.The Iphone is a niche player .
A good phone sure , but there a 2 billion Java phones out there .
It 's not dominating the market , or even anywhere near close , no matter what some people seem to think .
All the while that the Iphone is only a minority of the market , Opera have nothing to worry about .
Even if it were to suddenly be true that their usage of the Opera Mobile and Mini browsers fell less to that of Safari on the Iphone , since they each run on different phones , this would n't be a result of competition from the Iphone , rather just that Opera are n't doing well in general .
( Of course , perhaps I misread you , and you mean in the sense of " It 's doing so bad now that it is even being surpassed by iPhone " , in which case fair enough , though I would still be curious to see hard evidence .
) See the arstechnica analysis of misleading statcounter results hereWait - you plead that the stats are invalid , yet claim Opera 's share is low based on some other stats ?
Right. There are many reasons why the stats for desktops are unreliable too , and in particular Opera is worse off : firstly it reuses cached content without resending requests to server , secondly , up until version 9 , it defaulted to identifying as IE .
Furthermore , I sometimes have to identify as IE even now , because of dumbass websites that block anything identifying as Opera.Personally I do n't care how many people use it - if that was what we should care about , then we 'd all be using IE , right ?
Opera has served me fine long before it became trendy to switch from IE ( it infuriates me when some Firefox-fan tries to get me to switch to his browser , as if it matters , when I was using " tabs " long before , when he was still struggling in IE ) , and has continued to offer me great features first .
And it Just Works great out of the box .
If they die , it 'll be a shame as innovation will be gone , but that wo n't mean my Opera installation stops working .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera don't make money from their desktop browser (at least not directly), so it's not too much of a problem.As for the mobile market, it is being surpassed by iPhone.Heh.The Iphone is a niche player.
A good phone sure, but there a 2 billion Java phones out there.
It's not dominating the market, or even anywhere near close, no matter what some people seem to think.
All the while that the Iphone is only a minority of the market, Opera have nothing to worry about.
Even if it were to suddenly be true that their usage of the Opera Mobile and Mini browsers fell less to that of Safari on the Iphone, since they each run on different phones, this wouldn't be a result of competition from the Iphone, rather just that Opera aren't doing well in general.
(Of course, perhaps I misread you, and you mean in the sense of "It's doing so bad now that it is even being surpassed by iPhone", in which case fair enough, though I would still be curious to see hard evidence.
)See the arstechnica analysis of misleading statcounter results hereWait - you plead that the stats are invalid, yet claim Opera's share is low based on some other stats?
Right. There are many reasons why the stats for desktops are unreliable too, and in particular Opera is worse off: firstly it reuses cached content without resending requests to server, secondly, up until version 9, it defaulted to identifying as IE.
Furthermore, I sometimes have to identify as IE even now, because of dumbass websites that block anything identifying as Opera.Personally I don't care how many people use it - if that was what we should care about, then we'd all be using IE, right?
Opera has served me fine long before it became trendy to switch from IE (it infuriates me when some Firefox-fan tries to get me to switch to his browser, as if it matters, when I was using "tabs" long before, when he was still struggling in IE), and has continued to offer me great features first.
And it Just Works great out of the box.
If they die, it'll be a shame as innovation will be gone, but that won't mean my Opera installation stops working.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375557</id>
	<title>Re:Cloud = silver lining</title>
	<author>Mystra\_x64</author>
	<datestamp>1245346200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because you don't really want to store something on some hell knows where server?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because you do n't really want to store something on some hell knows where server ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because you don't really want to store something on some hell knows where server?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375243</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28377573</id>
	<title>Tonido VS Opera Unite</title>
	<author>rivercity</author>
	<datestamp>1245353580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>
Tonido is very similar to Opera Unite. Whose approach is better?

Tonido allows you to write plug-ins in c++/lua.  Opera Unite - Javascript.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Tonido is very similar to Opera Unite .
Whose approach is better ?
Tonido allows you to write plug-ins in c + + /lua .
Opera Unite - Javascript .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Tonido is very similar to Opera Unite.
Whose approach is better?
Tonido allows you to write plug-ins in c++/lua.
Opera Unite - Javascript.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28385045</id>
	<title>Some programs just aren't worth anything</title>
	<author>AP31R0N</author>
	<datestamp>1245342780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can we consider the possibility that some software just isn't worth any price?  The guys at Mozilla have a great product that doesn't nag me to buy or even donate.</p><p>Value = Supply/Demand</p><p>For software, supply is as close to infinite as makes no odds.<br>Demand is still finite.  Only X people want the product. Of that population there are striations of what people are willing to pay, if any thing.</p><p>Any infinite supply over a finite demand creates a value of all but zero.</p><p>If they want to make money, fine.  Make something that has intrinsic value, something of finite supply.  Something where your competitors are charging.  Chrome, IE and FF are all free (to the user, as in beer).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can we consider the possibility that some software just is n't worth any price ?
The guys at Mozilla have a great product that does n't nag me to buy or even donate.Value = Supply/DemandFor software , supply is as close to infinite as makes no odds.Demand is still finite .
Only X people want the product .
Of that population there are striations of what people are willing to pay , if any thing.Any infinite supply over a finite demand creates a value of all but zero.If they want to make money , fine .
Make something that has intrinsic value , something of finite supply .
Something where your competitors are charging .
Chrome , IE and FF are all free ( to the user , as in beer ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can we consider the possibility that some software just isn't worth any price?
The guys at Mozilla have a great product that doesn't nag me to buy or even donate.Value = Supply/DemandFor software, supply is as close to infinite as makes no odds.Demand is still finite.
Only X people want the product.
Of that population there are striations of what people are willing to pay, if any thing.Any infinite supply over a finite demand creates a value of all but zero.If they want to make money, fine.
Make something that has intrinsic value, something of finite supply.
Something where your competitors are charging.
Chrome, IE and FF are all free (to the user, as in beer).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375257</id>
	<title>Rumours of their death are continually exaggerated</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245345060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yep, I'll bet that a profitable browser company that continues to expand and make more money year after year is definitely in trouble.

People have been predicting the death of Opera Software for over a decade now, and yet they're still making huge waves in the internet market.

When will people start to realise that you don't need to be the most popular product on the market to be successful? The browser market is absolutely huge, remember. Even 1\% of the entire market is millions of satisfied users. The only thing that matters is that open standards are implemented, then we all win.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep , I 'll bet that a profitable browser company that continues to expand and make more money year after year is definitely in trouble .
People have been predicting the death of Opera Software for over a decade now , and yet they 're still making huge waves in the internet market .
When will people start to realise that you do n't need to be the most popular product on the market to be successful ?
The browser market is absolutely huge , remember .
Even 1 \ % of the entire market is millions of satisfied users .
The only thing that matters is that open standards are implemented , then we all win .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep, I'll bet that a profitable browser company that continues to expand and make more money year after year is definitely in trouble.
People have been predicting the death of Opera Software for over a decade now, and yet they're still making huge waves in the internet market.
When will people start to realise that you don't need to be the most popular product on the market to be successful?
The browser market is absolutely huge, remember.
Even 1\% of the entire market is millions of satisfied users.
The only thing that matters is that open standards are implemented, then we all win.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375039</id>
	<title>Bad Source!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245344160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The summary makes it sound like Opera is making a last ditch effort to stay relevant, which is clearly not the case.   Opera has always been in a dominant position in mobile browser marketshare.</p><p> <a href="http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile\_browser-ww-daily-20081201-20090618" title="statcounter.com" rel="nofollow">Source</a> [statcounter.com] </p></div><p>Gee, that's odd, your source doesn't even put IEMobile up there.  I guess no one's using it.  Also, when I switch your source to United States only, <a href="http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile\_browser-US-daily-20081216-20090618" title="statcounter.com" rel="nofollow">Opera disappears</a> [statcounter.com].  I am so sick and tired of people linking to that site and treating it like it's the authority on worldwide usage of everything when it's clearly got statistical data issues that don't make sense.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The summary makes it sound like Opera is making a last ditch effort to stay relevant , which is clearly not the case .
Opera has always been in a dominant position in mobile browser marketshare .
Source [ statcounter.com ] Gee , that 's odd , your source does n't even put IEMobile up there .
I guess no one 's using it .
Also , when I switch your source to United States only , Opera disappears [ statcounter.com ] .
I am so sick and tired of people linking to that site and treating it like it 's the authority on worldwide usage of everything when it 's clearly got statistical data issues that do n't make sense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The summary makes it sound like Opera is making a last ditch effort to stay relevant, which is clearly not the case.
Opera has always been in a dominant position in mobile browser marketshare.
Source [statcounter.com] Gee, that's odd, your source doesn't even put IEMobile up there.
I guess no one's using it.
Also, when I switch your source to United States only, Opera disappears [statcounter.com].
I am so sick and tired of people linking to that site and treating it like it's the authority on worldwide usage of everything when it's clearly got statistical data issues that don't make sense.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376479</id>
	<title>Re:Cloud = silver lining</title>
	<author>Synn</author>
	<datestamp>1245349680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>However - I've got a better idea: why don't they just store the stuff the users want to share on the <i>central servers</i>? I mean, hard disc space is about fsck all per megabyte these days,</p></div><p>It's not practical. Say I want to access my home PC files while at work, I'd have to upload everything all the time to that central server. Gigs and gigs of music, movies, whatever. It'd take days to upload and I'd have to resync it all the time.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>However - I 've got a better idea : why do n't they just store the stuff the users want to share on the central servers ?
I mean , hard disc space is about fsck all per megabyte these days,It 's not practical .
Say I want to access my home PC files while at work , I 'd have to upload everything all the time to that central server .
Gigs and gigs of music , movies , whatever .
It 'd take days to upload and I 'd have to resync it all the time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>However - I've got a better idea: why don't they just store the stuff the users want to share on the central servers?
I mean, hard disc space is about fsck all per megabyte these days,It's not practical.
Say I want to access my home PC files while at work, I'd have to upload everything all the time to that central server.
Gigs and gigs of music, movies, whatever.
It'd take days to upload and I'd have to resync it all the time.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375243</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28377767</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>hkmwbz</author>
	<datestamp>1245354120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Opera happens to be one of the most standards compliant browsers, and the "traditional apps back in charge" thing is pure and utter nonsense. Opera wants you to use the web as much as possible, because when you do, you will likely search the web a lot, and when you do, they make money. So the whole article is based on a total misunderstanding. Opera wants people to browse the web, not use traditional apps. Which is why Unite can replace many traditional apps like chat clients, MSN/Skype for sending files, etc.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera happens to be one of the most standards compliant browsers , and the " traditional apps back in charge " thing is pure and utter nonsense .
Opera wants you to use the web as much as possible , because when you do , you will likely search the web a lot , and when you do , they make money .
So the whole article is based on a total misunderstanding .
Opera wants people to browse the web , not use traditional apps .
Which is why Unite can replace many traditional apps like chat clients , MSN/Skype for sending files , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera happens to be one of the most standards compliant browsers, and the "traditional apps back in charge" thing is pure and utter nonsense.
Opera wants you to use the web as much as possible, because when you do, you will likely search the web a lot, and when you do, they make money.
So the whole article is based on a total misunderstanding.
Opera wants people to browse the web, not use traditional apps.
