<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_19_0128243</id>
	<title>Amiga and Hyperion Settle Ownership of AmigaOS</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1255953960000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>HKcastaway writes <i>"<a href="http://www.hyperion-entertainment.com/index.php?option=com\_content&amp;view=section&amp;layout=blog&amp;id=1&amp;Itemid=65">Amiga Inc and Hyperion Entertainment announced a settlement</a> over ownership and licensing over AmigaOS 4.0 and future versions. Since the <a href="//news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/11/15/1457205&amp;tid=172">bankruptcy of Commodore</a>, Amiga's history has been littered with lawsuits that have affected the development of Amiga hardware and software. Having a lawsuit-free OS probably will help a great deal to the continuity and recovery of the Amiga heritage. Hyperion also provides AmigaOS SDKs for developers.'</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>HKcastaway writes " Amiga Inc and Hyperion Entertainment announced a settlement over ownership and licensing over AmigaOS 4.0 and future versions .
Since the bankruptcy of Commodore , Amiga 's history has been littered with lawsuits that have affected the development of Amiga hardware and software .
Having a lawsuit-free OS probably will help a great deal to the continuity and recovery of the Amiga heritage .
Hyperion also provides AmigaOS SDKs for developers .
'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>HKcastaway writes "Amiga Inc and Hyperion Entertainment announced a settlement over ownership and licensing over AmigaOS 4.0 and future versions.
Since the bankruptcy of Commodore, Amiga's history has been littered with lawsuits that have affected the development of Amiga hardware and software.
Having a lawsuit-free OS probably will help a great deal to the continuity and recovery of the Amiga heritage.
Hyperion also provides AmigaOS SDKs for developers.
'</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793011</id>
	<title>Re:Aye, I had no idea these existed anymore</title>
	<author>hattig</author>
	<datestamp>1255962180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Amiga Inc company was running the brand into the ground via incompetence and very weird behaviour (asset switching between companies to avoid bankruptcies, etc). Hyperion have been trying to develop the market for a long time, so it is good that they have control now. I hope they port to ARM for upcoming Smartbooks.</p><p>It's well worth reading reviews c. 1985 - 1992 of the Amiga, to see how special it was back then. Hardware-wise, any modern PC in the last ten to fifteen years has been Amiga-like, with dedicated co-processors for graphics, audio, etc. OS-wise, AmigaOS is behind modern systems, but it had some niceties, I found the filesystem layout nice for example, nicer than Unix. In 1985 to 1995 it was simply far ahead technically. Lack of investment killed it though.</p><p>However my Amiga related shortcuts live in a bookmarks folder alongside my 8-bit computing links - the folder's called "Retro". I wish them all the best of luck, but I think they're five years too late. Actually, in 1998 I made a post here saying that AmigaOS would be perfect for a Palm-like device. Shame.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Amiga Inc company was running the brand into the ground via incompetence and very weird behaviour ( asset switching between companies to avoid bankruptcies , etc ) .
Hyperion have been trying to develop the market for a long time , so it is good that they have control now .
I hope they port to ARM for upcoming Smartbooks.It 's well worth reading reviews c. 1985 - 1992 of the Amiga , to see how special it was back then .
Hardware-wise , any modern PC in the last ten to fifteen years has been Amiga-like , with dedicated co-processors for graphics , audio , etc .
OS-wise , AmigaOS is behind modern systems , but it had some niceties , I found the filesystem layout nice for example , nicer than Unix .
In 1985 to 1995 it was simply far ahead technically .
Lack of investment killed it though.However my Amiga related shortcuts live in a bookmarks folder alongside my 8-bit computing links - the folder 's called " Retro " .
I wish them all the best of luck , but I think they 're five years too late .
Actually , in 1998 I made a post here saying that AmigaOS would be perfect for a Palm-like device .
Shame .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Amiga Inc company was running the brand into the ground via incompetence and very weird behaviour (asset switching between companies to avoid bankruptcies, etc).
Hyperion have been trying to develop the market for a long time, so it is good that they have control now.
I hope they port to ARM for upcoming Smartbooks.It's well worth reading reviews c. 1985 - 1992 of the Amiga, to see how special it was back then.
Hardware-wise, any modern PC in the last ten to fifteen years has been Amiga-like, with dedicated co-processors for graphics, audio, etc.
OS-wise, AmigaOS is behind modern systems, but it had some niceties, I found the filesystem layout nice for example, nicer than Unix.
In 1985 to 1995 it was simply far ahead technically.
Lack of investment killed it though.However my Amiga related shortcuts live in a bookmarks folder alongside my 8-bit computing links - the folder's called "Retro".
I wish them all the best of luck, but I think they're five years too late.
Actually, in 1998 I made a post here saying that AmigaOS would be perfect for a Palm-like device.
Shame.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792547</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792897</id>
	<title>A decade a head of it time 20 years ago.</title>
	<author>jellomizer</author>
	<datestamp>1255961580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Amega OS was almost 10 years ahead of its time in features, however that was 20 years ago.  Because of the rather stagnate growth in Amega it is now basically 10 years behind the times.  While that is a far way it isn't as bad as it seems.</p><p>Because of Vista failures most people are still using XP (Windows 7 hasn't gone out yet) so right now Microsoft is about 8 year behind the time... However because of Windows 7 and the fact they they learned from vista.  They are expected to be caught up real soon.</p><p>Linux in terms of graphics and User Interface it is about the same now as XP... With some more modern elements so I will be nice and say Linux is about 5 years behind the time, in GUI.  Some of the internals are state of the art the other are 30 years old and probably should be re-looked at but probably won't in fear of breaking compatibility.</p><p>OS X is mostly pretty modern.  However some parts like Linux are 30 years old tech that are left behind.  (Having to reformat my drive because of bad iNodes remind me of that)</p><p>So Amiga has a chance to get caught up.  And I think there is a hungry market for an other OS.</p><p>Sure Most people use Windows however people want a good choices.</p><p>OS X will only work with Mac Hardware... Although Mac Hardware isn't more expensive then PC for the same specs you really have a limited choices for models and specs.</p><p>Linux for desktop and UI still isn't that great.  And there is a lot of idealism that the average joe just doesn't care about... Why can't linux support this driver? Well because the manufacuture won't make it open source so We will not put it in our pure distribution. So what I want my hardware to work for the OS!  And if you get people who are above grandma and below Tech Geek.  You get a lot of questions on how you do a lot of rather basic (advanced) things.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Amega OS was almost 10 years ahead of its time in features , however that was 20 years ago .
Because of the rather stagnate growth in Amega it is now basically 10 years behind the times .
While that is a far way it is n't as bad as it seems.Because of Vista failures most people are still using XP ( Windows 7 has n't gone out yet ) so right now Microsoft is about 8 year behind the time... However because of Windows 7 and the fact they they learned from vista .
They are expected to be caught up real soon.Linux in terms of graphics and User Interface it is about the same now as XP... With some more modern elements so I will be nice and say Linux is about 5 years behind the time , in GUI .
Some of the internals are state of the art the other are 30 years old and probably should be re-looked at but probably wo n't in fear of breaking compatibility.OS X is mostly pretty modern .
However some parts like Linux are 30 years old tech that are left behind .
( Having to reformat my drive because of bad iNodes remind me of that ) So Amiga has a chance to get caught up .
And I think there is a hungry market for an other OS.Sure Most people use Windows however people want a good choices.OS X will only work with Mac Hardware... Although Mac Hardware is n't more expensive then PC for the same specs you really have a limited choices for models and specs.Linux for desktop and UI still is n't that great .
And there is a lot of idealism that the average joe just does n't care about... Why ca n't linux support this driver ?
Well because the manufacuture wo n't make it open source so We will not put it in our pure distribution .
So what I want my hardware to work for the OS !
And if you get people who are above grandma and below Tech Geek .
You get a lot of questions on how you do a lot of rather basic ( advanced ) things .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Amega OS was almost 10 years ahead of its time in features, however that was 20 years ago.
Because of the rather stagnate growth in Amega it is now basically 10 years behind the times.
While that is a far way it isn't as bad as it seems.Because of Vista failures most people are still using XP (Windows 7 hasn't gone out yet) so right now Microsoft is about 8 year behind the time... However because of Windows 7 and the fact they they learned from vista.
They are expected to be caught up real soon.Linux in terms of graphics and User Interface it is about the same now as XP... With some more modern elements so I will be nice and say Linux is about 5 years behind the time, in GUI.
Some of the internals are state of the art the other are 30 years old and probably should be re-looked at but probably won't in fear of breaking compatibility.OS X is mostly pretty modern.
However some parts like Linux are 30 years old tech that are left behind.
(Having to reformat my drive because of bad iNodes remind me of that)So Amiga has a chance to get caught up.
And I think there is a hungry market for an other OS.Sure Most people use Windows however people want a good choices.OS X will only work with Mac Hardware... Although Mac Hardware isn't more expensive then PC for the same specs you really have a limited choices for models and specs.Linux for desktop and UI still isn't that great.
And there is a lot of idealism that the average joe just doesn't care about... Why can't linux support this driver?
Well because the manufacuture won't make it open source so We will not put it in our pure distribution.
So what I want my hardware to work for the OS!
And if you get people who are above grandma and below Tech Geek.
