<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_12_1341218</id>
	<title>Android Application Development</title>
	<author>samzenpus</author>
	<datestamp>1255371420000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="mailto:bittercode@gmail" rel="nofollow">stoolpigeon</a> writes <i>"Google's mobile OS <a href="http://code.google.com/android/">Android</a> has received plenty of press.  As with a lot of Google products, there was much anticipation before any devices were even available.  Now a number of phones are available, with many more coming out world-wide in the near future.  Part of the lure of Android is the openness of the platform and the freely available tools for development.  The SDK and accompanying Eclipse plug-in give the would be creator of the next great Android application everything they need to make their idea reality.  The bar to entry in the official Google Android Marketplace is very low and it doesn't seem to be much of a stretch to predict that the number of developers working on Android is only going to grow.  As with any hot technology the number of books will grow as well and O'Reilly's <em>Android Application Development</em> has jumped into the fray, promising to help budding Android developers what they need to get started."</i> Read on for the rest of JR's review.</htmltext>
<tokenext>stoolpigeon writes " Google 's mobile OS Android has received plenty of press .
As with a lot of Google products , there was much anticipation before any devices were even available .
Now a number of phones are available , with many more coming out world-wide in the near future .
Part of the lure of Android is the openness of the platform and the freely available tools for development .
The SDK and accompanying Eclipse plug-in give the would be creator of the next great Android application everything they need to make their idea reality .
The bar to entry in the official Google Android Marketplace is very low and it does n't seem to be much of a stretch to predict that the number of developers working on Android is only going to grow .
As with any hot technology the number of books will grow as well and O'Reilly 's Android Application Development has jumped into the fray , promising to help budding Android developers what they need to get started .
" Read on for the rest of JR 's review .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>stoolpigeon writes "Google's mobile OS Android has received plenty of press.
As with a lot of Google products, there was much anticipation before any devices were even available.
Now a number of phones are available, with many more coming out world-wide in the near future.
Part of the lure of Android is the openness of the platform and the freely available tools for development.
The SDK and accompanying Eclipse plug-in give the would be creator of the next great Android application everything they need to make their idea reality.
The bar to entry in the official Google Android Marketplace is very low and it doesn't seem to be much of a stretch to predict that the number of developers working on Android is only going to grow.
As with any hot technology the number of books will grow as well and O'Reilly's Android Application Development has jumped into the fray, promising to help budding Android developers what they need to get started.
" Read on for the rest of JR's review.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722797</id>
	<title>Re:Google != Android</title>
	<author>douglas.barton</author>
	<datestamp>1255378860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>OpenHandsetAlliance = Google + Network Carriers + Hardware Manufacturers; <br> <br>

peoplesChoice = People + OpenMeshPoint2PointNetwork + OpenSoftware + OpenHardware;
<br> <br>
Start making it, or Microsoft/Danger says "all your data are belong to us"</htmltext>
<tokenext>OpenHandsetAlliance = Google + Network Carriers + Hardware Manufacturers ; peoplesChoice = People + OpenMeshPoint2PointNetwork + OpenSoftware + OpenHardware ; Start making it , or Microsoft/Danger says " all your data are belong to us "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OpenHandsetAlliance = Google + Network Carriers + Hardware Manufacturers;  

peoplesChoice = People + OpenMeshPoint2PointNetwork + OpenSoftware + OpenHardware;
 
Start making it, or Microsoft/Danger says "all your data are belong to us"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722473</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29724925</id>
	<title>Re:Solidity of the platform?</title>
	<author>0xdeadbeef</author>
	<datestamp>1255344600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The one really big hurdle which Android faces and which WinMo and iPhone have worked around is the problem of a moving target.</i></p><p>What does this mean? Do you have any understanding of what you're talking about? Please explain to us how these other platforms "worked around" this issue.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The one really big hurdle which Android faces and which WinMo and iPhone have worked around is the problem of a moving target.What does this mean ?
Do you have any understanding of what you 're talking about ?
Please explain to us how these other platforms " worked around " this issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The one really big hurdle which Android faces and which WinMo and iPhone have worked around is the problem of a moving target.What does this mean?
Do you have any understanding of what you're talking about?
Please explain to us how these other platforms "worked around" this issue.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29721975</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722747</id>
	<title>Re:Google != Android</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255378680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do you use maps?... what do you use?<br>Do you use mail?... what do you use?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you use maps ? .. .
what do you use ? Do you use mail ? .. .
what do you use ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you use maps?...
what do you use?Do you use mail?...
what do you use?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722473</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29726787</id>
	<title>Is Nokia maemo / N900 an android killer?</title>
	<author>cenc</author>
	<datestamp>1255354260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have to hand it to Google for trying to break the proprietary locked cell phone one trick pony problem, but so far everything I have seen indicates that we just have another locked up OS. This is free software for the handset makers, not the end user.</p><p>What we want and need is a fully Linux, no bs platform, no hidden anything. So far, the nokia n900 looks like it will do that. Especially with the announcement of the qt libraries will be in the next versions of maemo.</p><p>I am sick of being treated like a criminal for jail-breaking / accessing my own hardware and software that I payed lots of money to own and use as I see fit. F*** Google and all their handset Android makers. I am voting with my dollars and my companies dollars, and going with a full linux distro I can customize as needed for my business.</p><p>Now I just hope Nokia does not get stupid and drop the ball.   They seem to have a tendency to loose their momentum.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have to hand it to Google for trying to break the proprietary locked cell phone one trick pony problem , but so far everything I have seen indicates that we just have another locked up OS .
This is free software for the handset makers , not the end user.What we want and need is a fully Linux , no bs platform , no hidden anything .
So far , the nokia n900 looks like it will do that .
Especially with the announcement of the qt libraries will be in the next versions of maemo.I am sick of being treated like a criminal for jail-breaking / accessing my own hardware and software that I payed lots of money to own and use as I see fit .
F * * * Google and all their handset Android makers .
I am voting with my dollars and my companies dollars , and going with a full linux distro I can customize as needed for my business.Now I just hope Nokia does not get stupid and drop the ball .
They seem to have a tendency to loose their momentum .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have to hand it to Google for trying to break the proprietary locked cell phone one trick pony problem, but so far everything I have seen indicates that we just have another locked up OS.
This is free software for the handset makers, not the end user.What we want and need is a fully Linux, no bs platform, no hidden anything.
So far, the nokia n900 looks like it will do that.
Especially with the announcement of the qt libraries will be in the next versions of maemo.I am sick of being treated like a criminal for jail-breaking / accessing my own hardware and software that I payed lots of money to own and use as I see fit.
F*** Google and all their handset Android makers.
I am voting with my dollars and my companies dollars, and going with a full linux distro I can customize as needed for my business.Now I just hope Nokia does not get stupid and drop the ball.
They seem to have a tendency to loose their momentum.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29727137</id>
	<title>Re:Solidity of the platform?</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1255356720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The one really big hurdle which Android faces and which WinMo and iPhone have worked around is the problem of a moving target. Since Android is a work in progress, with OEMs deciding which version to release, there is only a core set of functionality that could be expected to exist across all versions on all phones. Now, this core set of functionality may be very large and useful, but without a rigorous breakdown of the differences between devices it still feels like a crapshoot.<br> <br>