Which is why Unite can replace many traditional apps like chat clients, MSN/Skype for sending files, etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375091</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374583</id>
	<title>Yes...</title>
	<author>AnonGCB</author>
	<datestamp>1245342300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because a very good browser needs a hail mary to stay in the game.

Seriously, Opera is good enough on it's own, this is actually a very useful tool. I personally don't use it, but my friends use the music sharing capabilities and file/photo sharing. The only reason I don't use it is because I already have an FTP server to do this for me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because a very good browser needs a hail mary to stay in the game .
Seriously , Opera is good enough on it 's own , this is actually a very useful tool .
I personally do n't use it , but my friends use the music sharing capabilities and file/photo sharing .
The only reason I do n't use it is because I already have an FTP server to do this for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because a very good browser needs a hail mary to stay in the game.
Seriously, Opera is good enough on it's own, this is actually a very useful tool.
I personally don't use it, but my friends use the music sharing capabilities and file/photo sharing.
The only reason I don't use it is because I already have an FTP server to do this for me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375359</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245345420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That'd be a relevant response because this Unite thing is part of their mobile browser, right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 'd be a relevant response because this Unite thing is part of their mobile browser , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That'd be a relevant response because this Unite thing is part of their mobile browser, right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376631</id>
	<title>Re:Cloud = silver lining</title>
	<author>Mordok-DestroyerOfWo</author>
	<datestamp>1245350340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sir, my updates are always applied by a virgin!  His name is Tony and he lives in his mother's basement.  However is neither nubile nor dusky.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sir , my updates are always applied by a virgin !
His name is Tony and he lives in his mother 's basement .
However is neither nubile nor dusky .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sir, my updates are always applied by a virgin!
His name is Tony and he lives in his mother's basement.
However is neither nubile nor dusky.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375243</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28381741</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1245324120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>We need lighter Browsers that are more standard compliment then heavy ones adding new features that we don't need.</i></p><p>In that case, I damn well hope you use Opera, and haven't "gone back to" Firefox. You should check out their filesizes if you're going to talk about bloat.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We need lighter Browsers that are more standard compliment then heavy ones adding new features that we do n't need.In that case , I damn well hope you use Opera , and have n't " gone back to " Firefox .
You should check out their filesizes if you 're going to talk about bloat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We need lighter Browsers that are more standard compliment then heavy ones adding new features that we don't need.In that case, I damn well hope you use Opera, and haven't "gone back to" Firefox.
You should check out their filesizes if you're going to talk about bloat.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375091</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375027</id>
	<title>Opera Unite is a Hail Mary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245344100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Never again will opera, football, and computers come together so succinctly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Never again will opera , football , and computers come together so succinctly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Never again will opera, football, and computers come together so succinctly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375365</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245345480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ok, so Opera's market share is relatively small compared to other browsers.</p><p>Why do you believe that means they're in trouble?  The browser market is huge; even a tiny percentage is still a lot.  Do you think they're not making enough money off of what they do have?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok , so Opera 's market share is relatively small compared to other browsers.Why do you believe that means they 're in trouble ?
The browser market is huge ; even a tiny percentage is still a lot .
Do you think they 're not making enough money off of what they do have ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok, so Opera's market share is relatively small compared to other browsers.Why do you believe that means they're in trouble?
The browser market is huge; even a tiny percentage is still a lot.
Do you think they're not making enough money off of what they do have?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375789</id>
	<title>No need to worry about security</title>
	<author>Demonantis</author>
	<datestamp>1245347160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I doubt a dsl line would support the traffic that would demand that security be implemented. That said Opera is not really a web browser anyways. Its a suit of tools like the article said that people tend to use online when they don't have to.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I doubt a dsl line would support the traffic that would demand that security be implemented .
That said Opera is not really a web browser anyways .
Its a suit of tools like the article said that people tend to use online when they do n't have to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I doubt a dsl line would support the traffic that would demand that security be implemented.
That said Opera is not really a web browser anyways.
Its a suit of tools like the article said that people tend to use online when they don't have to.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374775</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>DerekLyons</author>
	<datestamp>1245343140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Opera has always been in a dominant position in mobile browser marketshare.</p></div></blockquote><p>An interesting claim - got a citation?<br>
&nbsp; <br>The one you provide shows it roughly tied with the Iphone and Nokia not far behind.  It certainly does not show Opera as anything resembling 'dominant'.  The <a href="http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile\_browser-ww-daily-20081201-20090618-bar" title="statcounter.com">bar graph</a> [statcounter.com] version makes that even more starkly clear.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera has always been in a dominant position in mobile browser marketshare.An interesting claim - got a citation ?
  The one you provide shows it roughly tied with the Iphone and Nokia not far behind .
It certainly does not show Opera as anything resembling 'dominant' .
The bar graph [ statcounter.com ] version makes that even more starkly clear .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera has always been in a dominant position in mobile browser marketshare.An interesting claim - got a citation?
  The one you provide shows it roughly tied with the Iphone and Nokia not far behind.
It certainly does not show Opera as anything resembling 'dominant'.
The bar graph [statcounter.com] version makes that even more starkly clear.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374883</id>
	<title>The little things matter more</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245343440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Opera has always tried to inovate, they have an excellent product, with lots of good features and I couldn't believe how fast the pages loaded in comparrison to firefox. Its the little things though that destroy its market share and preventing it from gaining more.

In opera on my hardware middle click doesn't map to scrolling or even as any default middle button action. It never has in all the years it has been in development. I am always impressed then disappointed . I know if I wanted to I could probably find the problem, but how many of your non-tech friends would try to fix it - I know my DAD would just say " This doesn't work, where is my old browser?"</htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera has always tried to inovate , they have an excellent product , with lots of good features and I could n't believe how fast the pages loaded in comparrison to firefox .
Its the little things though that destroy its market share and preventing it from gaining more .
In opera on my hardware middle click does n't map to scrolling or even as any default middle button action .
It never has in all the years it has been in development .
I am always impressed then disappointed .
I know if I wanted to I could probably find the problem , but how many of your non-tech friends would try to fix it - I know my DAD would just say " This does n't work , where is my old browser ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera has always tried to inovate, they have an excellent product, with lots of good features and I couldn't believe how fast the pages loaded in comparrison to firefox.
Its the little things though that destroy its market share and preventing it from gaining more.
In opera on my hardware middle click doesn't map to scrolling or even as any default middle button action.
It never has in all the years it has been in development.
I am always impressed then disappointed .
I know if I wanted to I could probably find the problem, but how many of your non-tech friends would try to fix it - I know my DAD would just say " This doesn't work, where is my old browser?
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374555</id>
	<title>Epic Fail</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245342180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What the hell were they thinking?  "We'll do something that people won't understand and won't like if they do understand."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What the hell were they thinking ?
" We 'll do something that people wo n't understand and wo n't like if they do understand .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What the hell were they thinking?
"We'll do something that people won't understand and won't like if they do understand.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28386233</id>
	<title>Re:Rumours of their death are continually exaggera</title>
	<author>Jack Action</author>
	<datestamp>1245441660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
<i>The only thing that matters is that open standards are implemented, then we all win.</i>
</p><p>
Except for Bill Gates -- he loses.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The only thing that matters is that open standards are implemented , then we all win .
Except for Bill Gates -- he loses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
The only thing that matters is that open standards are implemented, then we all win.
Except for Bill Gates -- he loses.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375257</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28381171</id>
	<title>Re:Rumours of their death are continually exaggera</title>
	<author>pbhj</author>
	<datestamp>1245321600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They're giving it away free, but they make up for it in volume<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;0)</p><p>Yes, I do know they sell to the embedded market.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're giving it away free , but they make up for it in volume ... ; 0 ) Yes , I do know they sell to the embedded market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're giving it away free, but they make up for it in volume ... ;0)Yes, I do know they sell to the embedded market.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375257</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28378073</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>hkmwbz</author>
	<datestamp>1245354840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Opera browsers are free on the desktop but Opera in embedded applications is relatively expensive to license and closed source so its days are probably numbered in the one place it makes money. Maybe Opera can compete against it by offering better value in some areas to justify the price tag and the head aches of dealing with a proprietary closed source browser.... but in the long run.... I doubt it.</p></div></blockquote><p>
It's probably cheaper to just license Opera than to assemble your own browser team and make your own browser. It's extremely time-consuming and expensive to make a browser. Just look at Chrome. More than two years to make a basic browser like that, despite not having to build a rendering engine. Browsers are massively complex, and as long as it's this difficult to make your own Opera will have business. And their business is thriving.</p><blockquote><div><p>Dealing with Opera in the embedded space has all the negatives you would expect from dealing with a closed source, proprietary, software company.</p></div></blockquote><p>
How do you know?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera browsers are free on the desktop but Opera in embedded applications is relatively expensive to license and closed source so its days are probably numbered in the one place it makes money .
Maybe Opera can compete against it by offering better value in some areas to justify the price tag and the head aches of dealing with a proprietary closed source browser.... but in the long run.... I doubt it .
It 's probably cheaper to just license Opera than to assemble your own browser team and make your own browser .
It 's extremely time-consuming and expensive to make a browser .
Just look at Chrome .
More than two years to make a basic browser like that , despite not having to build a rendering engine .
Browsers are massively complex , and as long as it 's this difficult to make your own Opera will have business .
And their business is thriving.Dealing with Opera in the embedded space has all the negatives you would expect from dealing with a closed source , proprietary , software company .
How do you know ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera browsers are free on the desktop but Opera in embedded applications is relatively expensive to license and closed source so its days are probably numbered in the one place it makes money.
Maybe Opera can compete against it by offering better value in some areas to justify the price tag and the head aches of dealing with a proprietary closed source browser.... but in the long run.... I doubt it.
It's probably cheaper to just license Opera than to assemble your own browser team and make your own browser.
It's extremely time-consuming and expensive to make a browser.
Just look at Chrome.
More than two years to make a basic browser like that, despite not having to build a rendering engine.
Browsers are massively complex, and as long as it's this difficult to make your own Opera will have business.
And their business is thriving.Dealing with Opera in the embedded space has all the negatives you would expect from dealing with a closed source, proprietary, software company.
How do you know?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28382135</id>
	<title>Re:Not to mention security, bandwidth, etc.</title>
	<author>hkmwbz</author>
	<datestamp>1245325800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, as we all know, installing Opera destroys all your other browsers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , as we all know , installing Opera destroys all your other browsers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, as we all know, installing Opera destroys all your other browsers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374993</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28377293</id>
	<title>Re:Cloud = silver lining</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245352800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Control. I have control over what is on my PC. Once you put something up on a server, you lose all control over it.</p><p>Want to send your friends a picture but don't want it spread across the entire net where it will remain for the rest of your life? Then Opera's solution will help there.</p><p>It's amazing how many morons sign up for these "social networking" sites where they post all manner of crap, not realising that these things will now be stuck with them forever.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Control .
I have control over what is on my PC .
Once you put something up on a server , you lose all control over it.Want to send your friends a picture but do n't want it spread across the entire net where it will remain for the rest of your life ?
Then Opera 's solution will help there.It 's amazing how many morons sign up for these " social networking " sites where they post all manner of crap , not realising that these things will now be stuck with them forever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Control.
I have control over what is on my PC.
Once you put something up on a server, you lose all control over it.Want to send your friends a picture but don't want it spread across the entire net where it will remain for the rest of your life?