You get a lot of questions on how you do a lot of rather basic (advanced) things.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792441</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792739</id>
	<title>Re:let the flames begin</title>
	<author>theeddie55</author>
	<datestamp>1255960620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wow, did you miss the point, that being that UNIX, even at 40 years old is still relevant, so why can't a 20 year old platform like amiga still be relevant?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , did you miss the point , that being that UNIX , even at 40 years old is still relevant , so why ca n't a 20 year old platform like amiga still be relevant ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, did you miss the point, that being that UNIX, even at 40 years old is still relevant, so why can't a 20 year old platform like amiga still be relevant?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792513</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29797043</id>
	<title>Re:let the flames begin</title>
	<author>hazydave</author>
	<datestamp>1255978800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You ARE comparing Apples (sic) and oranges here.</p><p>The Mac platform was revolutionary... well, the software anyway (the hardware sucked from the get-go, despite the pretty plastic). 20 years later, they have actually fixed the OS (eg, went from a fairly poor low-level design to the Mach kernel and some other decent underpinnings), they have a growing user base, you can actually buy one in a store, there are many modern applications, and the company behind the Mac is making gobs of money. None of those things are true about anything related to the Amiga. And don't get on me for Amiga bashing -- I designed a bunch of them, I love the Amiga. I just hate what happened to it. It has gone nowhere significant since the mid 90s, and things were shakey even near the end, between Commodore's slow death and the year+ it took between that and the sincere attempt to bring things back at Amiga Technologies.</p><p>Sure, you may find a few things in AmigaOS that are still better than Windows. You can find that in just about any OS... Windows is an easy target. That doesn't make AmigaOS a useful choice for getting most kinds of real work done today. And it also doesn't remove the fact that the only real platform for AmigaOS today is software emulation of AmigaOS 3.x on a PC, under some other PC OS.</p><p>Telling the truth about something is not the same as bashing it; dreaming about what might have been doesn't change what is. But keep in mind... the AmigaOS has been in post Commodore, even post-Commodore/Amiga Technologies neglection longer than it had existed before this. That's a pretty harsh way of looking, but it's the truth. It was 10.5 years from the introduction of the Amiga 1000 (September 1985) to the functional end of Amiga Technologies (March 1986).  It's largely been in the hands of lawyers and bozos ever since. Is there anyone really holding their breath for an AmigaOS re-introduction of any kind, much less one that invites a thriving user and developer community? I'd love to see that, but I don't believe in it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You ARE comparing Apples ( sic ) and oranges here.The Mac platform was revolutionary... well , the software anyway ( the hardware sucked from the get-go , despite the pretty plastic ) .
20 years later , they have actually fixed the OS ( eg , went from a fairly poor low-level design to the Mach kernel and some other decent underpinnings ) , they have a growing user base , you can actually buy one in a store , there are many modern applications , and the company behind the Mac is making gobs of money .
None of those things are true about anything related to the Amiga .
And do n't get on me for Amiga bashing -- I designed a bunch of them , I love the Amiga .
I just hate what happened to it .
It has gone nowhere significant since the mid 90s , and things were shakey even near the end , between Commodore 's slow death and the year + it took between that and the sincere attempt to bring things back at Amiga Technologies.Sure , you may find a few things in AmigaOS that are still better than Windows .
You can find that in just about any OS... Windows is an easy target .
That does n't make AmigaOS a useful choice for getting most kinds of real work done today .
And it also does n't remove the fact that the only real platform for AmigaOS today is software emulation of AmigaOS 3.x on a PC , under some other PC OS.Telling the truth about something is not the same as bashing it ; dreaming about what might have been does n't change what is .
But keep in mind... the AmigaOS has been in post Commodore , even post-Commodore/Amiga Technologies neglection longer than it had existed before this .
That 's a pretty harsh way of looking , but it 's the truth .
It was 10.5 years from the introduction of the Amiga 1000 ( September 1985 ) to the functional end of Amiga Technologies ( March 1986 ) .
It 's largely been in the hands of lawyers and bozos ever since .
Is there anyone really holding their breath for an AmigaOS re-introduction of any kind , much less one that invites a thriving user and developer community ?
I 'd love to see that , but I do n't believe in it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You ARE comparing Apples (sic) and oranges here.The Mac platform was revolutionary... well, the software anyway (the hardware sucked from the get-go, despite the pretty plastic).
20 years later, they have actually fixed the OS (eg, went from a fairly poor low-level design to the Mach kernel and some other decent underpinnings), they have a growing user base, you can actually buy one in a store, there are many modern applications, and the company behind the Mac is making gobs of money.
None of those things are true about anything related to the Amiga.
And don't get on me for Amiga bashing -- I designed a bunch of them, I love the Amiga.
I just hate what happened to it.
It has gone nowhere significant since the mid 90s, and things were shakey even near the end, between Commodore's slow death and the year+ it took between that and the sincere attempt to bring things back at Amiga Technologies.Sure, you may find a few things in AmigaOS that are still better than Windows.
You can find that in just about any OS... Windows is an easy target.
That doesn't make AmigaOS a useful choice for getting most kinds of real work done today.
And it also doesn't remove the fact that the only real platform for AmigaOS today is software emulation of AmigaOS 3.x on a PC, under some other PC OS.Telling the truth about something is not the same as bashing it; dreaming about what might have been doesn't change what is.
But keep in mind... the AmigaOS has been in post Commodore, even post-Commodore/Amiga Technologies neglection longer than it had existed before this.
That's a pretty harsh way of looking, but it's the truth.
It was 10.5 years from the introduction of the Amiga 1000 (September 1985) to the functional end of Amiga Technologies (March 1986).
It's largely been in the hands of lawyers and bozos ever since.
Is there anyone really holding their breath for an AmigaOS re-introduction of any kind, much less one that invites a thriving user and developer community?
I'd love to see that, but I don't believe in it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792823</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29795321</id>
	<title>Not all programmers are careful</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1255972200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You don't need an MMU, you need careful programmers.</p></div><p>So how do users defend themselves from uncareful programmers?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't need an MMU , you need careful programmers.So how do users defend themselves from uncareful programmers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't need an MMU, you need careful programmers.So how do users defend themselves from uncareful programmers?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792981</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793923</id>
	<title>Re:let the flames begin</title>
	<author>ArmyOfAardvarks</author>
	<datestamp>1255966260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>While I'm not a huge fan of Macs, they DO have an actual user base.
But Amiga?
I'll admit, obscure systems can be kind of cool, but in all honesty, they're not relevant enough to warrant these kind of debates.
It doesn't mean that there's anything wrong with the OS. It just means that no one really cares.</htmltext>
<tokenext>While I 'm not a huge fan of Macs , they DO have an actual user base .
But Amiga ?
I 'll admit , obscure systems can be kind of cool , but in all honesty , they 're not relevant enough to warrant these kind of debates .
It does n't mean that there 's anything wrong with the OS .
It just means that no one really cares .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I'm not a huge fan of Macs, they DO have an actual user base.
But Amiga?
I'll admit, obscure systems can be kind of cool, but in all honesty, they're not relevant enough to warrant these kind of debates.
It doesn't mean that there's anything wrong with the OS.
It just means that no one really cares.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792823</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29805311</id>
	<title>Amiga = Quantum Leap</title>
	<author>master\_p</author>
	<datestamp>1256033940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The name "Amiga", for me, is synonymous to a quantum leap in computers: when the other computers had 4 colors in low res and simple "beep beep" sounds, Amiga had multiple hires color displays and stereo sound of the highest clarity.</p><p>An Amiga, today, in order to do the quantum leap, would have to:</p><p>A:<br>1) have hundreds of CPUs.<br>2) provide a multi-threaded programming model.<br>3) have the fastest memory interface.<br>4) be able to do real-time ray-tracing of movie quality.</p><p>or B:</p><p>1) provide the performance of a $5000 PC at the price of $199.</p><p>A new AmigaOS is a nice thing to have, but it only has sentimental value. No one is going to run it as a major O/S. Even Linux, with thousands of man work days behind it, has difficulties in being adopted by the mainstream.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The name " Amiga " , for me , is synonymous to a quantum leap in computers : when the other computers had 4 colors in low res and simple " beep beep " sounds , Amiga had multiple hires color displays and stereo sound of the highest clarity.An Amiga , today , in order to do the quantum leap , would have to : A : 1 ) have hundreds of CPUs.2 ) provide a multi-threaded programming model.3 ) have the fastest memory interface.4 ) be able to do real-time ray-tracing of movie quality.or B : 1 ) provide the performance of a $ 5000 PC at the price of $ 199.A new AmigaOS is a nice thing to have , but it only has sentimental value .
No one is going to run it as a major O/S .
Even Linux , with thousands of man work days behind it , has difficulties in being adopted by the mainstream .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The name "Amiga", for me, is synonymous to a quantum leap in computers: when the other computers had 4 colors in low res and simple "beep beep" sounds, Amiga had multiple hires color displays and stereo sound of the highest clarity.An Amiga, today, in order to do the quantum leap, would have to:A:1) have hundreds of CPUs.2) provide a multi-threaded programming model.3) have the fastest memory interface.4) be able to do real-time ray-tracing of movie quality.or B:1) provide the performance of a $5000 PC at the price of $199.A new AmigaOS is a nice thing to have, but it only has sentimental value.
No one is going to run it as a major O/S.
Even Linux, with thousands of man work days behind it, has difficulties in being adopted by the mainstream.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29796575</id>
	<title>best pc experience</title>
	<author>iphonetune</author>
	<datestamp>1255977180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dreaming back the old computer days, I must say that the Amiga times where the most fulfilling of all of my computer times I ever had. I know it is nostalgic to say that now but it feels like thinking back to my first real love in my live.