Attention to this "always in beta" aspect of developing on the Android platform would have been nice. Of course, Google just wants people developing apps and not worrying about how things may change. Unfortunately, this is a serious concern for developers of enterprise applications, and it may end up being Android's Achilles Tendon in the long run.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>

Parent does not understand nor has used Android.<br> <br>

Android is no longer in beta, its a finished product. Android is always improving which presents some of the issue you describe but not many. What you'll find is that across different android phones there are a great deal of similarities, its like comparing a Windows laptop made and configured by Dell to a Windows laptop made and configured by Lenovo. Both use the same OS but change the default programs, use a different interface for connecting to wireless networks and have a different default background, this has not presented an issue with selling laptops.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The one really big hurdle which Android faces and which WinMo and iPhone have worked around is the problem of a moving target .
Since Android is a work in progress , with OEMs deciding which version to release , there is only a core set of functionality that could be expected to exist across all versions on all phones .
Now , this core set of functionality may be very large and useful , but without a rigorous breakdown of the differences between devices it still feels like a crapshoot .
Attention to this " always in beta " aspect of developing on the Android platform would have been nice .
Of course , Google just wants people developing apps and not worrying about how things may change .
Unfortunately , this is a serious concern for developers of enterprise applications , and it may end up being Android 's Achilles Tendon in the long run .
Parent does not understand nor has used Android .
Android is no longer in beta , its a finished product .
Android is always improving which presents some of the issue you describe but not many .
What you 'll find is that across different android phones there are a great deal of similarities , its like comparing a Windows laptop made and configured by Dell to a Windows laptop made and configured by Lenovo .
Both use the same OS but change the default programs , use a different interface for connecting to wireless networks and have a different default background , this has not presented an issue with selling laptops .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The one really big hurdle which Android faces and which WinMo and iPhone have worked around is the problem of a moving target.
Since Android is a work in progress, with OEMs deciding which version to release, there is only a core set of functionality that could be expected to exist across all versions on all phones.
Now, this core set of functionality may be very large and useful, but without a rigorous breakdown of the differences between devices it still feels like a crapshoot.
Attention to this "always in beta" aspect of developing on the Android platform would have been nice.
Of course, Google just wants people developing apps and not worrying about how things may change.
Unfortunately, this is a serious concern for developers of enterprise applications, and it may end up being Android's Achilles Tendon in the long run.
Parent does not understand nor has used Android.
Android is no longer in beta, its a finished product.
Android is always improving which presents some of the issue you describe but not many.
What you'll find is that across different android phones there are a great deal of similarities, its like comparing a Windows laptop made and configured by Dell to a Windows laptop made and configured by Lenovo.
Both use the same OS but change the default programs, use a different interface for connecting to wireless networks and have a different default background, this has not presented an issue with selling laptops.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29721975</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29727113</id>
	<title>new to development</title>
	<author>drkwatr</author>
	<datestamp>1255356480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I always think it is appropriate to have a section on getting things setup. If you are going to write a book about development for a platform you better be ready to be thorough. If you start assuming things then your book will suck, and believe me I have had to go through a lot that have. The only exception I would make is if you have something like "advanced" in the title or something. I have been programming for over 20 years, and anytime I have to setup anything that isn't integrated I need some help to get things to see each other. Android is no different. Because of its open source nature and its ability to run on as many platforms as possible can present a slight challenge to get things working. You can't always rely on some quick tutorials since they often leave out the meat. I had to deal with some that would show you how to do something, but completely left out the part about adding anything to the manifest. It still beats iPhone development whereby XCode would eat perfectly good signature files. I have to admit I am a little biased on iPhone since I can't stand Objective-C and would rather on that platform go back to straight assembly. In closing it is always better for me and others to skip over something rather than having to find that material later on the author assumed we knew.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I always think it is appropriate to have a section on getting things setup .
If you are going to write a book about development for a platform you better be ready to be thorough .
If you start assuming things then your book will suck , and believe me I have had to go through a lot that have .
The only exception I would make is if you have something like " advanced " in the title or something .
I have been programming for over 20 years , and anytime I have to setup anything that is n't integrated I need some help to get things to see each other .
Android is no different .
Because of its open source nature and its ability to run on as many platforms as possible can present a slight challenge to get things working .
You ca n't always rely on some quick tutorials since they often leave out the meat .
I had to deal with some that would show you how to do something , but completely left out the part about adding anything to the manifest .
It still beats iPhone development whereby XCode would eat perfectly good signature files .
I have to admit I am a little biased on iPhone since I ca n't stand Objective-C and would rather on that platform go back to straight assembly .
In closing it is always better for me and others to skip over something rather than having to find that material later on the author assumed we knew .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I always think it is appropriate to have a section on getting things setup.
If you are going to write a book about development for a platform you better be ready to be thorough.
If you start assuming things then your book will suck, and believe me I have had to go through a lot that have.
The only exception I would make is if you have something like "advanced" in the title or something.
I have been programming for over 20 years, and anytime I have to setup anything that isn't integrated I need some help to get things to see each other.
Android is no different.
Because of its open source nature and its ability to run on as many platforms as possible can present a slight challenge to get things working.
You can't always rely on some quick tutorials since they often leave out the meat.
I had to deal with some that would show you how to do something, but completely left out the part about adding anything to the manifest.
It still beats iPhone development whereby XCode would eat perfectly good signature files.
I have to admit I am a little biased on iPhone since I can't stand Objective-C and would rather on that platform go back to straight assembly.
In closing it is always better for me and others to skip over something rather than having to find that material later on the author assumed we knew.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722255</id>
	<title>Re:Android is not an open platform</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255376580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The platform is open.  The distribution on the G1 as customized by T-Mobile and Google requires you to jump through hoops.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The platform is open .
The distribution on the G1 as customized by T-Mobile and Google requires you to jump through hoops .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The platform is open.
The distribution on the G1 as customized by T-Mobile and Google requires you to jump through hoops.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722077</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29724473</id>
	<title>I am a co-author...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255342560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am a co-author of this book. Feel free to ask me about it. If I can't answer, I'll make sure your questions get to the other co-authors and/or our editor.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am a co-author of this book .
Feel free to ask me about it .
If I ca n't answer , I 'll make sure your questions get to the other co-authors and/or our editor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am a co-author of this book.
Feel free to ask me about it.
If I can't answer, I'll make sure your questions get to the other co-authors and/or our editor.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29727193</id>
	<title>Re:I am a co-author...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255357080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do you have hairy balls?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you have hairy balls ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you have hairy balls?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29724473</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29721975</id>