Then Opera's solution will help there.It's amazing how many morons sign up for these "social networking" sites where they post all manner of crap, not realising that these things will now be stuck with them forever.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375243</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376589</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>rs79</author>
	<datestamp>1245350160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i> <b>"Opera is is in trouble."</b></i> </p><p>Keep telling yourself that enough and eventually you'll believe it.</p><p>This doesn't have to be a zero sum game. Opera doesn't have to lose for your favorite browser to win, and we all benefit from a rich array of alternative browsers. I don't want any browser, not even my favorite, be the "one true browser".</p><p>Opera contines to grow just fine and innovate so that firefox has something to get good ideas from and is a nice companion to google.</p><p>If only one of these browsers attains ubiquity, well, we had that before, it was called "Windows". Let's not do that again.</p><p>I also notice those who are most critical of Opera know the least about it and don't actually use it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Opera is is in trouble .
" Keep telling yourself that enough and eventually you 'll believe it.This does n't have to be a zero sum game .
Opera does n't have to lose for your favorite browser to win , and we all benefit from a rich array of alternative browsers .
I do n't want any browser , not even my favorite , be the " one true browser " .Opera contines to grow just fine and innovate so that firefox has something to get good ideas from and is a nice companion to google.If only one of these browsers attains ubiquity , well , we had that before , it was called " Windows " .
Let 's not do that again.I also notice those who are most critical of Opera know the least about it and do n't actually use it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> "Opera is is in trouble.
" Keep telling yourself that enough and eventually you'll believe it.This doesn't have to be a zero sum game.
Opera doesn't have to lose for your favorite browser to win, and we all benefit from a rich array of alternative browsers.
I don't want any browser, not even my favorite, be the "one true browser".Opera contines to grow just fine and innovate so that firefox has something to get good ideas from and is a nice companion to google.If only one of these browsers attains ubiquity, well, we had that before, it was called "Windows".
Let's not do that again.I also notice those who are most critical of Opera know the least about it and don't actually use it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28378473</id>
	<title>Arstechnica: The home of the degreeless &amp; cert</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245355860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><div class="quote"><p><b>"See the arstechnica analysis of misleading statcounter results"</b> - by prakslash (681585) on Thursday June 18, @11:36AM (#28374733)</p></div><p>Why would anyone want to read that site, when it's got 'authors' (regurgitators of others' findings only really 9/10 times) like Jeremy Reimer?</p><p>Jeremy Reimer, who was laughed out of Windows it pro magazine forums for impersonating others and lying, as well as having law enforcement contacted for libelling others as well as making death threats vs. others lives on his forums at OSY, his personal playpen website.</p><p>Jeremy Reimer, Jarrett DeAngelis, and Jay Little were all caught email harassing and stalking others online also at the Windows it pro magazine forums and when their isp's began tracking them on email harassment such as Shaw of Canada (reimer's isp), they stopped it, promptly. Jay Little, Reimer's friend (who has also been kicked out of microsoft forums &amp; others numerous times) had his websites removed in their entirety for death threats, libel, and more by CrystalTech.com &amp; petitiononline.com no less!</p><p>Jeremy Reimer's hosting provider also forced Reimer to remove portions of his website for such stupidity no less.</p><p>Bottom line here, is that Jeremy Reimer has no degree or even a certification like an A+ (much less an MCSE &amp; the like) in the science of computing. No thank you. Find better sources than the home of the 'fake-it-till-you-make-it' fool Jeremy Reimer. I don't go to 'sidewalk surgeon quacks' for advisement on medical topics, and hopefully, neither should any of you reading here.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" See the arstechnica analysis of misleading statcounter results " - by prakslash ( 681585 ) on Thursday June 18 , @ 11 : 36AM ( # 28374733 ) Why would anyone want to read that site , when it 's got 'authors ' ( regurgitators of others ' findings only really 9/10 times ) like Jeremy Reimer ? Jeremy Reimer , who was laughed out of Windows it pro magazine forums for impersonating others and lying , as well as having law enforcement contacted for libelling others as well as making death threats vs. others lives on his forums at OSY , his personal playpen website.Jeremy Reimer , Jarrett DeAngelis , and Jay Little were all caught email harassing and stalking others online also at the Windows it pro magazine forums and when their isp 's began tracking them on email harassment such as Shaw of Canada ( reimer 's isp ) , they stopped it , promptly .
Jay Little , Reimer 's friend ( who has also been kicked out of microsoft forums &amp; others numerous times ) had his websites removed in their entirety for death threats , libel , and more by CrystalTech.com &amp; petitiononline.com no less ! Jeremy Reimer 's hosting provider also forced Reimer to remove portions of his website for such stupidity no less.Bottom line here , is that Jeremy Reimer has no degree or even a certification like an A + ( much less an MCSE &amp; the like ) in the science of computing .
No thank you .
Find better sources than the home of the 'fake-it-till-you-make-it ' fool Jeremy Reimer .
I do n't go to 'sidewalk surgeon quacks ' for advisement on medical topics , and hopefully , neither should any of you reading here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"See the arstechnica analysis of misleading statcounter results" - by prakslash (681585) on Thursday June 18, @11:36AM (#28374733)Why would anyone want to read that site, when it's got 'authors' (regurgitators of others' findings only really 9/10 times) like Jeremy Reimer?Jeremy Reimer, who was laughed out of Windows it pro magazine forums for impersonating others and lying, as well as having law enforcement contacted for libelling others as well as making death threats vs. others lives on his forums at OSY, his personal playpen website.Jeremy Reimer, Jarrett DeAngelis, and Jay Little were all caught email harassing and stalking others online also at the Windows it pro magazine forums and when their isp's began tracking them on email harassment such as Shaw of Canada (reimer's isp), they stopped it, promptly.
Jay Little, Reimer's friend (who has also been kicked out of microsoft forums &amp; others numerous times) had his websites removed in their entirety for death threats, libel, and more by CrystalTech.com &amp; petitiononline.com no less!Jeremy Reimer's hosting provider also forced Reimer to remove portions of his website for such stupidity no less.Bottom line here, is that Jeremy Reimer has no degree or even a certification like an A+ (much less an MCSE &amp; the like) in the science of computing.
No thank you.
Find better sources than the home of the 'fake-it-till-you-make-it' fool Jeremy Reimer.
I don't go to 'sidewalk surgeon quacks' for advisement on medical topics, and hopefully, neither should any of you reading here.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375453</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>demachina</author>
	<datestamp>1245345840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"As for the mobile market, it is being surpassed by iPhone."</p><p>Opera is being challenged by WebKit, not exactly the iPhone.  WebKit is the browser in iPhone, Android and a number of other embedded platforms.  WebKit was spun off Konquerer and is also the engined under Apple's Safari browser.</p><p>WebKit is open source and free which is a key reason its a serious challenge to Opera in the embedded space.  Opera browsers are free on the desktop but Opera in embedded applications is relatively expensive to license and closed source so its days are probably numbered in the one place it makes money.  Maybe Opera can compete against it by offering better value in some areas to justify the price tag and the head aches of dealing with a proprietary closed source browser.... but in the long run.... I doubt it.  Dealing with Opera in the embedded space has all the negatives you would expect from dealing with a closed source, proprietary, software company.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" As for the mobile market , it is being surpassed by iPhone .
" Opera is being challenged by WebKit , not exactly the iPhone .
WebKit is the browser in iPhone , Android and a number of other embedded platforms .
WebKit was spun off Konquerer and is also the engined under Apple 's Safari browser.WebKit is open source and free which is a key reason its a serious challenge to Opera in the embedded space .
Opera browsers are free on the desktop but Opera in embedded applications is relatively expensive to license and closed source so its days are probably numbered in the one place it makes money .
Maybe Opera can compete against it by offering better value in some areas to justify the price tag and the head aches of dealing with a proprietary closed source browser.... but in the long run.... I doubt it .
Dealing with Opera in the embedded space has all the negatives you would expect from dealing with a closed source , proprietary , software company .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"As for the mobile market, it is being surpassed by iPhone.
"Opera is being challenged by WebKit, not exactly the iPhone.
WebKit is the browser in iPhone, Android and a number of other embedded platforms.
WebKit was spun off Konquerer and is also the engined under Apple's Safari browser.WebKit is open source and free which is a key reason its a serious challenge to Opera in the embedded space.
Opera browsers are free on the desktop but Opera in embedded applications is relatively expensive to license and closed source so its days are probably numbered in the one place it makes money.
Maybe Opera can compete against it by offering better value in some areas to justify the price tag and the head aches of dealing with a proprietary closed source browser.... but in the long run.... I doubt it.
Dealing with Opera in the embedded space has all the negatives you would expect from dealing with a closed source, proprietary, software company.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376715</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>drolli</author>
	<datestamp>1245350700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, webkit browsers and mobile opera browsers are pretty different. I have both on my Nokia (webkit based browser was preinstalled). Both are ok to use. I usually prefer opera mini for the lower amount of data and the 'image quality'  setting, and webkit when it comes to more dynamic things (like forms etc).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , webkit browsers and mobile opera browsers are pretty different .
I have both on my Nokia ( webkit based browser was preinstalled ) .
Both are ok to use .
I usually prefer opera mini for the lower amount of data and the 'image quality ' setting , and webkit when it comes to more dynamic things ( like forms etc ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, webkit browsers and mobile opera browsers are pretty different.
I have both on my Nokia (webkit based browser was preinstalled).
Both are ok to use.
I usually prefer opera mini for the lower amount of data and the 'image quality'  setting, and webkit when it comes to more dynamic things (like forms etc).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28383451</id>
	<title>Forget it</title>
	<author>Snaller</author>
	<datestamp>1245331620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dumb bloatware - I DON'T want a browser with webserver in it, I DONT want a browser with an email client in it, I DONT want a browser with torrents in it etc etc etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dumb bloatware - I DO N'T want a browser with webserver in it , I DONT want a browser with an email client in it , I DONT want a browser with torrents in it etc etc etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dumb bloatware - I DON'T want a browser with webserver in it, I DONT want a browser with an email client in it, I DONT want a browser with torrents in it etc etc etc.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567</id>
	<title>Bad summary</title>
	<author>csartanis</author>
	<datestamp>1245342240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The summary makes it sound like Opera is making a last ditch effort to stay relevant, which is clearly not the case.   Opera has always been in a dominant position in mobile browser marketshare.</p><p><a href="http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile\_browser-ww-daily-20081201-20090618" title="statcounter.com" rel="nofollow">Source</a> [statcounter.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The summary makes it sound like Opera is making a last ditch effort to stay relevant , which is clearly not the case .
Opera has always been in a dominant position in mobile browser marketshare.Source [ statcounter.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The summary makes it sound like Opera is making a last ditch effort to stay relevant, which is clearly not the case.
Opera has always been in a dominant position in mobile browser marketshare.Source [statcounter.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28381053</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>pbhj</author>
	<datestamp>1245321240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Opera has often appeared to be the most innovative of the top browsers, it would be a shame, especially given this new offering (which I think is a real paradigm changer and will change the internet over the next couple of years), it would be a shame if it were to fade away.</p><p>They have the DS as well, though not sure how significant that is. Is iPhone really selling more than Opera's install base on mobile, people have even more money than me than I thought.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera has often appeared to be the most innovative of the top browsers , it would be a shame , especially given this new offering ( which I think is a real paradigm changer and will change the internet over the next couple of years ) , it would be a shame if it were to fade away.They have the DS as well , though not sure how significant that is .