That is something nobody can take away from me, although I am happy I am where I am now.

Thanks to all the people that made this possible!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dreaming back the old computer days , I must say that the Amiga times where the most fulfilling of all of my computer times I ever had .
I know it is nostalgic to say that now but it feels like thinking back to my first real love in my live .
That is something nobody can take away from me , although I am happy I am where I am now .
Thanks to all the people that made this possible !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dreaming back the old computer days, I must say that the Amiga times where the most fulfilling of all of my computer times I ever had.
I know it is nostalgic to say that now but it feels like thinking back to my first real love in my live.
That is something nobody can take away from me, although I am happy I am where I am now.
Thanks to all the people that made this possible!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792357</id>
	<title>Hardware?</title>
	<author>bcmm</author>
	<datestamp>1255957980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why? Is anybody still making consumer boxes that can run this? Does the OS support MMUs yet?<br> <br>I can only see this being interesting of the source is released and ported to things.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why ?
Is anybody still making consumer boxes that can run this ?
Does the OS support MMUs yet ?
I can only see this being interesting of the source is released and ported to things .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why?
Is anybody still making consumer boxes that can run this?
Does the OS support MMUs yet?
I can only see this being interesting of the source is released and ported to things.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792347</id>
	<title>let the flames begin</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255957860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know I'll be flamed, but in all honesty, is the Amiga platform even relevant any more? The hardware and OS were revolutionary in 1989, but 20 years later, is it really something all that different?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know I 'll be flamed , but in all honesty , is the Amiga platform even relevant any more ?
The hardware and OS were revolutionary in 1989 , but 20 years later , is it really something all that different ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know I'll be flamed, but in all honesty, is the Amiga platform even relevant any more?
The hardware and OS were revolutionary in 1989, but 20 years later, is it really something all that different?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29799391</id>
	<title>Re:let the flames begin</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255943880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Wow, did you miss the point, that being that UNIX, even at 40 years old is still relevant, so why can't a 20 year old platform like amiga still be relevant?</p></div><p>And what makes you think UNIX is at all relevant?  Unless you mean linux / OSX?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , did you miss the point , that being that UNIX , even at 40 years old is still relevant , so why ca n't a 20 year old platform like amiga still be relevant ? And what makes you think UNIX is at all relevant ?
Unless you mean linux / OSX ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, did you miss the point, that being that UNIX, even at 40 years old is still relevant, so why can't a 20 year old platform like amiga still be relevant?And what makes you think UNIX is at all relevant?
Unless you mean linux / OSX?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792739</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792441</id>
	<title>A little late?</title>
	<author>EdIII</author>
	<datestamp>1255958580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would think this would be a little "late to the party" situation here.  Does Amiga even have the resources or funding to create ground breaking or even interesting new hardware?  Can they seriously compete with Intel, Motorola, AMD, NVidia, and Texas Instruments at this point?</p><p>Do they have any IP or expertise to develop a new OS that can provide a reasonable alternative to Linux, Mac OS X, or Windows?</p><p>Resurrecting a brand name might be one thing, but I am somewhat skeptical that Amiga can begin producing hardware and operating systems that are going to compete with current market players in any meaningful way.</p><p>What's next?  Coleco announces they have a Windows 7 killer in a brand new updated ColecoVision 2009?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would think this would be a little " late to the party " situation here .
Does Amiga even have the resources or funding to create ground breaking or even interesting new hardware ?
Can they seriously compete with Intel , Motorola , AMD , NVidia , and Texas Instruments at this point ? Do they have any IP or expertise to develop a new OS that can provide a reasonable alternative to Linux , Mac OS X , or Windows ? Resurrecting a brand name might be one thing , but I am somewhat skeptical that Amiga can begin producing hardware and operating systems that are going to compete with current market players in any meaningful way.What 's next ?
Coleco announces they have a Windows 7 killer in a brand new updated ColecoVision 2009 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would think this would be a little "late to the party" situation here.
Does Amiga even have the resources or funding to create ground breaking or even interesting new hardware?
Can they seriously compete with Intel, Motorola, AMD, NVidia, and Texas Instruments at this point?Do they have any IP or expertise to develop a new OS that can provide a reasonable alternative to Linux, Mac OS X, or Windows?Resurrecting a brand name might be one thing, but I am somewhat skeptical that Amiga can begin producing hardware and operating systems that are going to compete with current market players in any meaningful way.What's next?
Coleco announces they have a Windows 7 killer in a brand new updated ColecoVision 2009?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793461</id>
	<title>Re:Of course not</title>
	<author>mlts</author>
	<datestamp>1255964280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are a few niches where an OS that is dedicated for video and audio would be nice.  When I mean dedicated, I mean with the facility for as low latency as possible, and full realtime capabilities.</p><p>Combine this with hardware that has multiple cores (not just the same type, but perhaps some cores that turn on for higher CPU tasks, while basic I/O loops are handled by low power cores, as well as cores for DSP use.)</p><p>Of course, ports are necessary.  USB ports on different I/O channels (so the hard disk would be doing I/O on a separate bus from MIDI controllers.)  IEEE 1394 (400 and 800), AES/EBU, S/PDIF, multiple channels of analog in/out, multiple MIDI channels, gigE, and eSATA channels would all be a must.  IMHO, historically the two machines which had the "ports for your musical storm" were the Amiga, but there was another machine which had an amazing amount of things, and that was the SGI Indy.</p><p>The result would be an OS and hardware platform that would be genuinely idea for a studio or video production system.  The low latency would mean that one can pile the tracks on (with quality ADCs and input hardware, 48-96 isn't out of the realm of possibility.)</p><p>Now, take all the above and focus on optimizing for A/V work for not too high a price, and the Commodore successor would have a place in every home studio and video lab out there.</p><p>The key would be having the machine not just have the DSPs and the cores to throw at A/V jobs, but have the software available that can handle stuff like VST plugins out of the box.  This way, someone buys the machine, takes it home, plugs the I/O stuff in, and starts jamming.</p><p>Filesystem wise, it would be nice to see a later generation filesystem like ZFS present.  This way, data integrity is assured (64 bit CRCs), adding storage space becomes easy, snapshot functionality allows recovery of corrupted/deleted files without requiring a restore from backup, and backups become easy because one can just make a snapshot, copy it off to disk or tape and call it done.  It would take some UI design work to make a robust interface so a nontechnical person could get the most out of ZFS or btrfs, but it can be done.</p><p>Last, but not least security:  Probably the best way to implement modern security is to have a hypervisor that does its tasks on a dedicated CPU core.  The music stuff sits in one VM, the Web browser sits in another (or at least in a BSD-like jail), and so on.  This way, if a blackhat managed to take over one VM, the whole system wouldn't be at risk.  Of course, signed executables, ASLR, install-time profiles [1], TPM [2] and disk encryption would be present.</p><p>Conclusion:  If someone took the time to bring AmigaOS up to speed and aim for the audio/video niche with hardware in the machine to handle the demands, I'm sure that this would be a machine that would sell well.  It won't sell as well as Macs, HPs, or Dells, but it would always be needed and a profit center if done right.</p><p>[1]:  Upon installation of an application, it comes with a list of access lists that it requires, another list of stuff that would be nice, and a maximum permission list (so a program that touches untrusted stuff like a Web browser isn't accidentally run with root rights).  Once the program is installed, unless a patch is applied that asks the user for more permissions, it doesn't get any more access than what it originally asked (and got approved for).  This limits the damage a hijacked app can do.  For example, if a spreadsheet tries to access an unrelated database file, the OS will deny it access.</p><p>[2]:  TPMs are controversial, but here it would be a net benefit to the user to detect if a blackhat has tried booting from OS media and resetting passwords in order to gain access, or some malware tried editing the boot area.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are a few niches where an OS that is dedicated for video and audio would be nice .
When I mean dedicated , I mean with the facility for as low latency as possible , and full realtime capabilities.Combine this with hardware that has multiple cores ( not just the same type , but perhaps some cores that turn on for higher CPU tasks , while basic I/O loops are handled by low power cores , as well as cores for DSP use .
) Of course , ports are necessary .
USB ports on different I/O channels ( so the hard disk would be doing I/O on a separate bus from MIDI controllers .
) IEEE 1394 ( 400 and 800 ) , AES/EBU , S/PDIF , multiple channels of analog in/out , multiple MIDI channels , gigE , and eSATA channels would all be a must .
IMHO , historically the two machines which had the " ports for your musical storm " were the Amiga , but there was another machine which had an amazing amount of things , and that was the SGI Indy.The result would be an OS and hardware platform that would be genuinely idea for a studio or video production system .
The low latency would mean that one can pile the tracks on ( with quality ADCs and input hardware , 48-96 is n't out of the realm of possibility .
) Now , take all the above and focus on optimizing for A/V work for not too high a price , and the Commodore successor would have a place in every home studio and video lab out there.The key would be having the machine not just have the DSPs and the cores to throw at A/V jobs , but have the software available that can handle stuff like VST plugins out of the box .
This way , someone buys the machine , takes it home , plugs the I/O stuff in , and starts jamming.Filesystem wise , it would be nice to see a later generation filesystem like ZFS present .
This way , data integrity is assured ( 64 bit CRCs ) , adding storage space becomes easy , snapshot functionality allows recovery of corrupted/deleted files without requiring a restore from backup , and backups become easy because one can just make a snapshot , copy it off to disk or tape and call it done .