	<title>Solidity of the platform?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255375440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The one really big hurdle which Android faces and which WinMo and iPhone have worked around is the problem of a moving target. Since Android is a work in progress, with OEMs deciding which version to release, there is only a core set of functionality that could be expected to exist across all versions on all phones. Now, this core set of functionality may be very large and useful, but without a rigorous breakdown of the differences between devices it still feels like a crapshoot.</p><p>Attention to this "always in beta" aspect of developing on the Android platform would have been nice. Of course, Google just wants people developing apps and not worrying about how things may change. Unfortunately, this is a serious concern for developers of enterprise applications, and it may end up being Android's Achilles Tendon in the long run.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The one really big hurdle which Android faces and which WinMo and iPhone have worked around is the problem of a moving target .
Since Android is a work in progress , with OEMs deciding which version to release , there is only a core set of functionality that could be expected to exist across all versions on all phones .
Now , this core set of functionality may be very large and useful , but without a rigorous breakdown of the differences between devices it still feels like a crapshoot.Attention to this " always in beta " aspect of developing on the Android platform would have been nice .
Of course , Google just wants people developing apps and not worrying about how things may change .
Unfortunately , this is a serious concern for developers of enterprise applications , and it may end up being Android 's Achilles Tendon in the long run .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The one really big hurdle which Android faces and which WinMo and iPhone have worked around is the problem of a moving target.
Since Android is a work in progress, with OEMs deciding which version to release, there is only a core set of functionality that could be expected to exist across all versions on all phones.
Now, this core set of functionality may be very large and useful, but without a rigorous breakdown of the differences between devices it still feels like a crapshoot.Attention to this "always in beta" aspect of developing on the Android platform would have been nice.
Of course, Google just wants people developing apps and not worrying about how things may change.
Unfortunately, this is a serious concern for developers of enterprise applications, and it may end up being Android's Achilles Tendon in the long run.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29723891</id>
	<title>Re:Solidity of the platform?</title>
	<author>salesgeek</author>
	<datestamp>1255340160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, Android's "always in beta" has been a boon for users.  The package management system is a boon for developers.  I bought my phone nearly one year ago and periodically it tells me there is a system update.  After the update things are usually much better.  It shouldn't be a concern for enterprise developers familiar with developing for Linux - upgrades are handled very automatically, and distributing and installing software is easy.  It really isn't much more different than writing for any stack - where most enterprise programs head south is when they take shortcuts and do silly things like assume since the corporate standard is 1024x768 to design the gui for 1024x768 only.  If anything diversity of hardware will be a boon for Android, just like it was for PCs.</p><p>BTW - if your expectation of a new kind of platform (connected smartphone) is that there be no change in APIs, do us all a favor and retire now.  The platform has a lifetime of less than two years (cell phone contracts force upgrades and change) - it's time to stop expecting it to work like Windows XP.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , Android 's " always in beta " has been a boon for users .
The package management system is a boon for developers .
I bought my phone nearly one year ago and periodically it tells me there is a system update .
After the update things are usually much better .
It should n't be a concern for enterprise developers familiar with developing for Linux - upgrades are handled very automatically , and distributing and installing software is easy .
It really is n't much more different than writing for any stack - where most enterprise programs head south is when they take shortcuts and do silly things like assume since the corporate standard is 1024x768 to design the gui for 1024x768 only .
If anything diversity of hardware will be a boon for Android , just like it was for PCs.BTW - if your expectation of a new kind of platform ( connected smartphone ) is that there be no change in APIs , do us all a favor and retire now .
The platform has a lifetime of less than two years ( cell phone contracts force upgrades and change ) - it 's time to stop expecting it to work like Windows XP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, Android's "always in beta" has been a boon for users.
The package management system is a boon for developers.
I bought my phone nearly one year ago and periodically it tells me there is a system update.
After the update things are usually much better.
It shouldn't be a concern for enterprise developers familiar with developing for Linux - upgrades are handled very automatically, and distributing and installing software is easy.
It really isn't much more different than writing for any stack - where most enterprise programs head south is when they take shortcuts and do silly things like assume since the corporate standard is 1024x768 to design the gui for 1024x768 only.
If anything diversity of hardware will be a boon for Android, just like it was for PCs.BTW - if your expectation of a new kind of platform (connected smartphone) is that there be no change in APIs, do us all a favor and retire now.
The platform has a lifetime of less than two years (cell phone contracts force upgrades and change) - it's time to stop expecting it to work like Windows XP.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29721975</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29721907</id>
	<title>for android users:</title>
	<author>poetmatt</author>
	<datestamp>1255375260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>cyanogenmod + enochx = much more visually appealing, many features added to your phone.</p><p>Rooting is not as complicated as it used to be - meanwhile, there are lots of sites out there on programming an android phone with <a href="http://developer.android.com/reference/packages.html" title="android.com">great info, even google's.</a> [android.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>cyanogenmod + enochx = much more visually appealing , many features added to your phone.Rooting is not as complicated as it used to be - meanwhile , there are lots of sites out there on programming an android phone with great info , even google 's .
[ android.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>cyanogenmod + enochx = much more visually appealing, many features added to your phone.Rooting is not as complicated as it used to be - meanwhile, there are lots of sites out there on programming an android phone with great info, even google's.
[android.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29725453</id>
	<title>More (great) Android Books</title>
	<author>cnkurzke</author>
	<datestamp>1255347000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First off, let me admit that I have not yet read the Book reviewed here, but from reading the review, it sounds like it is targeted mainly to the "new to programming" crowd.</p><p>I have started my Android Development career by reading Mark Murphy's "Busy Coder's" books, and gotten a lot of details out of his Tutorial book.<br><a href="http://commonsware.com/books.html" title="commonsware.com" rel="nofollow">http://commonsware.com/books.html</a> [commonsware.com]</p><p>I'm not affiliated with him, but I'd like to really recommend his books to any developer who has an existing background in either Java and wants to quickly get productive in Android Development.</p><p>As an additional bonus, all of Mark's books are available electronically or as self-published printed paper back's.</p><p>He himself is also a great guy and very active on the Google Android developer forums.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First off , let me admit that I have not yet read the Book reviewed here , but from reading the review , it sounds like it is targeted mainly to the " new to programming " crowd.I have started my Android Development career by reading Mark Murphy 's " Busy Coder 's " books , and gotten a lot of details out of his Tutorial book.http : //commonsware.com/books.html [ commonsware.com ] I 'm not affiliated with him , but I 'd like to really recommend his books to any developer who has an existing background in either Java and wants to quickly get productive in Android Development.As an additional bonus , all of Mark 's books are available electronically or as self-published printed paper back 's.He himself is also a great guy and very active on the Google Android developer forums .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First off, let me admit that I have not yet read the Book reviewed here, but from reading the review, it sounds like it is targeted mainly to the "new to programming" crowd.I have started my Android Development career by reading Mark Murphy's "Busy Coder's" books, and gotten a lot of details out of his Tutorial book.http://commonsware.com/books.html [commonsware.com]I'm not affiliated with him, but I'd like to really recommend his books to any developer who has an existing background in either Java and wants to quickly get productive in Android Development.As an additional bonus, all of Mark's books are available electronically or as self-published printed paper back's.He himself is also a great guy and very active on the Google Android developer forums.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29728191</id>
	<title>Re:Google != Android</title>
	<author>farble1670</author>