Is iPhone really selling more than Opera 's install base on mobile , people have even more money than me than I thought .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera has often appeared to be the most innovative of the top browsers, it would be a shame, especially given this new offering (which I think is a real paradigm changer and will change the internet over the next couple of years), it would be a shame if it were to fade away.They have the DS as well, though not sure how significant that is.
Is iPhone really selling more than Opera's install base on mobile, people have even more money than me than I thought.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28377373</id>
	<title>Re:Not to mention security, bandwidth, etc.</title>
	<author>davidsyes</author>
	<datestamp>1245353100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ISP's DEFINITELY won't like this:</p><p><a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/06/congressman-has-a-bill-ready-to-combat-usage-caps.ars" title="arstechnica.com" rel="nofollow">http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/06/congressman-has-a-bill-ready-to-combat-usage-caps.ars</a> [arstechnica.com]</p><p>"Massa's solution would be to force ISPs to justify usage-based fees to the FTC before they are implemented. The ISP would have to submit an economic case, based on the capital equipment cost and operational costs, for why they need to charge for usage, and then consider the impact of those fees on users. The FTC would get injunction power, and the ability to fine any ISP that either neglected to file a justification or implemented the plan regardless of the injunction. The bill uses language like "unjust, unreasonable, or unreasonably discriminatory" to describe plans that run afoul of the economic analysis, which Massa says reflects existing statutory language used giving the FTC regulatory power.</p><p>It's safe to assume Time Warner won't like this one bit, as a basic economic analysis shows that its plan imposes fees that are nowhere close to those of its fellow duopolists. More generally, the cost of supporting subscribers appears to be dropping in most cases, so it seems unlikely that anyone in the industry would be able to get their plan past the FTC."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ISP 's DEFINITELY wo n't like this : http : //arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/06/congressman-has-a-bill-ready-to-combat-usage-caps.ars [ arstechnica.com ] " Massa 's solution would be to force ISPs to justify usage-based fees to the FTC before they are implemented .
The ISP would have to submit an economic case , based on the capital equipment cost and operational costs , for why they need to charge for usage , and then consider the impact of those fees on users .
The FTC would get injunction power , and the ability to fine any ISP that either neglected to file a justification or implemented the plan regardless of the injunction .
The bill uses language like " unjust , unreasonable , or unreasonably discriminatory " to describe plans that run afoul of the economic analysis , which Massa says reflects existing statutory language used giving the FTC regulatory power.It 's safe to assume Time Warner wo n't like this one bit , as a basic economic analysis shows that its plan imposes fees that are nowhere close to those of its fellow duopolists .
More generally , the cost of supporting subscribers appears to be dropping in most cases , so it seems unlikely that anyone in the industry would be able to get their plan past the FTC .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ISP's DEFINITELY won't like this:http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/06/congressman-has-a-bill-ready-to-combat-usage-caps.ars [arstechnica.com]"Massa's solution would be to force ISPs to justify usage-based fees to the FTC before they are implemented.
The ISP would have to submit an economic case, based on the capital equipment cost and operational costs, for why they need to charge for usage, and then consider the impact of those fees on users.
The FTC would get injunction power, and the ability to fine any ISP that either neglected to file a justification or implemented the plan regardless of the injunction.
The bill uses language like "unjust, unreasonable, or unreasonably discriminatory" to describe plans that run afoul of the economic analysis, which Massa says reflects existing statutory language used giving the FTC regulatory power.It's safe to assume Time Warner won't like this one bit, as a basic economic analysis shows that its plan imposes fees that are nowhere close to those of its fellow duopolists.
More generally, the cost of supporting subscribers appears to be dropping in most cases, so it seems unlikely that anyone in the industry would be able to get their plan past the FTC.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374543</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28378817</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>hkmwbz</author>
	<datestamp>1245356700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>W3schools stats are just for that site. Opera actually has <a href="http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-daily-20090101-20090618-bar" title="statcounter.com">more than Chrome</a> [statcounter.com]. In Europe it's even bigger. Which is surprising considering Google's massive advertising muscles.

<p>Also, even if your claims were correct, why would Opera be in trouble? They are setting profit records all the time even during these economic downtimes. The user base is growing quickly as well. They probably have something like 100 million users for all their products.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>W3schools stats are just for that site .
Opera actually has more than Chrome [ statcounter.com ] .
In Europe it 's even bigger .
Which is surprising considering Google 's massive advertising muscles .
Also , even if your claims were correct , why would Opera be in trouble ?
They are setting profit records all the time even during these economic downtimes .
The user base is growing quickly as well .
They probably have something like 100 million users for all their products .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>W3schools stats are just for that site.
Opera actually has more than Chrome [statcounter.com].
In Europe it's even bigger.
Which is surprising considering Google's massive advertising muscles.
Also, even if your claims were correct, why would Opera be in trouble?
They are setting profit records all the time even during these economic downtimes.
The user base is growing quickly as well.
They probably have something like 100 million users for all their products.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374543</id>
	<title>Not to mention security, bandwidth, etc.</title>
	<author>1sockchuck</author>
	<datestamp>1245342120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/06/16/opera-unite-should-hosts-be-worried/" title="datacenterknowledge.com">Data Center Knowledge</a> [datacenterknowledge.com] has a roundup that looks at some of the problems with this approach, including security issues related to running a server on a desktop app and bandwidth consumption. If your browser-hosted site gets busy, you think your ISP won't notice?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Data Center Knowledge [ datacenterknowledge.com ] has a roundup that looks at some of the problems with this approach , including security issues related to running a server on a desktop app and bandwidth consumption .
If your browser-hosted site gets busy , you think your ISP wo n't notice ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Data Center Knowledge [datacenterknowledge.com] has a roundup that looks at some of the problems with this approach, including security issues related to running a server on a desktop app and bandwidth consumption.
If your browser-hosted site gets busy, you think your ISP won't notice?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28385539</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245348600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well dominant in Asia and that spells it well out!</p><p>http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile\_browser-as-daily-20081201-20090618</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well dominant in Asia and that spells it well out ! http : //gs.statcounter.com/ # mobile \ _browser-as-daily-20081201-20090618</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well dominant in Asia and that spells it well out!http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile\_browser-as-daily-20081201-20090618</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374775</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376415</id>
	<title>Slashdotters not getting the point</title>
	<author>ThiagoHP</author>
	<datestamp>1245349380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I feel that most people here is Slashdot didn't get Opera Unite:</p><ul>
<li> <em>It's not meant to replace traditional webservers</em>. It's meant for average joes to be able to quickly and easily run some ephemeral services from their own computer, specially file sharing. If I want to send some file to a friend, I need to upload it to some place (via e-mail. FTP, whatever). With Unite, I just turn on the file sharing service and give the URL to my friend. No uploading needed.</li><li>Bandwidth issues are mostly moot, as Unite services are not meant to replace traditional Web servers (unless you share loads of files with doeload-hungry friends, of course<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:))</li><li>Regarding security: people talk about this issue as if Unite was a full-blown Web server. It's is not Apache nor IIS (God forbid), it's just an environment where simple applications written in HTML, CSS and Javascript are run. So Unite is as secure as Opera's Javascript security, and Opera has a very good security record to date.</li><li>The whole environment is sandboxed. All file access is only allowed in folders chosen by the user, and only when it runs some service that needs file access. Unite provides a file storage for services date, but the service doesn't know where its data is located.</li><li>Opera does not run Unite by default. No services are run by default, just the ones started by the user.</li><li>The <a href="http://unite.opera.com/support" title="opera.com" rel="nofollow">FAQ</a> [opera.com]</li><li><p> address most issues people discusss here and elsewhere.</p></li><li>Unite supports UPnP, so the Opera proxy servers are only used when UPnP is disabled.</li><li>You can use your own domain server.</li></ul></htmltext>
<tokenext>I feel that most people here is Slashdot did n't get Opera Unite : It 's not meant to replace traditional webservers .
It 's meant for average joes to be able to quickly and easily run some ephemeral services from their own computer , specially file sharing .
If I want to send some file to a friend , I need to upload it to some place ( via e-mail .
FTP , whatever ) .
With Unite , I just turn on the file sharing service and give the URL to my friend .
No uploading needed.Bandwidth issues are mostly moot , as Unite services are not meant to replace traditional Web servers ( unless you share loads of files with doeload-hungry friends , of course : ) ) Regarding security : people talk about this issue as if Unite was a full-blown Web server .
It 's is not Apache nor IIS ( God forbid ) , it 's just an environment where simple applications written in HTML , CSS and Javascript are run .
So Unite is as secure as Opera 's Javascript security , and Opera has a very good security record to date.The whole environment is sandboxed .
All file access is only allowed in folders chosen by the user , and only when it runs some service that needs file access .
Unite provides a file storage for services date , but the service does n't know where its data is located.Opera does not run Unite by default .
No services are run by default , just the ones started by the user.The FAQ [ opera.com ] address most issues people discusss here and elsewhere.Unite supports UPnP , so the Opera proxy servers are only used when UPnP is disabled.You can use your own domain server .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I feel that most people here is Slashdot didn't get Opera Unite:
 It's not meant to replace traditional webservers.
It's meant for average joes to be able to quickly and easily run some ephemeral services from their own computer, specially file sharing.
If I want to send some file to a friend, I need to upload it to some place (via e-mail.
FTP, whatever).
With Unite, I just turn on the file sharing service and give the URL to my friend.
No uploading needed.Bandwidth issues are mostly moot, as Unite services are not meant to replace traditional Web servers (unless you share loads of files with doeload-hungry friends, of course :))Regarding security: people talk about this issue as if Unite was a full-blown Web server.
It's is not Apache nor IIS (God forbid), it's just an environment where simple applications written in HTML, CSS and Javascript are run.
So Unite is as secure as Opera's Javascript security, and Opera has a very good security record to date.The whole environment is sandboxed.
All file access is only allowed in folders chosen by the user, and only when it runs some service that needs file access.
Unite provides a file storage for services date, but the service doesn't know where its data is located.Opera does not run Unite by default.
No services are run by default, just the ones started by the user.The FAQ [opera.com] address most issues people discusss here and elsewhere.Unite supports UPnP, so the Opera proxy servers are only used when UPnP is disabled.You can use your own domain server.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375695</id>
	<title>eDonkey</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245346740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The article's ending and the summary put an emphasis on traffic having to go through Opera and this being a way to compete with Facebook and the likes. Sounds a lot like another blog I read yesterday. What Unite does, is use Opera's servers as a fallback solution. It works the same way on the eDonkey network.</p><p><a href="http://my.opera.com/haavard/blog/2009/06/17/responding-to-unite-misconceptions" title="opera.com" rel="nofollow">http://my.opera.com/haavard/blog/2009/06/17/responding-to-unite-misconceptions</a> [opera.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The article 's ending and the summary put an emphasis on traffic having to go through Opera and this being a way to compete with Facebook and the likes .
Sounds a lot like another blog I read yesterday .
What Unite does , is use Opera 's servers as a fallback solution .
It works the same way on the eDonkey network.http : //my.opera.com/haavard/blog/2009/06/17/responding-to-unite-misconceptions [ opera.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The article's ending and the summary put an emphasis on traffic having to go through Opera and this being a way to compete with Facebook and the likes.
Sounds a lot like another blog I read yesterday.
What Unite does, is use Opera's servers as a fallback solution.