It would take some UI design work to make a robust interface so a nontechnical person could get the most out of ZFS or btrfs , but it can be done.Last , but not least security : Probably the best way to implement modern security is to have a hypervisor that does its tasks on a dedicated CPU core .
The music stuff sits in one VM , the Web browser sits in another ( or at least in a BSD-like jail ) , and so on .
This way , if a blackhat managed to take over one VM , the whole system would n't be at risk .
Of course , signed executables , ASLR , install-time profiles [ 1 ] , TPM [ 2 ] and disk encryption would be present.Conclusion : If someone took the time to bring AmigaOS up to speed and aim for the audio/video niche with hardware in the machine to handle the demands , I 'm sure that this would be a machine that would sell well .
It wo n't sell as well as Macs , HPs , or Dells , but it would always be needed and a profit center if done right .
[ 1 ] : Upon installation of an application , it comes with a list of access lists that it requires , another list of stuff that would be nice , and a maximum permission list ( so a program that touches untrusted stuff like a Web browser is n't accidentally run with root rights ) .
Once the program is installed , unless a patch is applied that asks the user for more permissions , it does n't get any more access than what it originally asked ( and got approved for ) .
This limits the damage a hijacked app can do .
For example , if a spreadsheet tries to access an unrelated database file , the OS will deny it access .
[ 2 ] : TPMs are controversial , but here it would be a net benefit to the user to detect if a blackhat has tried booting from OS media and resetting passwords in order to gain access , or some malware tried editing the boot area .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are a few niches where an OS that is dedicated for video and audio would be nice.
When I mean dedicated, I mean with the facility for as low latency as possible, and full realtime capabilities.Combine this with hardware that has multiple cores (not just the same type, but perhaps some cores that turn on for higher CPU tasks, while basic I/O loops are handled by low power cores, as well as cores for DSP use.
)Of course, ports are necessary.
USB ports on different I/O channels (so the hard disk would be doing I/O on a separate bus from MIDI controllers.
)  IEEE 1394 (400 and 800), AES/EBU, S/PDIF, multiple channels of analog in/out, multiple MIDI channels, gigE, and eSATA channels would all be a must.
IMHO, historically the two machines which had the "ports for your musical storm" were the Amiga, but there was another machine which had an amazing amount of things, and that was the SGI Indy.The result would be an OS and hardware platform that would be genuinely idea for a studio or video production system.
The low latency would mean that one can pile the tracks on (with quality ADCs and input hardware, 48-96 isn't out of the realm of possibility.
)Now, take all the above and focus on optimizing for A/V work for not too high a price, and the Commodore successor would have a place in every home studio and video lab out there.The key would be having the machine not just have the DSPs and the cores to throw at A/V jobs, but have the software available that can handle stuff like VST plugins out of the box.
This way, someone buys the machine, takes it home, plugs the I/O stuff in, and starts jamming.Filesystem wise, it would be nice to see a later generation filesystem like ZFS present.
This way, data integrity is assured (64 bit CRCs), adding storage space becomes easy, snapshot functionality allows recovery of corrupted/deleted files without requiring a restore from backup, and backups become easy because one can just make a snapshot, copy it off to disk or tape and call it done.
It would take some UI design work to make a robust interface so a nontechnical person could get the most out of ZFS or btrfs, but it can be done.Last, but not least security:  Probably the best way to implement modern security is to have a hypervisor that does its tasks on a dedicated CPU core.
The music stuff sits in one VM, the Web browser sits in another (or at least in a BSD-like jail), and so on.
This way, if a blackhat managed to take over one VM, the whole system wouldn't be at risk.
Of course, signed executables, ASLR, install-time profiles [1], TPM [2] and disk encryption would be present.Conclusion:  If someone took the time to bring AmigaOS up to speed and aim for the audio/video niche with hardware in the machine to handle the demands, I'm sure that this would be a machine that would sell well.
It won't sell as well as Macs, HPs, or Dells, but it would always be needed and a profit center if done right.
[1]:  Upon installation of an application, it comes with a list of access lists that it requires, another list of stuff that would be nice, and a maximum permission list (so a program that touches untrusted stuff like a Web browser isn't accidentally run with root rights).
Once the program is installed, unless a patch is applied that asks the user for more permissions, it doesn't get any more access than what it originally asked (and got approved for).
This limits the damage a hijacked app can do.
For example, if a spreadsheet tries to access an unrelated database file, the OS will deny it access.
[2]:  TPMs are controversial, but here it would be a net benefit to the user to detect if a blackhat has tried booting from OS media and resetting passwords in order to gain access, or some malware tried editing the boot area.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792585</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792585</id>
	<title>Of course not</title>
	<author>MikeRT</author>
	<datestamp>1255959600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If they're smart they'll either work on support for fat binaries for x86 and powerpc or powerpc and arm. If they couple that with a solid WebKit or Gecko-based browser and get Flash ported over, Amiga would be a very competitive platform for netbooks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If they 're smart they 'll either work on support for fat binaries for x86 and powerpc or powerpc and arm .
If they couple that with a solid WebKit or Gecko-based browser and get Flash ported over , Amiga would be a very competitive platform for netbooks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they're smart they'll either work on support for fat binaries for x86 and powerpc or powerpc and arm.
If they couple that with a solid WebKit or Gecko-based browser and get Flash ported over, Amiga would be a very competitive platform for netbooks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792441</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793751</id>
	<title>Re:Of course not</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255965480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We already have a Webkit browser on OS 4.x. Also scores a nice 100/100 in acid 3 test and renders most sites perfectly. We also now have gnash which at least works fine for flash videos like youtube and such. Firefox is also currently being ported by some of the OS4.x team.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We already have a Webkit browser on OS 4.x .
Also scores a nice 100/100 in acid 3 test and renders most sites perfectly .
We also now have gnash which at least works fine for flash videos like youtube and such .
Firefox is also currently being ported by some of the OS4.x team .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We already have a Webkit browser on OS 4.x.
Also scores a nice 100/100 in acid 3 test and renders most sites perfectly.
We also now have gnash which at least works fine for flash videos like youtube and such.
Firefox is also currently being ported by some of the OS4.x team.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792585</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792365</id>
	<title>Not quite</title>
	<author>cjfs</author>
	<datestamp>1255958100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Having a lawsuit-free OS</p></div><p>Software patents have been abolished too? About time.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Having a lawsuit-free OSSoftware patents have been abolished too ?
About time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having a lawsuit-free OSSoftware patents have been abolished too?
About time.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29804095</id>
	<title>Re:Wow, my clock must be broken</title>
	<author>metaforest</author>
	<datestamp>1255973040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One key reason the Amiga appeared to be so responsive is that it had DMA, and a rudimentary graphics accelerator, slinging pixels around on a 512x384x8 bit display at a time when PCs and Macs were slinging pixels around on a 800x600x32 and 1024x768X32 bit displays in SOFTWARE...    The Audio was also hardware accelerated at a time when Apple and low-end PC systems were still bit banging a tiny hardware buffer for 8-bit audio, the Amiga was streaming 16 bit stereo via DMA.  Heck the Apple<nobr> <wbr></nobr>//gs had better built-in audio than the Mac for years!</p><p>Another key feature of the Amiga was that the graphics accelerator could be used to perform tasks that had nothing to do with graphics.  OpenCL it wasn't but, the Copper and Blitter could easily be pushed into service for lots of different tasks that would easily bring a 68K to it's knees.</p><p>The custom hardware surrounding that 68K-L8 was WAY ahead of its time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One key reason the Amiga appeared to be so responsive is that it had DMA , and a rudimentary graphics accelerator , slinging pixels around on a 512x384x8 bit display at a time when PCs and Macs were slinging pixels around on a 800x600x32 and 1024x768X32 bit displays in SOFTWARE... The Audio was also hardware accelerated at a time when Apple and low-end PC systems were still bit banging a tiny hardware buffer for 8-bit audio , the Amiga was streaming 16 bit stereo via DMA .
Heck the Apple //gs had better built-in audio than the Mac for years ! Another key feature of the Amiga was that the graphics accelerator could be used to perform tasks that had nothing to do with graphics .
OpenCL it was n't but , the Copper and Blitter could easily be pushed into service for lots of different tasks that would easily bring a 68K to it 's knees.The custom hardware surrounding that 68K-L8 was WAY ahead of its time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One key reason the Amiga appeared to be so responsive is that it had DMA, and a rudimentary graphics accelerator, slinging pixels around on a 512x384x8 bit display at a time when PCs and Macs were slinging pixels around on a 800x600x32 and 1024x768X32 bit displays in SOFTWARE...    The Audio was also hardware accelerated at a time when Apple and low-end PC systems were still bit banging a tiny hardware buffer for 8-bit audio, the Amiga was streaming 16 bit stereo via DMA.
Heck the Apple //gs had better built-in audio than the Mac for years!Another key feature of the Amiga was that the graphics accelerator could be used to perform tasks that had nothing to do with graphics.