	<datestamp>1255365120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>doesn't every app the uses the google (map) SDK require the google components? that's a large percent of the apps. AFAIK, there's no replacement for things like the google SDK, and even if there was, nobody is writing software to utilize it.</p><p>regardless. cyanogen != no google. in 5 steps you can get the latest cyanogenmod with google components, in a google-approved manner.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>does n't every app the uses the google ( map ) SDK require the google components ?
that 's a large percent of the apps .
AFAIK , there 's no replacement for things like the google SDK , and even if there was , nobody is writing software to utilize it.regardless .
cyanogen ! = no google .
in 5 steps you can get the latest cyanogenmod with google components , in a google-approved manner .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>doesn't every app the uses the google (map) SDK require the google components?
that's a large percent of the apps.
AFAIK, there's no replacement for things like the google SDK, and even if there was, nobody is writing software to utilize it.regardless.
cyanogen != no google.
in 5 steps you can get the latest cyanogenmod with google components, in a google-approved manner.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722473</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29724075</id>
	<title>Re:Android is not an open platform</title>
	<author>vxvxvxvx</author>
	<datestamp>1255340880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As a practical matter, agree 100\%. Google allows the cell phone networks to place all their usual restrictions on android. This is the same problem we've had for as long as cell phones have existed. The networks take a decent phone with good features, disable 90\% of the features and functionality, load it up with their logo on everything and their own crappy software, and sell what amounts to a shiny turd to the consumers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a practical matter , agree 100 \ % .
Google allows the cell phone networks to place all their usual restrictions on android .
This is the same problem we 've had for as long as cell phones have existed .
The networks take a decent phone with good features , disable 90 \ % of the features and functionality , load it up with their logo on everything and their own crappy software , and sell what amounts to a shiny turd to the consumers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a practical matter, agree 100\%.
Google allows the cell phone networks to place all their usual restrictions on android.
This is the same problem we've had for as long as cell phones have existed.
The networks take a decent phone with good features, disable 90\% of the features and functionality, load it up with their logo on everything and their own crappy software, and sell what amounts to a shiny turd to the consumers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722077</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29727331</id>
	<title>Definitely an easy platform to develop for.</title>
	<author>Spety</author>
	<datestamp>1255358280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have been working on a windows mobile app in my spare time for the last year or so in C# and it has been a serious pain.  I have really enjoyed all of what the Android API has to offer.  I found it ridiculous that I had to implement my own view stack in windows mobile or see all of my views as separate windows on the device, Android handles this very well on its own.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have been working on a windows mobile app in my spare time for the last year or so in C # and it has been a serious pain .
I have really enjoyed all of what the Android API has to offer .
I found it ridiculous that I had to implement my own view stack in windows mobile or see all of my views as separate windows on the device , Android handles this very well on its own .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have been working on a windows mobile app in my spare time for the last year or so in C# and it has been a serious pain.
I have really enjoyed all of what the Android API has to offer.
I found it ridiculous that I had to implement my own view stack in windows mobile or see all of my views as separate windows on the device, Android handles this very well on its own.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722833</id>
	<title>Re:Google != Android</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255379040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google does the lion's share of Android development, decides what goes in or is left out, keeps release schedules secret,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... Regardless of what you say, Google still practically owns Android.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google does the lion 's share of Android development , decides what goes in or is left out , keeps release schedules secret , ... Regardless of what you say , Google still practically owns Android .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google does the lion's share of Android development, decides what goes in or is left out, keeps release schedules secret, ... Regardless of what you say, Google still practically owns Android.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722473</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29732327</id>
	<title>Moma's Android guide</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255450860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>See<br>http://www.futuredesktop.org/developing\_android\_apps\_on\_ubuntu.html</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seehttp : //www.futuredesktop.org/developing \ _android \ _apps \ _on \ _ubuntu.html</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seehttp://www.futuredesktop.org/developing\_android\_apps\_on\_ubuntu.html</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722351</id>
	<title>Question</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255377000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When one develops for a mobile platform, is there a basic screen size/resolution/ratio (HD 16:9-4:3) you shoot for? I mean what are the specs? Is there a recommendation? I always wondered if this would be an obstacle with Android and the multiple devices.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When one develops for a mobile platform , is there a basic screen size/resolution/ratio ( HD 16 : 9-4 : 3 ) you shoot for ?
I mean what are the specs ?
Is there a recommendation ?
I always wondered if this would be an obstacle with Android and the multiple devices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When one develops for a mobile platform, is there a basic screen size/resolution/ratio (HD 16:9-4:3) you shoot for?
I mean what are the specs?
Is there a recommendation?
I always wondered if this would be an obstacle with Android and the multiple devices.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29723695</id>
	<title>Re:Ummm...NOT Open Source</title>
	<author>salesgeek</author>
	<datestamp>1255339560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><b>It's only open source until Google decides that they don't want someone else using the "Open Source" code and files a court injunction as was done last week</b></p><p>What? Last week's situation was caused by someone distributing <b>proprietary</b> software that did not have permission.  Google could not have stopped Cyanogen had the mod not included Google's <b>proprietary</b> software.  Google deserves no ire for their actions, and Cyanogen's response was 100\% class. Android is coming of age quickly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's only open source until Google decides that they do n't want someone else using the " Open Source " code and files a court injunction as was done last weekWhat ?
Last week 's situation was caused by someone distributing proprietary software that did not have permission .
Google could not have stopped Cyanogen had the mod not included Google 's proprietary software .
Google deserves no ire for their actions , and Cyanogen 's response was 100 \ % class .
Android is coming of age quickly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's only open source until Google decides that they don't want someone else using the "Open Source" code and files a court injunction as was done last weekWhat?
Last week's situation was caused by someone distributing proprietary software that did not have permission.
Google could not have stopped Cyanogen had the mod not included Google's proprietary software.
Google deserves no ire for their actions, and Cyanogen's response was 100\% class.
Android is coming of age quickly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722973</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722473</id>
	<title>Google != Android</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255377480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just a reminder: Google and Android are not affiliated in any way any longer except that Google is a member of the Open Handset Alliance (OHA).</p><p>Google bought Android the company, developed Android the OS, then spun it off under control of the OHA, in which they are one participating member.</p><p>When a phone company develops hardware using Android, the operating system is open source/freely available.  They can customize it.  But if they want to bundle applications on it, say Google Maps, they have to license those apps from Google.  Android is not Google, Google is not Android.</p><p>For what it's worth, I run a G1 with Cyanogen's latest mod.  I have no Google apps that I care about anymore.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just a reminder : Google and Android are not affiliated in any way any longer except that Google is a member of the Open Handset Alliance ( OHA ) .Google bought Android the company , developed Android the OS , then spun it off under control of the OHA , in which they are one participating member.When a phone company develops hardware using Android , the operating system is open source/freely available .
They can customize it .
But if they want to bundle applications on it , say Google Maps , they have to license those apps from Google .
Android is not Google , Google is not Android.For what it 's worth , I run a G1 with Cyanogen 's latest mod .