It works the same way on the eDonkey network.http://my.opera.com/haavard/blog/2009/06/17/responding-to-unite-misconceptions [opera.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375671</id>
	<title>Re:Cloud = silver lining</title>
	<author>johnnysaucepn</author>
	<datestamp>1245346620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>However - I've got a better idea: why don't they just store the stuff the users want to share on the <i>central servers</i>? I mean, hard disc space is about fsck all per megabyte these days,
the servers can run 24/7, have a super-fast connection to teh interweb (not an ADSL line with lousy upload speed) and have the latest security patches applied daily by dusky, nubile virgins (well, 1 out of 3 ain't bad). Even if the server does get hacked then it doesn't affect the end user. Much better than leaving your PC on all the time, or having someone suddenly trying to download a video when you're in the middle of a networked deathmatch...</p></div><p>Joe Public shouldn't need to know about uploading, or hosting plans, or bandwidth caps, or service contracts or the like. Opera open, files open. Opera closed, files gone. Like opening and closing a window.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>However - I 've got a better idea : why do n't they just store the stuff the users want to share on the central servers ?
I mean , hard disc space is about fsck all per megabyte these days , the servers can run 24/7 , have a super-fast connection to teh interweb ( not an ADSL line with lousy upload speed ) and have the latest security patches applied daily by dusky , nubile virgins ( well , 1 out of 3 ai n't bad ) .
Even if the server does get hacked then it does n't affect the end user .
Much better than leaving your PC on all the time , or having someone suddenly trying to download a video when you 're in the middle of a networked deathmatch...Joe Public should n't need to know about uploading , or hosting plans , or bandwidth caps , or service contracts or the like .
Opera open , files open .
Opera closed , files gone .
Like opening and closing a window .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>However - I've got a better idea: why don't they just store the stuff the users want to share on the central servers?
I mean, hard disc space is about fsck all per megabyte these days,
the servers can run 24/7, have a super-fast connection to teh interweb (not an ADSL line with lousy upload speed) and have the latest security patches applied daily by dusky, nubile virgins (well, 1 out of 3 ain't bad).
Even if the server does get hacked then it doesn't affect the end user.
Much better than leaving your PC on all the time, or having someone suddenly trying to download a video when you're in the middle of a networked deathmatch...Joe Public shouldn't need to know about uploading, or hosting plans, or bandwidth caps, or service contracts or the like.
Opera open, files open.
Opera closed, files gone.
Like opening and closing a window.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375243</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376341</id>
	<title>could be worse</title>
	<author>GetTragic</author>
	<datestamp>1245349080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>could be a Hail Satan</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>could be a Hail Satan</tokentext>
<sentencetext>could be a Hail Satan</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375385</id>
	<title>I would love this service</title>
	<author>bestadvocate</author>
	<datestamp>1245345480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was eager to see if this would automatically work, but none of it seems to.  It seemed like a nice risk-free way to share files with friends and family. I also could not fine any real help on their support pages. Great potential, zero functionality at least for me.  When it gets patched or the support pages get a little more helpful I'll try it again, until then I'm sticking with good ol' 3.5</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was eager to see if this would automatically work , but none of it seems to .
It seemed like a nice risk-free way to share files with friends and family .
I also could not fine any real help on their support pages .
Great potential , zero functionality at least for me .
When it gets patched or the support pages get a little more helpful I 'll try it again , until then I 'm sticking with good ol ' 3.5</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was eager to see if this would automatically work, but none of it seems to.
It seemed like a nice risk-free way to share files with friends and family.
I also could not fine any real help on their support pages.
Great potential, zero functionality at least for me.
When it gets patched or the support pages get a little more helpful I'll try it again, until then I'm sticking with good ol' 3.5</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28377839</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>rs79</author>
	<datestamp>1245354240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i> <b>"WebKit is open source and free which is a key reason its a serious challenge to Opera in the embedded space.</b></i> "</p><p>Newsflash: not all open srouce stuff is any good, and while open source may be a good religion, to follow it blindly in defiance to facts doesn't do anybody any good.</p><p>Case in point from last week: I had to back up a sysetm image from a scsi raid XP system. I tried 14 programs, 6 of which were open source. Only Norton Ghost worked. Do I care it's not open source? No. I needed a tool to get the job done and paid for it and it worked.</p><p>While there are some commensursate professionals dong open source code (djbdns comes to mind, and to a lesser extent, postfix) there's still a lot of poeple contributing to open source projects that really have some dumb ideas implemented poorly.</p><p>I've been programming unix in C since 1976 and have put my share of stuff out there. But the quality of open source code is plummeted badly in the last decade imo.</p><p>Open source as a primary criteria for selecting a tool is a really bad idea. We need to be objective. At the end of the day stuff has to actually *work*.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" WebKit is open source and free which is a key reason its a serious challenge to Opera in the embedded space .
" Newsflash : not all open srouce stuff is any good , and while open source may be a good religion , to follow it blindly in defiance to facts does n't do anybody any good.Case in point from last week : I had to back up a sysetm image from a scsi raid XP system .
I tried 14 programs , 6 of which were open source .
Only Norton Ghost worked .
Do I care it 's not open source ?
No. I needed a tool to get the job done and paid for it and it worked.While there are some commensursate professionals dong open source code ( djbdns comes to mind , and to a lesser extent , postfix ) there 's still a lot of poeple contributing to open source projects that really have some dumb ideas implemented poorly.I 've been programming unix in C since 1976 and have put my share of stuff out there .
But the quality of open source code is plummeted badly in the last decade imo.Open source as a primary criteria for selecting a tool is a really bad idea .
We need to be objective .
At the end of the day stuff has to actually * work * .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> "WebKit is open source and free which is a key reason its a serious challenge to Opera in the embedded space.
"Newsflash: not all open srouce stuff is any good, and while open source may be a good religion, to follow it blindly in defiance to facts doesn't do anybody any good.Case in point from last week: I had to back up a sysetm image from a scsi raid XP system.
I tried 14 programs, 6 of which were open source.
Only Norton Ghost worked.
Do I care it's not open source?
No. I needed a tool to get the job done and paid for it and it worked.While there are some commensursate professionals dong open source code (djbdns comes to mind, and to a lesser extent, postfix) there's still a lot of poeple contributing to open source projects that really have some dumb ideas implemented poorly.I've been programming unix in C since 1976 and have put my share of stuff out there.
But the quality of open source code is plummeted badly in the last decade imo.Open source as a primary criteria for selecting a tool is a really bad idea.
We need to be objective.
At the end of the day stuff has to actually *work*.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374835</id>
	<title>Pffft... trojan horse</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245343320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah right. If Microsoft had done this first it would have been hailed as revolutionary.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah right .
If Microsoft had done this first it would have been hailed as revolutionary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah right.
If Microsoft had done this first it would have been hailed as revolutionary.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374993</id>
	<title>Re:Not to mention security, bandwidth, etc.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245343920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not to mention maybe I don't want to use Opera as a browser? Why not make this a separate product?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not to mention maybe I do n't want to use Opera as a browser ?
Why not make this a separate product ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not to mention maybe I don't want to use Opera as a browser?
Why not make this a separate product?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374543</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28378845</id>
	<title>If you don't get it, STFU.</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1245356820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apparently, the Neil McAllister (whoever that is, and why ever he thinks he is relevant) of that summary did not understand the main point.</p><p>The point of the difference in complexity, of setting up a Apache, and FTP server, and all that stuff, versus just using your browser.<br>That is the thing. Now everyone can be the other side of the net. In just a few seconds, and without learning how to do it professionally.</p><p>While I love my custom-built Gentoo root server, I can not expect my mom to do the same thing, just to send me a file. She can't even use Rapidshare and similar sites.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apparently , the Neil McAllister ( whoever that is , and why ever he thinks he is relevant ) of that summary did not understand the main point.The point of the difference in complexity , of setting up a Apache , and FTP server , and all that stuff , versus just using your browser.That is the thing .
Now everyone can be the other side of the net .
In just a few seconds , and without learning how to do it professionally.While I love my custom-built Gentoo root server , I can not expect my mom to do the same thing , just to send me a file .
She ca n't even use Rapidshare and similar sites .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apparently, the Neil McAllister (whoever that is, and why ever he thinks he is relevant) of that summary did not understand the main point.The point of the difference in complexity, of setting up a Apache, and FTP server, and all that stuff, versus just using your browser.That is the thing.
Now everyone can be the other side of the net.
In just a few seconds, and without learning how to do it professionally.While I love my custom-built Gentoo root server, I can not expect my mom to do the same thing, just to send me a file.
She can't even use Rapidshare and similar sites.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376611</id>
	<title>More like a Fail Mary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245350220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Opera was once at the forefront of HTML5. Now--not even video. What has become of them?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera was once at the forefront of HTML5 .
Now--not even video .
What has become of them ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera was once at the forefront of HTML5.
Now--not even video.
What has become of them?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374947</id>
	<title>A little phobic, OP?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245343740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been using Opera Unite and it's incredibly useful.  It's a quick and easy way to pirate.</p><p>No, I'm serious.  I can put whatever I want on my file server and give it to my friends.  If I archive it and put a password on the archive, who will know it's an album or movie?  Not Opera.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been using Opera Unite and it 's incredibly useful .
It 's a quick and easy way to pirate.No , I 'm serious .
I can put whatever I want on my file server and give it to my friends .
If I archive it and put a password on the archive , who will know it 's an album or movie ?
Not Opera .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been using Opera Unite and it's incredibly useful.
It's a quick and easy way to pirate.No, I'm serious.
I can put whatever I want on my file server and give it to my friends.
If I archive it and put a password on the archive, who will know it's an album or movie?
Not Opera.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376437</id>
	<title>Hail Mary?</title>
	<author>lostmongoose</author>
	<datestamp>1245349500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>more like Fail Mary, amirite?</htmltext>
<tokenext>more like Fail Mary , amirite ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>more like Fail Mary, amirite?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28378321</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>nine-times</author>
	<datestamp>1245355440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>WebKit is open source and free which is a key reason its a serious challenge to Opera in the embedded space.</p></div><p>Yeah, whereas IE seems to be a good example of how vendor lock-in can overcome superior products, Opera seems to be a case study on how difficult it can be even for a very good product to compete in an area that has become commoditized by open source projects.  Safari, Chrome, and Firefox are all very good browsers on the desktop, and Webkit generally seems to be taking over the mobile market, due to being free and having a small footprint.
</p><p>Opera has to try to offer something more than these open source projects can, given the backing of companies like Apple and Google, I'd imagine that it won't be long before the open source competition catches up.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>WebKit is open source and free which is a key reason its a serious challenge to Opera in the embedded space.Yeah , whereas IE seems to be a good example of how vendor lock-in can overcome superior products , Opera seems to be a case study on how difficult it can be even for a very good product to compete in an area that has become commoditized by open source projects .
Safari , Chrome , and Firefox are all very good browsers on the desktop , and Webkit generally seems to be taking over the mobile market , due to being free and having a small footprint .
Opera has to try to offer something more than these open source projects can , given the backing of companies like Apple and Google , I 'd imagine that it wo n't be long before the open source competition catches up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WebKit is open source and free which is a key reason its a serious challenge to Opera in the embedded space.Yeah, whereas IE seems to be a good example of how vendor lock-in can overcome superior products, Opera seems to be a case study on how difficult it can be even for a very good product to compete in an area that has become commoditized by open source projects.