OpenCL it wasn't but, the Copper and Blitter could easily be pushed into service for lots of different tasks that would easily bring a 68K to it's knees.The custom hardware surrounding that 68K-L8 was WAY ahead of its time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29798353</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29804211</id>
	<title>Re:Amiga comeback</title>
	<author>yuhong</author>
	<datestamp>1255974660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>On OS/2, MS was themselves partly to blame for choosing Windows instead of OS/2 back in 1991, and then attacking OS/2 afterwards. If MS chose OS/2 instead, Win32 would not even exist! Even worse, OS/2 did not require DOS while Windows did back then. Considering the attacks on DR-DOS got to the point where they ended up attempting to detect DR-DOS using the so-called AARD code and putting out a non-fatal warning message if it was detected, it would have been very important.</htmltext>
<tokenext>On OS/2 , MS was themselves partly to blame for choosing Windows instead of OS/2 back in 1991 , and then attacking OS/2 afterwards .
If MS chose OS/2 instead , Win32 would not even exist !
Even worse , OS/2 did not require DOS while Windows did back then .
Considering the attacks on DR-DOS got to the point where they ended up attempting to detect DR-DOS using the so-called AARD code and putting out a non-fatal warning message if it was detected , it would have been very important .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On OS/2, MS was themselves partly to blame for choosing Windows instead of OS/2 back in 1991, and then attacking OS/2 afterwards.
If MS chose OS/2 instead, Win32 would not even exist!
Even worse, OS/2 did not require DOS while Windows did back then.
Considering the attacks on DR-DOS got to the point where they ended up attempting to detect DR-DOS using the so-called AARD code and putting out a non-fatal warning message if it was detected, it would have been very important.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793435</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29795123</id>
	<title>Re:let the flames begin</title>
	<author>CarpetShark</author>
	<datestamp>1255971540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>is the Amiga platform even relevant any more? The hardware and OS were revolutionary in 1989, but 20 years later, is it really something all that different?</p></div></blockquote><p>Certainly not.  I clicked a menu on my PC back in '94, and it responded this last Saturday.  Now that PCs have finally caught up, I can forget the amiga and move on.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>is the Amiga platform even relevant any more ?
The hardware and OS were revolutionary in 1989 , but 20 years later , is it really something all that different ? Certainly not .
I clicked a menu on my PC back in '94 , and it responded this last Saturday .
Now that PCs have finally caught up , I can forget the amiga and move on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is the Amiga platform even relevant any more?
The hardware and OS were revolutionary in 1989, but 20 years later, is it really something all that different?Certainly not.
I clicked a menu on my PC back in '94, and it responded this last Saturday.
Now that PCs have finally caught up, I can forget the amiga and move on.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792347</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793005</id>
	<title>Re:let the flames begin</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255962120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm an old Amiga user/programmer but you have a good point. For one, all the bankruptcies and bad hardware/software has run enough people off from it to even be able to make a real profit or become relevant again.</p><p>The best thing that could come of this would be to open source the operating system and let the hackers convert some of that goodness over to something usable with Linux or BSD.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm an old Amiga user/programmer but you have a good point .
For one , all the bankruptcies and bad hardware/software has run enough people off from it to even be able to make a real profit or become relevant again.The best thing that could come of this would be to open source the operating system and let the hackers convert some of that goodness over to something usable with Linux or BSD .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm an old Amiga user/programmer but you have a good point.
For one, all the bankruptcies and bad hardware/software has run enough people off from it to even be able to make a real profit or become relevant again.The best thing that could come of this would be to open source the operating system and let the hackers convert some of that goodness over to something usable with Linux or BSD.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792347</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792981</id>
	<title>Re:Hardware?</title>
	<author>Hal\_Porter</author>
	<datestamp>1255962060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You don't need an MMU, you need careful programmers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't need an MMU , you need careful programmers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't need an MMU, you need careful programmers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792357</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29797025</id>
	<title>Re:Wow, my clock must be broken</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255978740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>A true geek, you are not.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A true geek , you are not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A true geek, you are not.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793651</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29795643</id>
	<title>Re:Wow, my clock must be broken</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255973460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your forgetting one important thing! MS Windows fails at everything. When 80\% of users are infected with viruses, spyware, and can't utilize these supposed capabilities then Amiga still has significant advantages and potential. It is sort of like how Mac OS X. It works well- although a tad pricey. Then again MS Windows probably costs more still yet due to the cost of virus removals, anti-virus, memory upgrades, and other related expenses. Point is that the market should be more competitive given the low quality and bloat that MS Windows is-and if people would stop listening to those with your attitude of "nothing else can succeed" and "nothing else will due cause nothing else supports everything" attitude we might get some half-way decent systems. You don't need a system to support everything- even MS Windows doesn't support everything. I can't tell you how much of my stuff doesn't work with MS Windows XP, MS Windows Vista, or MS Windows 7. It does all work with GNU/Linux though. And that is largely because I buy for GNU/Linux and GNU/Linux doesn't loose support just because Microsoft's proprietary ecosystem prevents it. If you have difficulty finding GNU/Linux supported products check out thinkpenguin.com. They sell products that utilize free and open source drivers ensuring you get continued support without any headaches like in MS Windows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your forgetting one important thing !
MS Windows fails at everything .
When 80 \ % of users are infected with viruses , spyware , and ca n't utilize these supposed capabilities then Amiga still has significant advantages and potential .
It is sort of like how Mac OS X. It works well- although a tad pricey .
Then again MS Windows probably costs more still yet due to the cost of virus removals , anti-virus , memory upgrades , and other related expenses .
Point is that the market should be more competitive given the low quality and bloat that MS Windows is-and if people would stop listening to those with your attitude of " nothing else can succeed " and " nothing else will due cause nothing else supports everything " attitude we might get some half-way decent systems .
You do n't need a system to support everything- even MS Windows does n't support everything .
I ca n't tell you how much of my stuff does n't work with MS Windows XP , MS Windows Vista , or MS Windows 7 .
It does all work with GNU/Linux though .
And that is largely because I buy for GNU/Linux and GNU/Linux does n't loose support just because Microsoft 's proprietary ecosystem prevents it .
If you have difficulty finding GNU/Linux supported products check out thinkpenguin.com .
They sell products that utilize free and open source drivers ensuring you get continued support without any headaches like in MS Windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your forgetting one important thing!
MS Windows fails at everything.
When 80\% of users are infected with viruses, spyware, and can't utilize these supposed capabilities then Amiga still has significant advantages and potential.
It is sort of like how Mac OS X. It works well- although a tad pricey.
Then again MS Windows probably costs more still yet due to the cost of virus removals, anti-virus, memory upgrades, and other related expenses.
Point is that the market should be more competitive given the low quality and bloat that MS Windows is-and if people would stop listening to those with your attitude of "nothing else can succeed" and "nothing else will due cause nothing else supports everything" attitude we might get some half-way decent systems.
You don't need a system to support everything- even MS Windows doesn't support everything.
I can't tell you how much of my stuff doesn't work with MS Windows XP, MS Windows Vista, or MS Windows 7.
It does all work with GNU/Linux though.
And that is largely because I buy for GNU/Linux and GNU/Linux doesn't loose support just because Microsoft's proprietary ecosystem prevents it.
If you have difficulty finding GNU/Linux supported products check out thinkpenguin.com.
They sell products that utilize free and open source drivers ensuring you get continued support without any headaches like in MS Windows.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793651</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792781</id>
	<title>Re:Wow, my clock must be broken</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1255960920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For a second there, it looked like I was reading a story about the Iphone being able to check a website in 2009. Ha ha ha! Silly clock radio.</p><p>For a second there, it looked like I was reading a comment from someone still poking fun at the Amiga in 2009. Ha ha ha! Silly clock radio.</p><p>Yep that's right - one Amiga article in a blue moon and the jokes start, yet Slashdot covers all manner of other platforms and systems, whether they're still cutting edge or not.</p><p>Hell, we still have stories about other old platforms too (such as old Macs). The Amiga has plenty of historical importance, but I guess it's sad that the anti-Amiga posters are still here, even in 2009.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For a second there , it looked like I was reading a story about the Iphone being able to check a website in 2009 .
Ha ha ha !
Silly clock radio.For a second there , it looked like I was reading a comment from someone still poking fun at the Amiga in 2009 .
Ha ha ha !
Silly clock radio.Yep that 's right - one Amiga article in a blue moon and the jokes start , yet Slashdot covers all manner of other platforms and systems , whether they 're still cutting edge or not.Hell , we still have stories about other old platforms too ( such as old Macs ) .
The Amiga has plenty of historical importance , but I guess it 's sad that the anti-Amiga posters are still here , even in 2009 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For a second there, it looked like I was reading a story about the Iphone being able to check a website in 2009.
Ha ha ha!
Silly clock radio.For a second there, it looked like I was reading a comment from someone still poking fun at the Amiga in 2009.
Ha ha ha!
Silly clock radio.Yep that's right - one Amiga article in a blue moon and the jokes start, yet Slashdot covers all manner of other platforms and systems, whether they're still cutting edge or not.Hell, we still have stories about other old platforms too (such as old Macs).