I have no Google apps that I care about anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just a reminder: Google and Android are not affiliated in any way any longer except that Google is a member of the Open Handset Alliance (OHA).Google bought Android the company, developed Android the OS, then spun it off under control of the OHA, in which they are one participating member.When a phone company develops hardware using Android, the operating system is open source/freely available.
They can customize it.
But if they want to bundle applications on it, say Google Maps, they have to license those apps from Google.
Android is not Google, Google is not Android.For what it's worth, I run a G1 with Cyanogen's latest mod.
I have no Google apps that I care about anymore.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29727125</id>
	<title>Re:I am a co-author...</title>
	<author>AmberBlackCat</author>
	<datestamp>1255356600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's my understanding that the apps are done in Java, and it's fairly easy to get the source code to a Java program. If this is so, how do people port their commercially viable applications to Android without other people easily ripping off their source code? Does the book cover any better methods of protecting the source code than "obfuscation"?</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's my understanding that the apps are done in Java , and it 's fairly easy to get the source code to a Java program .
If this is so , how do people port their commercially viable applications to Android without other people easily ripping off their source code ?
Does the book cover any better methods of protecting the source code than " obfuscation " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's my understanding that the apps are done in Java, and it's fairly easy to get the source code to a Java program.
If this is so, how do people port their commercially viable applications to Android without other people easily ripping off their source code?
Does the book cover any better methods of protecting the source code than "obfuscation"?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29724473</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29723103</id>
	<title>Re:Ummm...NOT Open Source</title>
	<author>mmurphy000</author>
	<datestamp>1255380180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>It's only open source until Google decides that they don't want someone else using the "Open Source" code and files a court injunction as was done last week.</p></div></blockquote><p>And your proof of this claim is...what, exactly?</p><p>Perhaps you are referring to an incident from about 2-3 weeks ago, when a ROM modder was sent a cease-and-desist letter by Google for including closed-source applications in his Android ROMs. The consensus opinion is that Google was legally right but clumsy in how they handled this incident. However, misrepresenting what happened helps nobody.</p><blockquote><div><p>If you are going to bash, bash evenly.</p></div></blockquote><p>Better yet, bash factually.</p><p>In the interest of full disclosure, per my sig, I'm involved in the Android development community.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's only open source until Google decides that they do n't want someone else using the " Open Source " code and files a court injunction as was done last week.And your proof of this claim is...what , exactly ? Perhaps you are referring to an incident from about 2-3 weeks ago , when a ROM modder was sent a cease-and-desist letter by Google for including closed-source applications in his Android ROMs .
The consensus opinion is that Google was legally right but clumsy in how they handled this incident .
However , misrepresenting what happened helps nobody.If you are going to bash , bash evenly.Better yet , bash factually.In the interest of full disclosure , per my sig , I 'm involved in the Android development community .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's only open source until Google decides that they don't want someone else using the "Open Source" code and files a court injunction as was done last week.And your proof of this claim is...what, exactly?Perhaps you are referring to an incident from about 2-3 weeks ago, when a ROM modder was sent a cease-and-desist letter by Google for including closed-source applications in his Android ROMs.
The consensus opinion is that Google was legally right but clumsy in how they handled this incident.
However, misrepresenting what happened helps nobody.If you are going to bash, bash evenly.Better yet, bash factually.In the interest of full disclosure, per my sig, I'm involved in the Android development community.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722973</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722311</id>
	<title>O'reilly books</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255376820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I'm a fan of O'Reilly books. Interestingly enough this doesn't mean that I'll gloss over issues with what they produce. The result is actually the inverse, in that I go into all their titles with a high level of expectation with regards to quality on every level. This may mean that though I strive to be neutral when I look at a book, I'm probably a little tougher on O'Reilly titles. This made my rough start with Android Application Development a bit jarring. The repetition and what felt like sloppy editing are not what I expect. I was quickly given a sense that this book may have been rushed to publication a little sooner than it should have been.</p></div></blockquote><p>IMO, O'Reilly's once stellar reputation has gone downhill since the days when they only had a handfull of titles.  I think these days in the rush to churn out a Learning/Mastering/Pocket Reference/Nutshell book for every language and variant thereof their editors miss quite a bit.  Now you have to scrutinize their books just as much as the other publishers (although they haven't quite hit the abomination level that the Whatever-Language "Bible" books are that Wiley publishes).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a fan of O'Reilly books .
Interestingly enough this does n't mean that I 'll gloss over issues with what they produce .
The result is actually the inverse , in that I go into all their titles with a high level of expectation with regards to quality on every level .
This may mean that though I strive to be neutral when I look at a book , I 'm probably a little tougher on O'Reilly titles .
This made my rough start with Android Application Development a bit jarring .
The repetition and what felt like sloppy editing are not what I expect .
I was quickly given a sense that this book may have been rushed to publication a little sooner than it should have been.IMO , O'Reilly 's once stellar reputation has gone downhill since the days when they only had a handfull of titles .
I think these days in the rush to churn out a Learning/Mastering/Pocket Reference/Nutshell book for every language and variant thereof their editors miss quite a bit .
Now you have to scrutinize their books just as much as the other publishers ( although they have n't quite hit the abomination level that the Whatever-Language " Bible " books are that Wiley publishes ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a fan of O'Reilly books.
Interestingly enough this doesn't mean that I'll gloss over issues with what they produce.
The result is actually the inverse, in that I go into all their titles with a high level of expectation with regards to quality on every level.
This may mean that though I strive to be neutral when I look at a book, I'm probably a little tougher on O'Reilly titles.
This made my rough start with Android Application Development a bit jarring.
The repetition and what felt like sloppy editing are not what I expect.
I was quickly given a sense that this book may have been rushed to publication a little sooner than it should have been.IMO, O'Reilly's once stellar reputation has gone downhill since the days when they only had a handfull of titles.
I think these days in the rush to churn out a Learning/Mastering/Pocket Reference/Nutshell book for every language and variant thereof their editors miss quite a bit.
Now you have to scrutinize their books just as much as the other publishers (although they haven't quite hit the abomination level that the Whatever-Language "Bible" books are that Wiley publishes).
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29726423</id>
	<title>App Store?</title>
	<author>Doc Ruby</author>
	<datestamp>1255352160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Once you've built your app, how do you market it on the Google app store? Do you need a license or registration to upload it? How do you upload it? Does it have to be signed or otherwise processed after it's an executing binary? How do you get paid? How do you include a GPL or other license, and the source code if required/desired?</p><p>Those details of "development" are going to be the greatest incentive, or inhibitor, to developers. Especially like me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Once you 've built your app , how do you market it on the Google app store ?
Do you need a license or registration to upload it ?
How do you upload it ?
Does it have to be signed or otherwise processed after it 's an executing binary ?
How do you get paid ?
How do you include a GPL or other license , and the source code if required/desired ? Those details of " development " are going to be the greatest incentive , or inhibitor , to developers .
Especially like me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Once you've built your app, how do you market it on the Google app store?
Do you need a license or registration to upload it?
How do you upload it?
Does it have to be signed or otherwise processed after it's an executing binary?
How do you get paid?
How do you include a GPL or other license, and the source code if required/desired?Those details of "development" are going to be the greatest incentive, or inhibitor, to developers.
Especially like me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29727221</id>
	<title>Re:App Store?</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1255357380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Once you've built your app, how do you market it on the Google app store?</p></div></blockquote><p>