Safari, Chrome, and Firefox are all very good browsers on the desktop, and Webkit generally seems to be taking over the mobile market, due to being free and having a small footprint.
Opera has to try to offer something more than these open source projects can, given the backing of companies like Apple and Google, I'd imagine that it won't be long before the open source competition catches up.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375019</id>
	<title>There are all kinds of uses</title>
	<author>Giant Electronic Bra</author>
	<datestamp>1245344040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The author may be right in the sense that Opera is attempting to find a way to distinguish their product from the competition, but I think he's missing a few points.</p><p>There are many reasons why you might want to run a personal web server on your local machine. It can act as a proxy for example. Since it is fairly easy to program it with scripting languages it can do a lot of interesting things. Granted all that functionality could be built into the browser itself, but if you can tap into a lot of existing code and also create a more organized stack for this kind of thing it could be useful. You could do most of the things people use things like Greasemonkey for now, except probably better.</p><p>It could be highly useful for web app developers. With some specialized tools designed to help with things like AJAX debugging it could represent a significant draw. This is maybe not a huge market for the bigger browsers, but if Opera can get a bit of penetration into the dev tools market this way it could provide them with a new revenue stream.</p><p>It could be highly useful for collaborative web based applications which feature interactivity. For example it makes more sense to send a copy of every event the UI needs to process to a queue on the client side than to force repetitive performance-destroying polling across the net. Now the app need merely check a local queue using a local HTTP request, probably using AJAX. It could also be used to allow processing resources at the clients to be harnessed to do a lot of the work, possibly in parallel.</p><p>This is not a new concept, but nobody has really rolled out a useful version of it before. There are going to be issues like NAT firewalls etc, but there are various ways to approach solving them. Afterall, people play online games all the time that require them to open ports, etc for bi-directional communications. All this is doing is extending that capability to the web.</p><p>Personally I don't think it will catch on simply because Opera has too small a market share to make it worth people writing a lot of software that depends on it, but the concept itself is not bad. Perhaps Mozilla will experiment with this too, then it might go somewhere, finally.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The author may be right in the sense that Opera is attempting to find a way to distinguish their product from the competition , but I think he 's missing a few points.There are many reasons why you might want to run a personal web server on your local machine .
It can act as a proxy for example .
Since it is fairly easy to program it with scripting languages it can do a lot of interesting things .
Granted all that functionality could be built into the browser itself , but if you can tap into a lot of existing code and also create a more organized stack for this kind of thing it could be useful .
You could do most of the things people use things like Greasemonkey for now , except probably better.It could be highly useful for web app developers .
With some specialized tools designed to help with things like AJAX debugging it could represent a significant draw .
This is maybe not a huge market for the bigger browsers , but if Opera can get a bit of penetration into the dev tools market this way it could provide them with a new revenue stream.It could be highly useful for collaborative web based applications which feature interactivity .
For example it makes more sense to send a copy of every event the UI needs to process to a queue on the client side than to force repetitive performance-destroying polling across the net .
Now the app need merely check a local queue using a local HTTP request , probably using AJAX .
It could also be used to allow processing resources at the clients to be harnessed to do a lot of the work , possibly in parallel.This is not a new concept , but nobody has really rolled out a useful version of it before .
There are going to be issues like NAT firewalls etc , but there are various ways to approach solving them .
Afterall , people play online games all the time that require them to open ports , etc for bi-directional communications .
All this is doing is extending that capability to the web.Personally I do n't think it will catch on simply because Opera has too small a market share to make it worth people writing a lot of software that depends on it , but the concept itself is not bad .
Perhaps Mozilla will experiment with this too , then it might go somewhere , finally .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The author may be right in the sense that Opera is attempting to find a way to distinguish their product from the competition, but I think he's missing a few points.There are many reasons why you might want to run a personal web server on your local machine.
It can act as a proxy for example.
Since it is fairly easy to program it with scripting languages it can do a lot of interesting things.
Granted all that functionality could be built into the browser itself, but if you can tap into a lot of existing code and also create a more organized stack for this kind of thing it could be useful.
You could do most of the things people use things like Greasemonkey for now, except probably better.It could be highly useful for web app developers.
With some specialized tools designed to help with things like AJAX debugging it could represent a significant draw.
This is maybe not a huge market for the bigger browsers, but if Opera can get a bit of penetration into the dev tools market this way it could provide them with a new revenue stream.It could be highly useful for collaborative web based applications which feature interactivity.
For example it makes more sense to send a copy of every event the UI needs to process to a queue on the client side than to force repetitive performance-destroying polling across the net.
Now the app need merely check a local queue using a local HTTP request, probably using AJAX.
It could also be used to allow processing resources at the clients to be harnessed to do a lot of the work, possibly in parallel.This is not a new concept, but nobody has really rolled out a useful version of it before.
There are going to be issues like NAT firewalls etc, but there are various ways to approach solving them.
Afterall, people play online games all the time that require them to open ports, etc for bi-directional communications.
All this is doing is extending that capability to the web.Personally I don't think it will catch on simply because Opera has too small a market share to make it worth people writing a lot of software that depends on it, but the concept itself is not bad.
Perhaps Mozilla will experiment with this too, then it might go somewhere, finally.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375291</id>
	<title>Re:Forgive my ignorance but..</title>
	<author>silent\_artichoke</author>
	<datestamp>1245345180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Think American football. A desperate throw to try to make a touchdown from an area of the field where you should really be focused on gaining a first down.</p><p>For examples, see any football movie involving a slow-motion throw in the last second of the game from too far away that the main character catches against all odds to win the game for Sunnyville High (or whatever) with cheesy music playing in the background.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Think American football .
A desperate throw to try to make a touchdown from an area of the field where you should really be focused on gaining a first down.For examples , see any football movie involving a slow-motion throw in the last second of the game from too far away that the main character catches against all odds to win the game for Sunnyville High ( or whatever ) with cheesy music playing in the background .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Think American football.
A desperate throw to try to make a touchdown from an area of the field where you should really be focused on gaining a first down.For examples, see any football movie involving a slow-motion throw in the last second of the game from too far away that the main character catches against all odds to win the game for Sunnyville High (or whatever) with cheesy music playing in the background.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375155</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28379157</id>
	<title>Re:Cloud = silver lining</title>
	<author>hoooocheymomma</author>
	<datestamp>1245357840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are you really unable to grasp that there are both pros and cons to having content centrally stored, as well as pros and cons to hosting your own content?</p><p>Opera knows about facebook, youtube, etc. They are offering users the capability to host their OWN content easily. Did they say you'll want to do that in every scenario? Nope. They seem to have stated that there might be situations where you want to host your own content, rather than uploading it to some other location before somebody has the ability to download it.</p><p>They acknowledge that central servers for content are valid and necessary. They are simply providing users with an easy way to forgo that IF they want to.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you really unable to grasp that there are both pros and cons to having content centrally stored , as well as pros and cons to hosting your own content ? Opera knows about facebook , youtube , etc .
They are offering users the capability to host their OWN content easily .
Did they say you 'll want to do that in every scenario ?
Nope. They seem to have stated that there might be situations where you want to host your own content , rather than uploading it to some other location before somebody has the ability to download it.They acknowledge that central servers for content are valid and necessary .
They are simply providing users with an easy way to forgo that IF they want to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you really unable to grasp that there are both pros and cons to having content centrally stored, as well as pros and cons to hosting your own content?Opera knows about facebook, youtube, etc.
They are offering users the capability to host their OWN content easily.
Did they say you'll want to do that in every scenario?
Nope. They seem to have stated that there might be situations where you want to host your own content, rather than uploading it to some other location before somebody has the ability to download it.They acknowledge that central servers for content are valid and necessary.
They are simply providing users with an easy way to forgo that IF they want to.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375243</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376217</id>
	<title>It depends on the location</title>
	<author>m\_gol</author>
	<datestamp>1245348660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In my country (Poland) Opera has as much as 7\% of the market; this IS something. Of course I agree they don't do as well worldwide.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In my country ( Poland ) Opera has as much as 7 \ % of the market ; this IS something .
Of course I agree they do n't do as well worldwide .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my country (Poland) Opera has as much as 7\% of the market; this IS something.
Of course I agree they don't do as well worldwide.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375155</id>
	<title>Forgive my ignorance but..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245344580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A "Hail Mary" is something Catholics do, right?  What's the meaning of it when used in a metaphorical sense?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A " Hail Mary " is something Catholics do , right ?
What 's the meaning of it when used in a metaphorical sense ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A "Hail Mary" is something Catholics do, right?
What's the meaning of it when used in a metaphorical sense?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374583</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28386341</id>
	<title>Re:I thought we were against cloud computing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245442560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Slashdot isn't one guy.</p><p>Or... wait a minute!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Slashdot is n't one guy.Or... wait a minute !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slashdot isn't one guy.Or... wait a minute!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375669</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376257</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245348840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Opera is is in trouble.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.</p></div><p>No it is not. Ever heard of the Wii or the Nintendo DSi or the Nintendo DS Browser or Opera Mini? How about some little companies like: Motorola, Nokia, Sony Ericsson, Samsung or T-Mobile?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera is is in trouble .
.No it is not .
Ever heard of the Wii or the Nintendo DSi or the Nintendo DS Browser or Opera Mini ?
How about some little companies like : Motorola , Nokia , Sony Ericsson , Samsung or T-Mobile ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera is is in trouble.
.No it is not.
Ever heard of the Wii or the Nintendo DSi or the Nintendo DS Browser or Opera Mini?
How about some little companies like: Motorola, Nokia, Sony Ericsson, Samsung or T-Mobile?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28381695</id>
	<title>Re:Epic Fail</title>
	<author>hkmwbz</author>
	<datestamp>1245323940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So because you don't understand it, no one does? The author of the article was obviously completely clueless. Opera, a desktop software company? No dammit, Opera is a browser company. The less time you spend in your desktop apps and the more time you spend in their web browser, the more money they will be making. You are either extremely biased, and will reject anything Opera does out of hand, or you are extremely ignorant and possibly naive, and will believe anything some ill-informed "journalist" writes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So because you do n't understand it , no one does ?
The author of the article was obviously completely clueless .
Opera , a desktop software company ?
No dammit , Opera is a browser company .
The less time you spend in your desktop apps and the more time you spend in their web browser , the more money they will be making .
You are either extremely biased , and will reject anything Opera does out of hand , or you are extremely ignorant and possibly naive , and will believe anything some ill-informed " journalist " writes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So because you don't understand it, no one does?
The author of the article was obviously completely clueless.
Opera, a desktop software company?
No dammit, Opera is a browser company.
The less time you spend in your desktop apps and the more time you spend in their web browser, the more money they will be making.
You are either extremely biased, and will reject anything Opera does out of hand, or you are extremely ignorant and possibly naive, and will believe anything some ill-informed "journalist" writes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374555</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375835</id>
	<title>Re:Pffft... trojan horse</title>
	<author>dwiget001</author>
	<datestamp>1245347280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;</p><p>No. If Microsoft had done it, Microsoft and hundreds of paid employees, consultants, analysts and the like would have hailed it as *innovative*.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; No .
If Microsoft had done it , Microsoft and hundreds of paid employees , consultants , analysts and the like would have hailed it as * innovative * .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;No.