The Amiga has plenty of historical importance, but I guess it's sad that the anti-Amiga posters are still here, even in 2009.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792345</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29804351</id>
	<title>Amiga Forever - Emulator</title>
	<author>7bit</author>
	<datestamp>1255976400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I loved my Amiga. It made working with a computer fun and exciting! Bit for bit it was faster and more capable than an PC or Apple or Mac my friends had in the 80's. It was so far ahead of everyone else that it took MS 10 more years to even start coming close (Win 95). As a result it's been impossible for me to be impressed by anything MS does...</p><p>Anyway, I could go on for hours about Amiga and how it would have changed the world if the oil baron who bought it out, bled it dry and illegally bankrupted it for his own profit hadn't gotten involved, but I originally started this post to share the link to the most "Official" Amiga Emulator around:<br>.</p><p>Amiga Forever - Amiga Hardware/Software Emulator<br><a href="http://www.amigaforever.com/" title="amigaforever.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.amigaforever.com/</a> [amigaforever.com]</p><p>It comes with several actual Amiga Kickstart ROM images as well as Workbench OS images and a huge collection of Amiga software and Games to play with! Plus, many more features that can make it easier to use and more fun even than using the original hardware. And it's cheap enough to buy on a lark. I would recommend it to anyone who has any fond memories of their Amiga. Oh, also, I might as well link to the same companies Commodore 64 Emulator package, which I also highly recommend:<br>.</p><p>C64 Forever - Commodore 64 System Emulator, also emulates : PET 2001, CBM 3032, CBM 4032, CBM 8032, VIC 20, CBM 610, C16, Plus/4 and C128<br><a href="http://www.c64forever.com/" title="c64forever.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.c64forever.com/</a> [c64forever.com]</p><p>Enjoy!!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I loved my Amiga .
It made working with a computer fun and exciting !
Bit for bit it was faster and more capable than an PC or Apple or Mac my friends had in the 80 's .
It was so far ahead of everyone else that it took MS 10 more years to even start coming close ( Win 95 ) .
As a result it 's been impossible for me to be impressed by anything MS does...Anyway , I could go on for hours about Amiga and how it would have changed the world if the oil baron who bought it out , bled it dry and illegally bankrupted it for his own profit had n't gotten involved , but I originally started this post to share the link to the most " Official " Amiga Emulator around : .Amiga Forever - Amiga Hardware/Software Emulatorhttp : //www.amigaforever.com/ [ amigaforever.com ] It comes with several actual Amiga Kickstart ROM images as well as Workbench OS images and a huge collection of Amiga software and Games to play with !
Plus , many more features that can make it easier to use and more fun even than using the original hardware .
And it 's cheap enough to buy on a lark .
I would recommend it to anyone who has any fond memories of their Amiga .
Oh , also , I might as well link to the same companies Commodore 64 Emulator package , which I also highly recommend : .C64 Forever - Commodore 64 System Emulator , also emulates : PET 2001 , CBM 3032 , CBM 4032 , CBM 8032 , VIC 20 , CBM 610 , C16 , Plus/4 and C128http : //www.c64forever.com/ [ c64forever.com ] Enjoy ! !
: D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I loved my Amiga.
It made working with a computer fun and exciting!
Bit for bit it was faster and more capable than an PC or Apple or Mac my friends had in the 80's.
It was so far ahead of everyone else that it took MS 10 more years to even start coming close (Win 95).
As a result it's been impossible for me to be impressed by anything MS does...Anyway, I could go on for hours about Amiga and how it would have changed the world if the oil baron who bought it out, bled it dry and illegally bankrupted it for his own profit hadn't gotten involved, but I originally started this post to share the link to the most "Official" Amiga Emulator around:.Amiga Forever - Amiga Hardware/Software Emulatorhttp://www.amigaforever.com/ [amigaforever.com]It comes with several actual Amiga Kickstart ROM images as well as Workbench OS images and a huge collection of Amiga software and Games to play with!
Plus, many more features that can make it easier to use and more fun even than using the original hardware.
And it's cheap enough to buy on a lark.
I would recommend it to anyone who has any fond memories of their Amiga.
Oh, also, I might as well link to the same companies Commodore 64 Emulator package, which I also highly recommend:.C64 Forever - Commodore 64 System Emulator, also emulates : PET 2001, CBM 3032, CBM 4032, CBM 8032, VIC 20, CBM 610, C16, Plus/4 and C128http://www.c64forever.com/ [c64forever.com]Enjoy!!
:D</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29798345</id>
	<title>Not the world as it is...</title>
	<author>petrus4</author>
	<datestamp>1255983600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...but the world as it could be.  That has always been the nature of the Amiga.</p><p>I've always had a strange feeling that the Amiga was like something out of an episode of <i>Sliders.</i></p><p>It was almost as if, with this system, instead of being something from our own world, at some point a brief window to a different and more positive reality was opened; a place where the priority systems of people was aligned with what truly worked, and said place's inhabitants cared more about creativity, and community, and real innovation, and less purely about the profit motive, than they do here...and that for the few seconds said window was open, an A500 fell through it, was found by someone here, reverse engineered, and then reproduced.</p><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0\_1PjOEFPTk" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0\_1PjOEFPTk</a> [youtube.com] - This is an example of what I'm talking about.  A comparison with Linux on a very old machine.  The Amiga always demonstrated the kind of performance which logically, just didn't seem as though it should be possible...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...and yet somehow, it was.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...but the world as it could be .
That has always been the nature of the Amiga.I 've always had a strange feeling that the Amiga was like something out of an episode of Sliders.It was almost as if , with this system , instead of being something from our own world , at some point a brief window to a different and more positive reality was opened ; a place where the priority systems of people was aligned with what truly worked , and said place 's inhabitants cared more about creativity , and community , and real innovation , and less purely about the profit motive , than they do here...and that for the few seconds said window was open , an A500 fell through it , was found by someone here , reverse engineered , and then reproduced.http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = 0 \ _1PjOEFPTk [ youtube.com ] - This is an example of what I 'm talking about .
A comparison with Linux on a very old machine .
The Amiga always demonstrated the kind of performance which logically , just did n't seem as though it should be possible... ...and yet somehow , it was .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...but the world as it could be.
That has always been the nature of the Amiga.I've always had a strange feeling that the Amiga was like something out of an episode of Sliders.It was almost as if, with this system, instead of being something from our own world, at some point a brief window to a different and more positive reality was opened; a place where the priority systems of people was aligned with what truly worked, and said place's inhabitants cared more about creativity, and community, and real innovation, and less purely about the profit motive, than they do here...and that for the few seconds said window was open, an A500 fell through it, was found by someone here, reverse engineered, and then reproduced.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0\_1PjOEFPTk [youtube.com] - This is an example of what I'm talking about.
A comparison with Linux on a very old machine.
The Amiga always demonstrated the kind of performance which logically, just didn't seem as though it should be possible... ...and yet somehow, it was.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29802079</id>
	<title>Re:Wow, my clock must be broken</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1255957020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i> Even a mid-spec'ed Windows PC can handle genuine video editing, multi-track virtual recording studios with awesome soft synths and effects plug-ins, 24-bit colour to massive resolutions.</i></p><p>How is that relevant though? When we have Mac vs Windows battles, is it sufficient to say that?</p><p>I haven't used an Amiga in years, but it's not like they're talking about the A500 these days. AmigaOS 4 won't even run on such a machine (or anywhere near it - IIRC, it's PPC only).</p><p><i>Great in the day, but only interesting in a historical context. The same could be said of the Atari ST or Acorn Archimedes.</i></p><p>And many other platforms, e.g., the Mac. But it's all still news for nerds, historical or not, why not have an occasional story.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Even a mid-spec'ed Windows PC can handle genuine video editing , multi-track virtual recording studios with awesome soft synths and effects plug-ins , 24-bit colour to massive resolutions.How is that relevant though ?
When we have Mac vs Windows battles , is it sufficient to say that ? I have n't used an Amiga in years , but it 's not like they 're talking about the A500 these days .
AmigaOS 4 wo n't even run on such a machine ( or anywhere near it - IIRC , it 's PPC only ) .Great in the day , but only interesting in a historical context .
The same could be said of the Atari ST or Acorn Archimedes.And many other platforms , e.g. , the Mac .
But it 's all still news for nerds , historical or not , why not have an occasional story .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Even a mid-spec'ed Windows PC can handle genuine video editing, multi-track virtual recording studios with awesome soft synths and effects plug-ins, 24-bit colour to massive resolutions.How is that relevant though?
When we have Mac vs Windows battles, is it sufficient to say that?I haven't used an Amiga in years, but it's not like they're talking about the A500 these days.
AmigaOS 4 won't even run on such a machine (or anywhere near it - IIRC, it's PPC only).Great in the day, but only interesting in a historical context.
The same could be said of the Atari ST or Acorn Archimedes.And many other platforms, e.g., the Mac.
But it's all still news for nerds, historical or not, why not have an occasional story.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793651</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792989</id>
	<title>Re:Aye, I had no idea these existed anymore</title>
	<author>mikael\_j</author>
	<datestamp>1255962120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, the Amiga still had plenty of enthusiastic (read: Zealous) users as late as the early years of this millenium, really, I've been to demo parties where there were guys still running their A3000 towers with NetBSD and telling anyone who wanted to listen how awesome their rat's nest of a machine with soldered on components, G3-expansion cards and all that was. The Amiga scene seems to be pretty dead these days though (but the even older 8-bit scene has made a comeback since it somehow attained some sort of "retro cool").</p><p>/Mikael</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , the Amiga still had plenty of enthusiastic ( read : Zealous ) users as late as the early years of this millenium , really , I 've been to demo parties where there were guys still running their A3000 towers with NetBSD and telling anyone who wanted to listen how awesome their rat 's nest of a machine with soldered on components , G3-expansion cards and all that was .
The Amiga scene seems to be pretty dead these days though ( but the even older 8-bit scene has made a comeback since it somehow attained some sort of " retro cool " ) ./Mikael</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, the Amiga still had plenty of enthusiastic (read: Zealous) users as late as the early years of this millenium, really, I've been to demo parties where there were guys still running their A3000 towers with NetBSD and telling anyone who wanted to listen how awesome their rat's nest of a machine with soldered on components, G3-expansion cards and all that was.