Marketing is entirely up to you, there is no "staff pick" or other kind of rigged personality contest. Advertise by any method you see fit, you can even direct link to the Android marketplace by URL or QR code from another web site or even a print or web ad using a QR code. QR codes on <a href="http://www.cyrket.com/" title="cyrket.com">Cyrket</a> [cyrket.com] are useful as I can brows the market on my PC and then use a bar code scanner to take my phone straight to the installer page on the marketplace.</p><blockquote><div><p>Do you need a license or registration to upload it?</p></div></blockquote><p>

A once off US$25 fee is required for listing on the Android Marketplace. This allows for infinite apps to be added. Further more you do not need to use the Android marketplace and can publish the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.apk (Android installer) on any web site or other distribution medium.</p><blockquote><div><p>How do you upload it?</p></div></blockquote><p>

Should be a simple process, I'm certain google will tell you how.</p><blockquote><div><p>Does it have to be signed or otherwise processed after it's an executing binary?</p></div></blockquote><p>

No. Google do not vet the Marketplace and if they did, Android does not prevent you from installing from other sources. Once you have registered as a developer you can upload applications to the Marketplace.</p><blockquote><div><p>How do you get paid?</p></div></blockquote><p>

If you are using the Android marketplace provided by google, Google handles the transaction and credits your account. The details of this are part of the registration.</p><blockquote><div><p>How do you include a GPL or other license, and the source code if required/desired?</p></div></blockquote><p>

That's up to you to comply with the license of the code you are using (or have created). The GPL specifies how the code must be made accessible to the public.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Once you 've built your app , how do you market it on the Google app store ?
Marketing is entirely up to you , there is no " staff pick " or other kind of rigged personality contest .
Advertise by any method you see fit , you can even direct link to the Android marketplace by URL or QR code from another web site or even a print or web ad using a QR code .
QR codes on Cyrket [ cyrket.com ] are useful as I can brows the market on my PC and then use a bar code scanner to take my phone straight to the installer page on the marketplace.Do you need a license or registration to upload it ?
A once off US $ 25 fee is required for listing on the Android Marketplace .
This allows for infinite apps to be added .
Further more you do not need to use the Android marketplace and can publish the .apk ( Android installer ) on any web site or other distribution medium.How do you upload it ?
Should be a simple process , I 'm certain google will tell you how.Does it have to be signed or otherwise processed after it 's an executing binary ?
No. Google do not vet the Marketplace and if they did , Android does not prevent you from installing from other sources .
Once you have registered as a developer you can upload applications to the Marketplace.How do you get paid ?
If you are using the Android marketplace provided by google , Google handles the transaction and credits your account .
The details of this are part of the registration.How do you include a GPL or other license , and the source code if required/desired ?
That 's up to you to comply with the license of the code you are using ( or have created ) .
The GPL specifies how the code must be made accessible to the public .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Once you've built your app, how do you market it on the Google app store?
Marketing is entirely up to you, there is no "staff pick" or other kind of rigged personality contest.
Advertise by any method you see fit, you can even direct link to the Android marketplace by URL or QR code from another web site or even a print or web ad using a QR code.
QR codes on Cyrket [cyrket.com] are useful as I can brows the market on my PC and then use a bar code scanner to take my phone straight to the installer page on the marketplace.Do you need a license or registration to upload it?
A once off US$25 fee is required for listing on the Android Marketplace.
This allows for infinite apps to be added.
Further more you do not need to use the Android marketplace and can publish the .apk (Android installer) on any web site or other distribution medium.How do you upload it?
Should be a simple process, I'm certain google will tell you how.Does it have to be signed or otherwise processed after it's an executing binary?
No. Google do not vet the Marketplace and if they did, Android does not prevent you from installing from other sources.
Once you have registered as a developer you can upload applications to the Marketplace.How do you get paid?
If you are using the Android marketplace provided by google, Google handles the transaction and credits your account.
The details of this are part of the registration.How do you include a GPL or other license, and the source code if required/desired?
That's up to you to comply with the license of the code you are using (or have created).
The GPL specifies how the code must be made accessible to the public.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29726423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722077</id>
	<title>Android is not an open platform</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255375800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Android is not an open platform. It may be free(as in beer), but it is not fully free(as in freedom).