If Microsoft had done it, Microsoft and hundreds of paid employees, consultants, analysts and the like would have hailed it as *innovative*.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374835</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376755</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245350760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nintendo DS and Wii both use Opera. I'm sure there are more of those out there than iPhones.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nintendo DS and Wii both use Opera .
I 'm sure there are more of those out there than iPhones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nintendo DS and Wii both use Opera.
I'm sure there are more of those out there than iPhones.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28378867</id>
	<title>Re:I would love this service</title>
	<author>hkmwbz</author>
	<datestamp>1245356880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was having problems too. Turns out the launch was so successful their servers kept getting overloaded<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was having problems too .
Turns out the launch was so successful their servers kept getting overloaded : D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was having problems too.
Turns out the launch was so successful their servers kept getting overloaded :D</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375385</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28385603</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245349020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In Russia the all 7 iPhone users do not have a chance against Opera.</p><p>http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile\_browser-RU-daily-20081201-20090618-bar</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In Russia the all 7 iPhone users do not have a chance against Opera.http : //gs.statcounter.com/ # mobile \ _browser-RU-daily-20081201-20090618-bar</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Russia the all 7 iPhone users do not have a chance against Opera.http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile\_browser-RU-daily-20081201-20090618-bar</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374775</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28377837</id>
	<title>Re:I thought we were against cloud computing?</title>
	<author>quercus.aeternam</author>
	<datestamp>1245354240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, part of the problem is that the term 'cloud' is somewhat nebulous at best.</p><p>I'm pretty sure that the main issue with cloud computing is the loss of personal control of data, trusting in 'the man', etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , part of the problem is that the term 'cloud ' is somewhat nebulous at best.I 'm pretty sure that the main issue with cloud computing is the loss of personal control of data , trusting in 'the man ' , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, part of the problem is that the term 'cloud' is somewhat nebulous at best.I'm pretty sure that the main issue with cloud computing is the loss of personal control of data, trusting in 'the man', etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375669</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375243</id>
	<title>Cloud = silver lining</title>
	<author>itsdapead</author>
	<datestamp>1245344940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>ensuring all of their exchanges pass through Opera's servers first. 'That's an effective way to get around technical difficulties like NAT firewalls,</p></div><p>Well, ever since broadband came in people could run home servers if they want - OS X comes with a built in web server and the world hasn't ended. Lots of NAS boxes today include click-and-drool webservers and you can get dynamic DNS if you don't have a fixed addresss.

</p><p>However - I've got a better idea: why don't they just store the stuff the users want to share on the <i>central servers</i>? I mean, hard disc space is about fsck all per megabyte these days,
the servers can run 24/7, have a super-fast connection to teh interweb (not an ADSL line with lousy upload speed) and have the latest security patches applied daily by dusky, nubile virgins (well, 1 out of 3 ain't bad). Even if the server does get hacked then it doesn't affect the end user. Much better than leaving your PC on all the time, or having someone suddenly trying to download a video when you're in the middle of a networked deathmatch...
</p><p>Then there would be loads of material on the servers, so people would actually want to visit them. Hey, they could even attach comments and stuff to people's photos, videos, news articles and things to say whether they liked them.
</p><p>You could call it MyCRT, FlipR, ArseBook or ColonPling or something...
</p><p>Should I patent this, perhaps?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>ensuring all of their exchanges pass through Opera 's servers first .
'That 's an effective way to get around technical difficulties like NAT firewalls,Well , ever since broadband came in people could run home servers if they want - OS X comes with a built in web server and the world has n't ended .
Lots of NAS boxes today include click-and-drool webservers and you can get dynamic DNS if you do n't have a fixed addresss .
However - I 've got a better idea : why do n't they just store the stuff the users want to share on the central servers ?
I mean , hard disc space is about fsck all per megabyte these days , the servers can run 24/7 , have a super-fast connection to teh interweb ( not an ADSL line with lousy upload speed ) and have the latest security patches applied daily by dusky , nubile virgins ( well , 1 out of 3 ai n't bad ) .
Even if the server does get hacked then it does n't affect the end user .
Much better than leaving your PC on all the time , or having someone suddenly trying to download a video when you 're in the middle of a networked deathmatch.. . Then there would be loads of material on the servers , so people would actually want to visit them .
Hey , they could even attach comments and stuff to people 's photos , videos , news articles and things to say whether they liked them .
You could call it MyCRT , FlipR , ArseBook or ColonPling or something.. . Should I patent this , perhaps ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ensuring all of their exchanges pass through Opera's servers first.
'That's an effective way to get around technical difficulties like NAT firewalls,Well, ever since broadband came in people could run home servers if they want - OS X comes with a built in web server and the world hasn't ended.
Lots of NAS boxes today include click-and-drool webservers and you can get dynamic DNS if you don't have a fixed addresss.
However - I've got a better idea: why don't they just store the stuff the users want to share on the central servers?
I mean, hard disc space is about fsck all per megabyte these days,
the servers can run 24/7, have a super-fast connection to teh interweb (not an ADSL line with lousy upload speed) and have the latest security patches applied daily by dusky, nubile virgins (well, 1 out of 3 ain't bad).
Even if the server does get hacked then it doesn't affect the end user.
Much better than leaving your PC on all the time, or having someone suddenly trying to download a video when you're in the middle of a networked deathmatch...
Then there would be loads of material on the servers, so people would actually want to visit them.
Hey, they could even attach comments and stuff to people's photos, videos, news articles and things to say whether they liked them.
You could call it MyCRT, FlipR, ArseBook or ColonPling or something...
Should I patent this, perhaps?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375397</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>Carewolf</author>
	<datestamp>1245345540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>As for the mobile market, it is being surpassed by iPhone.</p></div></blockquote><p>Maybe in Apple branded phones, but on all other brands they are way ahead<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>Btw, non-Apple branded phones is more than 95\% of the market even in the US, more than 99\% of the market outside the US.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As for the mobile market , it is being surpassed by iPhone.Maybe in Apple branded phones , but on all other brands they are way ahead ; ) Btw , non-Apple branded phones is more than 95 \ % of the market even in the US , more than 99 \ % of the market outside the US .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As for the mobile market, it is being surpassed by iPhone.Maybe in Apple branded phones, but on all other brands they are way ahead ;)Btw, non-Apple branded phones is more than 95\% of the market even in the US, more than 99\% of the market outside the US.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375373</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>sopssa</author>
	<datestamp>1245345480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Opera is not in trouble, their marketshare has only growth aswell when people have got off IE. And even so, it varies A LOT by region. In CIS regions (Russia, Ukraine etc) <a href="http://my.opera.com/dstorey/blog/2009/03/16/a-look-at-desktop-market-share-cis-edition" title="opera.com">Opera has 25-50\% marketshare</a> [opera.com], so in many of the countries it is actually the #1 browser, kicking both IE and FF far behind. And that is a huge amount of people using Opera.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera is not in trouble , their marketshare has only growth aswell when people have got off IE .
And even so , it varies A LOT by region .
In CIS regions ( Russia , Ukraine etc ) Opera has 25-50 \ % marketshare [ opera.com ] , so in many of the countries it is actually the # 1 browser , kicking both IE and FF far behind .
And that is a huge amount of people using Opera .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera is not in trouble, their marketshare has only growth aswell when people have got off IE.
And even so, it varies A LOT by region.
In CIS regions (Russia, Ukraine etc) Opera has 25-50\% marketshare [opera.com], so in many of the countries it is actually the #1 browser, kicking both IE and FF far behind.
And that is a huge amount of people using Opera.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375349</id>
	<title>Re:free car?!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245345360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's over nine thousaaaaaaaaaaaaaand penises!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's over nine thousaaaaaaaaaaaaaand penises !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's over nine thousaaaaaaaaaaaaaand penises!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374551</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376899</id>
	<title>Re:Cloud = silver lining</title>
	<author>mythandros</author>
	<datestamp>1245351360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Arsebook is my favorite but that's already a (surprise!!) porn site.  ColongPling, however, seems to be free.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Arsebook is my favorite but that 's already a ( surprise ! !
) porn site .
ColongPling , however , seems to be free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Arsebook is my favorite but that's already a (surprise!!
) porn site.
ColongPling, however, seems to be free.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375243</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375485</id>
	<title>Re:Not to mention security, bandwidth, etc.</title>
	<author>rs79</author>
	<datestamp>1245345960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i> <b>"Data Center Knowledge has a roundup that looks at some of the problems with this approach, including security issues related to running a server on a desktop app and bandwidth consumption. If your browser-hosted site gets busy, you think your ISP won't notice?</b></i> "</p><p>I don't think you understand what it's supposed to be used for. If you want to "host a web site" in the familiar sense, you rent some webspace on a server somewhere. This is for stuff other than that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Data Center Knowledge has a roundup that looks at some of the problems with this approach , including security issues related to running a server on a desktop app and bandwidth consumption .
If your browser-hosted site gets busy , you think your ISP wo n't notice ?
" I do n't think you understand what it 's supposed to be used for .
If you want to " host a web site " in the familiar sense , you rent some webspace on a server somewhere .
This is for stuff other than that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> "Data Center Knowledge has a roundup that looks at some of the problems with this approach, including security issues related to running a server on a desktop app and bandwidth consumption.
If your browser-hosted site gets busy, you think your ISP won't notice?
"I don't think you understand what it's supposed to be used for.
If you want to "host a web site" in the familiar sense, you rent some webspace on a server somewhere.
This is for stuff other than that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374543</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376007</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>CarpetShark</author>
	<datestamp>1245347820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>As for the mobile market, it is being surpassed by iPhone.</p></div></blockquote><p>More generally, it's being surpassed by the KHTML-based Webkit, not just on Safari/iPhone, but soon on Nokia's Qt as well.</p><p>I'm kind of disappointed with where KDE has gone with v4, but even if it dies out, Webkit, DBUS, and LGPL Qt are all pretty amazing legacies.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As for the mobile market , it is being surpassed by iPhone.More generally , it 's being surpassed by the KHTML-based Webkit , not just on Safari/iPhone , but soon on Nokia 's Qt as well.I 'm kind of disappointed with where KDE has gone with v4 , but even if it dies out , Webkit , DBUS , and LGPL Qt are all pretty amazing legacies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As for the mobile market, it is being surpassed by iPhone.More generally, it's being surpassed by the KHTML-based Webkit, not just on Safari/iPhone, but soon on Nokia's Qt as well.I'm kind of disappointed with where KDE has gone with v4, but even if it dies out, Webkit, DBUS, and LGPL Qt are all pretty amazing legacies.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376925</id>
	<title>Yo dawg.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245351420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I heard you like the web.  So I put a webserver in your webbrowser so you can serve while you surf.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I heard you like the web .
So I put a webserver in your webbrowser so you can serve while you surf .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I heard you like the web.
So I put a webserver in your webbrowser so you can serve while you surf.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374503</id>
	<title>Hail first post.....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245341940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...that is all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...that is all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...that is all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375433</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>Mystra\_x64</author>
	<datestamp>1245345720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>w3schools stats represent only their own site. What are you talking about?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>w3schools stats represent only their own site .
What are you talking about ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>w3schools stats represent only their own site.
What are you talking about?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28379267</id>
	<title>Re:The little things matter more</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245358140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Odd. Middle Click the first time usually asks you what you want it to map to... It certainly maps to scrolling on WinXP with O9.64<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... for me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Odd .
Middle Click the first time usually asks you what you want it to map to... It certainly maps to scrolling on WinXP with O9.64 ... for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Odd.