The Amiga scene seems to be pretty dead these days though (but the even older 8-bit scene has made a comeback since it somehow attained some sort of "retro cool")./Mikael</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792547</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29794547</id>
	<title>Re:let the flames begin</title>
	<author>IntlHarvester</author>
	<datestamp>1255968840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"I know I'll be flamed, but in all honesty, is the Mac platform even relevant any more? The hardware and OS were revolutionary in 1989, but 20 years later, is it really something all that different?"</p></div><p>If someone came out with a modern Mac Quadra that ran all your old System 7 programs, then yes, it would be safe to say it's irrelevant.</p><p>The impression I got is that the modern Amiga is a hobbyist machine for nostalgic users, they're not really attempting to be "relevant" in the modern PC market.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" I know I 'll be flamed , but in all honesty , is the Mac platform even relevant any more ?
The hardware and OS were revolutionary in 1989 , but 20 years later , is it really something all that different ?
" If someone came out with a modern Mac Quadra that ran all your old System 7 programs , then yes , it would be safe to say it 's irrelevant.The impression I got is that the modern Amiga is a hobbyist machine for nostalgic users , they 're not really attempting to be " relevant " in the modern PC market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I know I'll be flamed, but in all honesty, is the Mac platform even relevant any more?
The hardware and OS were revolutionary in 1989, but 20 years later, is it really something all that different?
"If someone came out with a modern Mac Quadra that ran all your old System 7 programs, then yes, it would be safe to say it's irrelevant.The impression I got is that the modern Amiga is a hobbyist machine for nostalgic users, they're not really attempting to be "relevant" in the modern PC market.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792823</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29797209</id>
	<title>Re:let the flames begin</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255979400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>See, if I posted that to every Mac story, I'd get modded down in an instant.</p></div></blockquote><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...maybe because Macs have been in mainstream production, development, and use for the last twenty years? Sorry, but no, your comparison doesn't wash. I <i>was</i> and Amiga head. It <i>was</i> ten years ahead of its time. And I don't think the parent questioning how Amiga is relevant today is flamebait. It's actually the first reasonable question of nearly everyone who's heard of the system, and deserves to be answered.</p><p>(It's not even a hostile question. Try it this way: "Amiga's back? Narg! So... what's it do now?")</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>See , if I posted that to every Mac story , I 'd get modded down in an instant .
...maybe because Macs have been in mainstream production , development , and use for the last twenty years ?
Sorry , but no , your comparison does n't wash. I was and Amiga head .
It was ten years ahead of its time .
And I do n't think the parent questioning how Amiga is relevant today is flamebait .
It 's actually the first reasonable question of nearly everyone who 's heard of the system , and deserves to be answered .
( It 's not even a hostile question .
Try it this way : " Amiga 's back ?
Narg ! So... what 's it do now ?
" )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>See, if I posted that to every Mac story, I'd get modded down in an instant.
...maybe because Macs have been in mainstream production, development, and use for the last twenty years?
Sorry, but no, your comparison doesn't wash. I was and Amiga head.
It was ten years ahead of its time.
And I don't think the parent questioning how Amiga is relevant today is flamebait.
It's actually the first reasonable question of nearly everyone who's heard of the system, and deserves to be answered.
(It's not even a hostile question.
Try it this way: "Amiga's back?
Narg! So... what's it do now?
")
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792823</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29798271</id>
	<title>Re:Amiga comeback</title>
	<author>Darinbob</author>
	<datestamp>1255983360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yep, better does not usually succeed. I had an Amiga, and an OS/2 machine.  Of course, the nice thing is that eventually stuff does catch up.  Even if some products never seem to really take off, you need to have them out there to serve as the guideposts.  If there had never been any OS except those from Microsoft, do you think Windows 7 would look the way it does?  If we'd only ever had CISC CPUs, do you think we'd have something resembling the modern Intel CPUs?  If we'd never had Smalltalk or Lisp, do you think we'd have something like Java today?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep , better does not usually succeed .
I had an Amiga , and an OS/2 machine .
Of course , the nice thing is that eventually stuff does catch up .
Even if some products never seem to really take off , you need to have them out there to serve as the guideposts .
If there had never been any OS except those from Microsoft , do you think Windows 7 would look the way it does ?
If we 'd only ever had CISC CPUs , do you think we 'd have something resembling the modern Intel CPUs ?
If we 'd never had Smalltalk or Lisp , do you think we 'd have something like Java today ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep, better does not usually succeed.
I had an Amiga, and an OS/2 machine.
Of course, the nice thing is that eventually stuff does catch up.
Even if some products never seem to really take off, you need to have them out there to serve as the guideposts.
If there had never been any OS except those from Microsoft, do you think Windows 7 would look the way it does?
If we'd only ever had CISC CPUs, do you think we'd have something resembling the modern Intel CPUs?
If we'd never had Smalltalk or Lisp, do you think we'd have something like Java today?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793435</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792735</id>
	<title>Re:Wow, my clock must be broken</title>
	<author>R4wBon3</author>
	<datestamp>1255960560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>..."I love you babe. I love you babe. I love you babe."</htmltext>
<tokenext>... " I love you babe .
I love you babe .
I love you babe .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>..."I love you babe.
I love you babe.
I love you babe.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792345</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29805477</id>
	<title>Re:let the flames begin</title>
	<author>node 3</author>
	<datestamp>1256036100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"I know I'll be flamed, but in all honesty, is the Mac platform even relevant any more? The hardware and OS were revolutionary in 1989, but 20 years later, is it really something all that different?"</p><p>See, if I posted that to every Mac story, I'd get modded down in an instant.</p></div><p>Rightfully so, because it's an extremely idiotic thing to say.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Why must every Amiga story (it's not like we get them often, unlike the three Apple stories a day) be bogged down with these flames?</p></div><p>Because Amiga *isn't* relevant today. Since you have such a hard on for Apple, you probably know of at least 10 people who currently own and use a Mac, at least 50 who currently own and use an iPod or iPhone. How many people do you know that currently use an Amiga?</p><p>Media interest, market share, available hardware, available software, retail space (even *outside* of Apple's own stores), their own stores... In which of these categories is Amiga even *remotely* similar to Apple?</p><p>Hell, how many people do you think would even recognize the word Amiga as applies to computers? How many do you think don't know about Apple as applies to computers?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>go to an Apple versus Windows debate, note that every pro-Mac argument is simply an argument against Windows</p></div><p>I use Macs because of their usability, the quality of the hardware, the overall feel and polish of the apps (both from Apple and third party software), and things tend to "just work". Any "Apple versus Windows debate" will have pro-Mac arguments just like mine. You clearly haven't thought this through.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>[pro-Mac arguments are just anti-Windows] and therefore note they can be applied here in favour of the Amiga too</p></div><p>Not really, *because the Amiga isn't a modern platform*. An argument against GM in defense of Toyota is not also an argument in favor of a Model T or a Gremlin.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>See? I used to have trouble arguing for the Amiga in the late 90s, but now supporting a non-Windows platform here on Slashdot is easy<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:) A shame the anti-Amiga trolls are still around though - why not moan about the platforms we hear more often about?</p></div><p>If you think simply being "not Windows" is sufficient to garner support on Slashdot, you are woefully clueless. There will always be supporters of pretty much *any* platform here, but the hive-mind here doesn't just go, "not Windows, then it's good!". In fact, there are a *lot* of Windows supporters here.</p><p>Your powers of observation are severely lacking.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" I know I 'll be flamed , but in all honesty , is the Mac platform even relevant any more ?
The hardware and OS were revolutionary in 1989 , but 20 years later , is it really something all that different ?
" See , if I posted that to every Mac story , I 'd get modded down in an instant.Rightfully so , because it 's an extremely idiotic thing to say.Why must every Amiga story ( it 's not like we get them often , unlike the three Apple stories a day ) be bogged down with these flames ? Because Amiga * is n't * relevant today .
Since you have such a hard on for Apple , you probably know of at least 10 people who currently own and use a Mac , at least 50 who currently own and use an iPod or iPhone .
How many people do you know that currently use an Amiga ? Media interest , market share , available hardware , available software , retail space ( even * outside * of Apple 's own stores ) , their own stores... In which of these categories is Amiga even * remotely * similar to Apple ? Hell , how many people do you think would even recognize the word Amiga as applies to computers ?
How many do you think do n't know about Apple as applies to computers ? go to an Apple versus Windows debate , note that every pro-Mac argument is simply an argument against WindowsI use Macs because of their usability , the quality of the hardware , the overall feel and polish of the apps ( both from Apple and third party software ) , and things tend to " just work " .
Any " Apple versus Windows debate " will have pro-Mac arguments just like mine .
You clearly have n't thought this through .
[ pro-Mac arguments are just anti-Windows ] and therefore note they can be applied here in favour of the Amiga tooNot really , * because the Amiga is n't a modern platform * .
An argument against GM in defense of Toyota is not also an argument in favor of a Model T or a Gremlin.See ?
I used to have trouble arguing for the Amiga in the late 90s , but now supporting a non-Windows platform here on Slashdot is easy : ) A shame the anti-Amiga trolls are still around though - why not moan about the platforms we hear more often about ? If you think simply being " not Windows " is sufficient to garner support on Slashdot , you are woefully clueless .