Anyone ever tried starting up their G1 phone while out of network coverage after a hard reset. OUCH.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Android is not an open platform .
It may be free ( as in beer ) , but it is not fully free ( as in freedom ) .
Anyone ever tried starting up their G1 phone while out of network coverage after a hard reset .
OUCH .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Android is not an open platform.
It may be free(as in beer), but it is not fully free(as in freedom).
Anyone ever tried starting up their G1 phone while out of network coverage after a hard reset.
OUCH.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722787</id>
	<title>fagoRz</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255378800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">do, and with any ro0ts and gets on</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>do , and with any ro0ts and gets on [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>do, and with any ro0ts and gets on [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29724469</id>
	<title>Re:Ummm...NOT Open Source</title>
	<author>ReverendDC</author>
	<datestamp>1255342560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So what you are saying is that it is okay to advertise something that is partially Open Source as completely open source.

It doesn't matter what part was balked at.  The fact of the matter is that the way that the system is advertised, it is completely open source.  If you put proprietary pieces into place, it is no longer open source by definition, because not all of the code is open for alteration and that part of code is not redistributable.  Therefore, Android is just like everyone else's OS, except instead of putting in an SDK and spending money on figuring out ways to keep part of the system closed while opening other parts, you leave the code open for the same things that you would normally make an SDK for and lock down the parts you don't want touched.  That's not open source.  That is a very efficient and cost effective way to avoid making SDKs.

More power to Google for taking this route...but it is NOT open source.  Give me a phone where every part of the code is open for alteration and I will see an Open Source phone.  Otherwise, Android is JUST like every other system.

BTW, with all of the talk of customization, Windows Mobile is almost as customizable after developers get done with it?  The iPhone can be jailbroken and heavily customized.  While neither of these companies outright ALLOW this, DevTeam and others have been doing it since the cell phone became popular.  Basically, without the "Open Source" moniker and a different (not necessarily better) UI, there is no difference between Android and anything else.

Therefore, it becomes much more grave of a situation when one of the only selling points for your product is only partially true when no indication had been given as such before.  This is called "false advertising."

True "open source," such as OpenOffice and Firefox or the huge majority of Linux distros, use ONLY open source software.  Everything is code-downloadable, not just the OS or parts of the OS.

In addition, with the way that the Google tools interact with the OS, how can you say that it is not in the OS for these parts?  You can remove it, and some of the vaunted integration goes away.  Splitting hairs is always a way to win an argument, but not one to improve upon products.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So what you are saying is that it is okay to advertise something that is partially Open Source as completely open source .
It does n't matter what part was balked at .
The fact of the matter is that the way that the system is advertised , it is completely open source .
If you put proprietary pieces into place , it is no longer open source by definition , because not all of the code is open for alteration and that part of code is not redistributable .
Therefore , Android is just like everyone else 's OS , except instead of putting in an SDK and spending money on figuring out ways to keep part of the system closed while opening other parts , you leave the code open for the same things that you would normally make an SDK for and lock down the parts you do n't want touched .
That 's not open source .
That is a very efficient and cost effective way to avoid making SDKs .
More power to Google for taking this route...but it is NOT open source .
Give me a phone where every part of the code is open for alteration and I will see an Open Source phone .
Otherwise , Android is JUST like every other system .
BTW , with all of the talk of customization , Windows Mobile is almost as customizable after developers get done with it ?
The iPhone can be jailbroken and heavily customized .
While neither of these companies outright ALLOW this , DevTeam and others have been doing it since the cell phone became popular .
Basically , without the " Open Source " moniker and a different ( not necessarily better ) UI , there is no difference between Android and anything else .
Therefore , it becomes much more grave of a situation when one of the only selling points for your product is only partially true when no indication had been given as such before .
This is called " false advertising .
" True " open source , " such as OpenOffice and Firefox or the huge majority of Linux distros , use ONLY open source software .
Everything is code-downloadable , not just the OS or parts of the OS .
In addition , with the way that the Google tools interact with the OS , how can you say that it is not in the OS for these parts ?
You can remove it , and some of the vaunted integration goes away .
Splitting hairs is always a way to win an argument , but not one to improve upon products .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So what you are saying is that it is okay to advertise something that is partially Open Source as completely open source.
It doesn't matter what part was balked at.
The fact of the matter is that the way that the system is advertised, it is completely open source.
If you put proprietary pieces into place, it is no longer open source by definition, because not all of the code is open for alteration and that part of code is not redistributable.
Therefore, Android is just like everyone else's OS, except instead of putting in an SDK and spending money on figuring out ways to keep part of the system closed while opening other parts, you leave the code open for the same things that you would normally make an SDK for and lock down the parts you don't want touched.
That's not open source.
That is a very efficient and cost effective way to avoid making SDKs.
More power to Google for taking this route...but it is NOT open source.
Give me a phone where every part of the code is open for alteration and I will see an Open Source phone.
Otherwise, Android is JUST like every other system.
BTW, with all of the talk of customization, Windows Mobile is almost as customizable after developers get done with it?
The iPhone can be jailbroken and heavily customized.
While neither of these companies outright ALLOW this, DevTeam and others have been doing it since the cell phone became popular.
Basically, without the "Open Source" moniker and a different (not necessarily better) UI, there is no difference between Android and anything else.
Therefore, it becomes much more grave of a situation when one of the only selling points for your product is only partially true when no indication had been given as such before.
This is called "false advertising.
"

True "open source," such as OpenOffice and Firefox or the huge majority of Linux distros, use ONLY open source software.
Everything is code-downloadable, not just the OS or parts of the OS.
In addition, with the way that the Google tools interact with the OS, how can you say that it is not in the OS for these parts?
You can remove it, and some of the vaunted integration goes away.
Splitting hairs is always a way to win an argument, but not one to improve upon products.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722973</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722973</id>
	<title>Ummm...NOT Open Source</title>
	<author>ReverendDC</author>
	<datestamp>1255379520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's only open source until Google decides that they don't want someone else using the "Open Source" code and files a court injunction as was done last week.