Middle Click the first time usually asks you what you want it to map to... It certainly maps to scrolling on WinXP with O9.64 ... for me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374883</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245342960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Opera <b>is</b> is in trouble. .
<br>
Its desktop share is <a href="http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers\_stats.asp" title="w3schools.com" rel="nofollow">less</a> [w3schools.com] than even Chrome.
<br>
As for the mobile market, it is being surpassed by iPhone. <br>See the arstechnica analysis of misleading statcounter results <a href="http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2009/06/opera-bests-iphones-mobile-browser-market-shareor-does-it.ars" title="arstechnica.com" rel="nofollow">here</a> [arstechnica.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera is is in trouble .
. Its desktop share is less [ w3schools.com ] than even Chrome .
As for the mobile market , it is being surpassed by iPhone .
See the arstechnica analysis of misleading statcounter results here [ arstechnica.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera is is in trouble.
.

Its desktop share is less [w3schools.com] than even Chrome.
As for the mobile market, it is being surpassed by iPhone.
See the arstechnica analysis of misleading statcounter results here [arstechnica.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376255</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>BasilBrush</author>
	<datestamp>1245348840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You need to talk a closer look at your source. Mobile Safari runs on both the iPhone AND the iPod Touch (which they've labelled as iTouch). Add those two together and you'll see Mobile Safari is comfortably ahead of Opera Mini.</p><p>There does seem to be something interesting happening around the 7th of May on that graph though where there's rapid switch of a lot of users from the iPhone line to the Opera line.  Given the ineptness of the categorising of that graph though, it seems it's most likely another goof on the part of statcounter.com.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You need to talk a closer look at your source .
Mobile Safari runs on both the iPhone AND the iPod Touch ( which they 've labelled as iTouch ) .
Add those two together and you 'll see Mobile Safari is comfortably ahead of Opera Mini.There does seem to be something interesting happening around the 7th of May on that graph though where there 's rapid switch of a lot of users from the iPhone line to the Opera line .
Given the ineptness of the categorising of that graph though , it seems it 's most likely another goof on the part of statcounter.com .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You need to talk a closer look at your source.
Mobile Safari runs on both the iPhone AND the iPod Touch (which they've labelled as iTouch).
Add those two together and you'll see Mobile Safari is comfortably ahead of Opera Mini.There does seem to be something interesting happening around the 7th of May on that graph though where there's rapid switch of a lot of users from the iPhone line to the Opera line.
Given the ineptness of the categorising of that graph though, it seems it's most likely another goof on the part of statcounter.com.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376045</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245348000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I sincerely hope all of the staff are able to get good jobs with the competition. We win if they take their talent to their competition.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I sincerely hope all of the staff are able to get good jobs with the competition .
We win if they take their talent to their competition .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I sincerely hope all of the staff are able to get good jobs with the competition.
We win if they take their talent to their competition.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376821</id>
	<title>Re:Epic Fail</title>
	<author>keefus\_a</author>
	<datestamp>1245351000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well I saw it a little differently.  It looks to me like an attempt to duplicate some of the functions offered by Sharepoint and Messenger, but in a browser.  Add in the API and you're steps from offering all of the functions.  Everyone that doesn't use IE should be applauding this.  One of the biggest hangups on adopting non-IE6 browsers is the massive corporate intranet establishment.  At least this offers some functionality that a PHB might find attractive, and therefore at least a little motivation to move to a standards based intranet.  Keep in mind that you can "direct connect" Unite without going through Opera servers.  And I expect, if it catches on, there will be some sort of appliance offered that can privately act as the central server.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well I saw it a little differently .
It looks to me like an attempt to duplicate some of the functions offered by Sharepoint and Messenger , but in a browser .
Add in the API and you 're steps from offering all of the functions .
Everyone that does n't use IE should be applauding this .
One of the biggest hangups on adopting non-IE6 browsers is the massive corporate intranet establishment .
At least this offers some functionality that a PHB might find attractive , and therefore at least a little motivation to move to a standards based intranet .
Keep in mind that you can " direct connect " Unite without going through Opera servers .
And I expect , if it catches on , there will be some sort of appliance offered that can privately act as the central server .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well I saw it a little differently.
It looks to me like an attempt to duplicate some of the functions offered by Sharepoint and Messenger, but in a browser.
Add in the API and you're steps from offering all of the functions.
Everyone that doesn't use IE should be applauding this.
One of the biggest hangups on adopting non-IE6 browsers is the massive corporate intranet establishment.
At least this offers some functionality that a PHB might find attractive, and therefore at least a little motivation to move to a standards based intranet.
Keep in mind that you can "direct connect" Unite without going through Opera servers.
And I expect, if it catches on, there will be some sort of appliance offered that can privately act as the central server.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374555</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375549</id>
	<title>Way around net blocking?</title>
	<author>mdm-adph</author>
	<datestamp>1245346200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I saw someone talking about this recently and said it would be a good way to get around things like net filters and help with the spread of information (like with the current mess happening in Iran).</p><p>I mean, that is until they all start blocking Operaunite.com, right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I saw someone talking about this recently and said it would be a good way to get around things like net filters and help with the spread of information ( like with the current mess happening in Iran ) .I mean , that is until they all start blocking Operaunite.com , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I saw someone talking about this recently and said it would be a good way to get around things like net filters and help with the spread of information (like with the current mess happening in Iran).I mean, that is until they all start blocking Operaunite.com, right?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376553</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>Ash Vince</author>
	<datestamp>1245349980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The summary makes it sound like Opera is making a last ditch effort to stay relevant, which is clearly not the case. Opera has always been in a dominant position in mobile browser marketshare.</p></div><p>I am really surprised by that link, so thanks.</p><p>Does anyone know why the Windows Mobile version of IE does not seem to appear on the list though? I find it very difficult to believe it lags behind Sony in the Other section. Although after discussing this in our office we did just find that both of us with Windows Mobile phones have installed Opera so maybe it is not that surprising.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The summary makes it sound like Opera is making a last ditch effort to stay relevant , which is clearly not the case .
Opera has always been in a dominant position in mobile browser marketshare.I am really surprised by that link , so thanks.Does anyone know why the Windows Mobile version of IE does not seem to appear on the list though ?
I find it very difficult to believe it lags behind Sony in the Other section .
Although after discussing this in our office we did just find that both of us with Windows Mobile phones have installed Opera so maybe it is not that surprising .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The summary makes it sound like Opera is making a last ditch effort to stay relevant, which is clearly not the case.
Opera has always been in a dominant position in mobile browser marketshare.I am really surprised by that link, so thanks.Does anyone know why the Windows Mobile version of IE does not seem to appear on the list though?
I find it very difficult to believe it lags behind Sony in the Other section.
Although after discussing this in our office we did just find that both of us with Windows Mobile phones have installed Opera so maybe it is not that surprising.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375339</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>mpapet</author>
	<datestamp>1245345360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1. That was a horrible summary.  Maybe the point is to generate some flamebait?<br>2. Every case you give to justify Opera's weakness are free-ish.  As in something else (not the browser) is generating the revenue.  Opera has to generate revenue through their browser and they have managed to stay in business despite other companies giving away different browsers.  That suggests Opera is delivering way more value than the other free browsers.  Good for them.<br>3. This idea will be copied because it is useful.  It is a very long time in coming.  It's a great feature that neither Apple or Microsoft can implement easily because they want their marriage to the media distributors to be a happy one.<br>4. To borrow from another post, hopefully consumers will latch onto this one to see the one of the grander purposes built into the Internet.  Many powerful parties (ex. media distributors) would like nothing more than to maintain a one-way sh!t pipe of the current, common Internet experience.  Consumers deserve to have all of the features of  the Internet available to them.</p><p>No, I don't use Opera.  I never particularly cared for it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 .
That was a horrible summary .
Maybe the point is to generate some flamebait ? 2 .
Every case you give to justify Opera 's weakness are free-ish .
As in something else ( not the browser ) is generating the revenue .
Opera has to generate revenue through their browser and they have managed to stay in business despite other companies giving away different browsers .
That suggests Opera is delivering way more value than the other free browsers .
Good for them.3 .
This idea will be copied because it is useful .
It is a very long time in coming .
It 's a great feature that neither Apple or Microsoft can implement easily because they want their marriage to the media distributors to be a happy one.4 .
To borrow from another post , hopefully consumers will latch onto this one to see the one of the grander purposes built into the Internet .
Many powerful parties ( ex .
media distributors ) would like nothing more than to maintain a one-way sh ! t pipe of the current , common Internet experience .
Consumers deserve to have all of the features of the Internet available to them.No , I do n't use Opera .
I never particularly cared for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.
That was a horrible summary.
Maybe the point is to generate some flamebait?2.
Every case you give to justify Opera's weakness are free-ish.
As in something else (not the browser) is generating the revenue.
Opera has to generate revenue through their browser and they have managed to stay in business despite other companies giving away different browsers.
That suggests Opera is delivering way more value than the other free browsers.
Good for them.3.
This idea will be copied because it is useful.
It is a very long time in coming.
It's a great feature that neither Apple or Microsoft can implement easily because they want their marriage to the media distributors to be a happy one.4.
To borrow from another post, hopefully consumers will latch onto this one to see the one of the grander purposes built into the Internet.
Many powerful parties (ex.
media distributors) would like nothing more than to maintain a one-way sh!t pipe of the current, common Internet experience.
Consumers deserve to have all of the features of  the Internet available to them.No, I don't use Opera.
I never particularly cared for it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375835
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28377293
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375243
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28385539
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374775
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376715
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376589
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376257
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28386341
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375669
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376045
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375433
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375485
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376553
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28377373
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375373
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28378321
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28381635
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375671
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375243
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28378473
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28378073
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376007
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376057
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376255
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28379267
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374883
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376821
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374555
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376755
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375039
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376631
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375243
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28381053
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375359
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375397
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28385603
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374775
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375557
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375243
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376151
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374993
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28386233
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375257
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28377539
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374993
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376479
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375243
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28381741
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375091
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375349
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374551
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375155
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374583
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28378817
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28379157
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375243
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28378867
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375385
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375879
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374555
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28377767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375091
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375339
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28381171
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375257
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28382135
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374993
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28381695
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374555
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28377839
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375329
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375155
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374583
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376899
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375243
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375365
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1419227_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28377837
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375669
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1419227.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374883
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28379267
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1419227.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374555
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376821
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375879
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28381695
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1419227.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374551
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375349
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1419227.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375027
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1419227.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28377573
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1419227.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375695
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1419227.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375385
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28378867
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1419227.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375019
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1419227.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28383451
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1419227.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374583
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375155
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375329
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375291
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1419227.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374543
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28377373
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374993
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28377539
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28382135
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376151
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375485
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1419227.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374567
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375039
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376553
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376255
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376045
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376217
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375359
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374775
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28385603
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28385539
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374733
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375365
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376057
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28381635
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375397
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28381053
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376007
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376257
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28378473
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375373
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28378817
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376755
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375453
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28378321
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376715
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28378073
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28377839
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376589
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375433
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375339
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375091
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28381741
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28377767
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1419227.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375477
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1419227.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375257
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28386233
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28381171
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1419227.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375243
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376899
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28377293
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375557
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375671
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28379157
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376631
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28376479
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1419227.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375669
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28377837
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28386341
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1419227.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28374835
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1419227.28375835
</commentlist>
</conversation>