If you are going to bash, bash evenly.  Google deserves your ire as well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's only open source until Google decides that they do n't want someone else using the " Open Source " code and files a court injunction as was done last week .
If you are going to bash , bash evenly .
Google deserves your ire as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's only open source until Google decides that they don't want someone else using the "Open Source" code and files a court injunction as was done last week.
If you are going to bash, bash evenly.
Google deserves your ire as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29725103</id>
	<title>Re:Solidity of the platform?</title>
	<author>recharged95</author>
	<datestamp>1255345380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Beta doesn't have an impact when you're constantly downloading 2.7GB Xcode-based SDKs that change from version 3.1.1 o 3.1.2 (from the <i>current</i> leader in the smart phone market). Even MSVS makes you wait a year before downloading a few gigs of IDE, not per version of the OS.
<br>
Having to download Eclipse IDE (not the full version) and a plugin is refreshing to the developer and the way it should be done.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Beta does n't have an impact when you 're constantly downloading 2.7GB Xcode-based SDKs that change from version 3.1.1 o 3.1.2 ( from the current leader in the smart phone market ) .
Even MSVS makes you wait a year before downloading a few gigs of IDE , not per version of the OS .
Having to download Eclipse IDE ( not the full version ) and a plugin is refreshing to the developer and the way it should be done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Beta doesn't have an impact when you're constantly downloading 2.7GB Xcode-based SDKs that change from version 3.1.1 o 3.1.2 (from the current leader in the smart phone market).
Even MSVS makes you wait a year before downloading a few gigs of IDE, not per version of the OS.
Having to download Eclipse IDE (not the full version) and a plugin is refreshing to the developer and the way it should be done.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29721975</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29731787</id>
	<title>Moma's Android guide</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255448520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This super-guide will put you straight on the Android-track.<br>http://www.futuredesktop.org/developing\_android\_apps\_on\_ubuntu.html<br>Use Ubuntu 9.04. The latest Eclipse IDE does not run well on the Ubuntu 9.10 (Karmic) development version. Let's hope it will when Karmic is ready.</p><p>Kindly<br>
&nbsp; Moma from Gr&#248;nland/Oslo</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This super-guide will put you straight on the Android-track.http : //www.futuredesktop.org/developing \ _android \ _apps \ _on \ _ubuntu.htmlUse Ubuntu 9.04 .
The latest Eclipse IDE does not run well on the Ubuntu 9.10 ( Karmic ) development version .
Let 's hope it will when Karmic is ready.Kindly   Moma from Gr   nland/Oslo</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This super-guide will put you straight on the Android-track.http://www.futuredesktop.org/developing\_android\_apps\_on\_ubuntu.htmlUse Ubuntu 9.04.
The latest Eclipse IDE does not run well on the Ubuntu 9.10 (Karmic) development version.
Let's hope it will when Karmic is ready.Kindly
  Moma from Grønland/Oslo</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722851</id>
	<title>Review Needs and Editor</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255379100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>For someone scrutinizing repetitious repetition, this review certainly repeats many points repeatedly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For someone scrutinizing repetitious repetition , this review certainly repeats many points repeatedly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For someone scrutinizing repetitious repetition, this review certainly repeats many points repeatedly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722225</id>
	<title>Re:Solidity of the platform?</title>
	<author>rxan</author>
	<datestamp>1255376460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, applications developed on earlier API levels (as Android calls them) are always forward compatible with newer API levels. Sure, APIs may be deprecated and replaced with newer interfaces, like any platform, but it won't cause your app to break as you are implying.

</p><p>With the new Android SDK things like different screen sizes are being allowed, which I consider a boon. The one thing that always bugged me about BlackBerry was the different screen sizes and device capabilities. Now Android developers have the same thing to worry about. Bah... It's the one thing that Apple did right: keep the core platform identical and you save developers a lot of hard work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , applications developed on earlier API levels ( as Android calls them ) are always forward compatible with newer API levels .
Sure , APIs may be deprecated and replaced with newer interfaces , like any platform , but it wo n't cause your app to break as you are implying .
With the new Android SDK things like different screen sizes are being allowed , which I consider a boon .
The one thing that always bugged me about BlackBerry was the different screen sizes and device capabilities .
Now Android developers have the same thing to worry about .
Bah... It 's the one thing that Apple did right : keep the core platform identical and you save developers a lot of hard work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, applications developed on earlier API levels (as Android calls them) are always forward compatible with newer API levels.
Sure, APIs may be deprecated and replaced with newer interfaces, like any platform, but it won't cause your app to break as you are implying.
With the new Android SDK things like different screen sizes are being allowed, which I consider a boon.
The one thing that always bugged me about BlackBerry was the different screen sizes and device capabilities.
Now Android developers have the same thing to worry about.
Bah... It's the one thing that Apple did right: keep the core platform identical and you save developers a lot of hard work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29721975</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_12_1341218_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722255
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722077
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_12_1341218_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29723103
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722973
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_12_1341218_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29723695
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722973
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_12_1341218_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29728191
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722473
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_12_1341218_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29727125
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29724473
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_12_1341218_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722797
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722473
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_12_1341218_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29727221
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29726423
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_12_1341218_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29724469
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722973
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_12_1341218_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29724075
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722077
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_12_1341218_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722473
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_12_1341218_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29727137
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29721975
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_12_1341218_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29724925
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29721975
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_12_1341218_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29727193
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29724473
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_12_1341218_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722747
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722473
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_12_1341218_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29725103
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29721975
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_12_1341218_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722225
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29721975
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_12_1341218_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29723891
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29721975
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_12_1341218.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29721907
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_12_1341218.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722077
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29724075
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722255
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_12_1341218.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29724473
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29727193
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29727125
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_12_1341218.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722351
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_12_1341218.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29721975
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29727137
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29724925
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29723891
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722225
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29725103
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_12_1341218.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722973
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29724469
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29723103
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29723695
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_12_1341218.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29726423
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29727221
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_12_1341218.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722311
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_12_1341218.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722473
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722797
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722833
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29728191
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29722747
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_12_1341218.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_12_1341218.29725453
</commentlist>
</conversation>