There will always be supporters of pretty much * any * platform here , but the hive-mind here does n't just go , " not Windows , then it 's good ! " .
In fact , there are a * lot * of Windows supporters here.Your powers of observation are severely lacking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I know I'll be flamed, but in all honesty, is the Mac platform even relevant any more?
The hardware and OS were revolutionary in 1989, but 20 years later, is it really something all that different?
"See, if I posted that to every Mac story, I'd get modded down in an instant.Rightfully so, because it's an extremely idiotic thing to say.Why must every Amiga story (it's not like we get them often, unlike the three Apple stories a day) be bogged down with these flames?Because Amiga *isn't* relevant today.
Since you have such a hard on for Apple, you probably know of at least 10 people who currently own and use a Mac, at least 50 who currently own and use an iPod or iPhone.
How many people do you know that currently use an Amiga?Media interest, market share, available hardware, available software, retail space (even *outside* of Apple's own stores), their own stores... In which of these categories is Amiga even *remotely* similar to Apple?Hell, how many people do you think would even recognize the word Amiga as applies to computers?
How many do you think don't know about Apple as applies to computers?go to an Apple versus Windows debate, note that every pro-Mac argument is simply an argument against WindowsI use Macs because of their usability, the quality of the hardware, the overall feel and polish of the apps (both from Apple and third party software), and things tend to "just work".
Any "Apple versus Windows debate" will have pro-Mac arguments just like mine.
You clearly haven't thought this through.
[pro-Mac arguments are just anti-Windows] and therefore note they can be applied here in favour of the Amiga tooNot really, *because the Amiga isn't a modern platform*.
An argument against GM in defense of Toyota is not also an argument in favor of a Model T or a Gremlin.See?
I used to have trouble arguing for the Amiga in the late 90s, but now supporting a non-Windows platform here on Slashdot is easy :) A shame the anti-Amiga trolls are still around though - why not moan about the platforms we hear more often about?If you think simply being "not Windows" is sufficient to garner support on Slashdot, you are woefully clueless.
There will always be supporters of pretty much *any* platform here, but the hive-mind here doesn't just go, "not Windows, then it's good!".
In fact, there are a *lot* of Windows supporters here.Your powers of observation are severely lacking.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792823</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29808043</id>
	<title>Many people still use the Amiga regularly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256053620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Amiga is a strong platform, What other computer platform is still alive from the 80's? Amiga has a large following and the user group is strong. I myself still use my A4000 that I towerised along with a Video Toaster Flyer, I have over 200gb of SCSI Audio Video drive space attached to the flyer and it still works flawlessly. Its 20 years old, PC's never last that long!</p><p>Is the Amiga ever going to become what it was? No. But its fun and its not as outdated as some say. It was way ahead of its time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Amiga is a strong platform , What other computer platform is still alive from the 80 's ?
Amiga has a large following and the user group is strong .
I myself still use my A4000 that I towerised along with a Video Toaster Flyer , I have over 200gb of SCSI Audio Video drive space attached to the flyer and it still works flawlessly .
Its 20 years old , PC 's never last that long ! Is the Amiga ever going to become what it was ?
No. But its fun and its not as outdated as some say .
It was way ahead of its time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Amiga is a strong platform, What other computer platform is still alive from the 80's?
Amiga has a large following and the user group is strong.
I myself still use my A4000 that I towerised along with a Video Toaster Flyer, I have over 200gb of SCSI Audio Video drive space attached to the flyer and it still works flawlessly.
Its 20 years old, PC's never last that long!Is the Amiga ever going to become what it was?
No. But its fun and its not as outdated as some say.
It was way ahead of its time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29796717</id>
	<title>Re:Brutality</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255977720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the Amiga has been allowed to "die" back in the mid 90s I think it would probably be in a much better position than it is now.</p><p>Endless promises and outright lies over the years have slowly destroyed the community that was once so strong. If people had just accept that it was a retro system, much like the Archimedes and Atari ST guys I think more people would be interested in the Amiga today. I sold my last one (yes, the "Ami" part of my handle is short for Amiga) in 2004. I was just so fed up with the whole thing I just wanted rid of it.</p><p>The World of Amiga 2001 was the final nail in the coffin I think - we (the organisers) had been promised a new Amiga and OS4 running on it for the show, we even had a full page magazine ad for it. Then they tell us two days before the event that actually they have not even started planning the new hardware and OS, let alone prototyped it. How could we ever trust them after that? We didn't even like what they were promising: a final classic OS update and then something called AmigaOS but otherwise baring no relationship to it at all and running on mobile phones and set top boxes. Even the classic OS update seemed pointless as there would be no new software to run on it and the last chance to keep the few remaining developers with us was fast slipping away.</p><p>Up until that point people were still doing stuff with Amigas, making new hardware and apps and generally getting a lot out of them. On that day people kind of realised that all the effort and energy they put in had been shit on by some lying arse holes who a decade later still have not delivered a single product. All they wanted to do was milk the community for all it was worth while making plans to simply discard all the things we loved and produce a VM that had already missed the boat Java sailed in on by about 5 years.</p><p>The best thing that could have happened to the Amiga would have been for it to die in 1994 and the source to the OS to have been leaked. If that had happened I imagine I may well still be running one today.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the Amiga has been allowed to " die " back in the mid 90s I think it would probably be in a much better position than it is now.Endless promises and outright lies over the years have slowly destroyed the community that was once so strong .
If people had just accept that it was a retro system , much like the Archimedes and Atari ST guys I think more people would be interested in the Amiga today .
I sold my last one ( yes , the " Ami " part of my handle is short for Amiga ) in 2004 .
I was just so fed up with the whole thing I just wanted rid of it.The World of Amiga 2001 was the final nail in the coffin I think - we ( the organisers ) had been promised a new Amiga and OS4 running on it for the show , we even had a full page magazine ad for it .
Then they tell us two days before the event that actually they have not even started planning the new hardware and OS , let alone prototyped it .
How could we ever trust them after that ?
We did n't even like what they were promising : a final classic OS update and then something called AmigaOS but otherwise baring no relationship to it at all and running on mobile phones and set top boxes .
Even the classic OS update seemed pointless as there would be no new software to run on it and the last chance to keep the few remaining developers with us was fast slipping away.Up until that point people were still doing stuff with Amigas , making new hardware and apps and generally getting a lot out of them .
On that day people kind of realised that all the effort and energy they put in had been shit on by some lying arse holes who a decade later still have not delivered a single product .
All they wanted to do was milk the community for all it was worth while making plans to simply discard all the things we loved and produce a VM that had already missed the boat Java sailed in on by about 5 years.The best thing that could have happened to the Amiga would have been for it to die in 1994 and the source to the OS to have been leaked .
If that had happened I imagine I may well still be running one today .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the Amiga has been allowed to "die" back in the mid 90s I think it would probably be in a much better position than it is now.Endless promises and outright lies over the years have slowly destroyed the community that was once so strong.
If people had just accept that it was a retro system, much like the Archimedes and Atari ST guys I think more people would be interested in the Amiga today.
I sold my last one (yes, the "Ami" part of my handle is short for Amiga) in 2004.
I was just so fed up with the whole thing I just wanted rid of it.The World of Amiga 2001 was the final nail in the coffin I think - we (the organisers) had been promised a new Amiga and OS4 running on it for the show, we even had a full page magazine ad for it.
Then they tell us two days before the event that actually they have not even started planning the new hardware and OS, let alone prototyped it.
How could we ever trust them after that?
We didn't even like what they were promising: a final classic OS update and then something called AmigaOS but otherwise baring no relationship to it at all and running on mobile phones and set top boxes.
Even the classic OS update seemed pointless as there would be no new software to run on it and the last chance to keep the few remaining developers with us was fast slipping away.Up until that point people were still doing stuff with Amigas, making new hardware and apps and generally getting a lot out of them.
On that day people kind of realised that all the effort and energy they put in had been shit on by some lying arse holes who a decade later still have not delivered a single product.
All they wanted to do was milk the community for all it was worth while making plans to simply discard all the things we loved and produce a VM that had already missed the boat Java sailed in on by about 5 years.The best thing that could have happened to the Amiga would have been for it to die in 1994 and the source to the OS to have been leaked.
If that had happened I imagine I may well still be running one today.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792419</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792419</id>
	<title>Brutality</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255958520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is little good in them coming out of their litigation.</p><p>Winding back the clock a little, Amiga Inc came out of the broken bones of the old Amiga organisation. They came up with some plans, most of which broke down.</p><p>What they did do, was ally themselves up in an evil triumverate, with two other companies.</p><p>Amiga Inc, Hyperion, and a third company, Eyetech.<br>These three cooked up a goofy plan to ship a half baked OS, on severely half baked PPC hardware, so broken it became an in joke. The worst lunatics in the 'community' bandwagoned this complete junk, and the vast majority of people who fell for it, paid a lot of money for over priced junk. The warranty was worthless. A great many people walked away during this time, and a great deal of friction arose because of these antics.</p><p>The fact that two of these were killing themselves through litigation led to a hope they might destroy themselves, if for no other reason than they be denied the ground to sell their next 'release' on the unwise, the ill educated, or the stupid.</p><p>Putting that aside, its hard to consider Amiga OS, and the hardware choices are appallingly bad (unless you like crippled and old PPC equipment tied to old junk from the PC world) - so unless this 'new' start comes up with very serious improvements in every area, including warranty and support, and merchantable quality in their goods and services, and decent, reasonably priced hardware, then there is no reason for them to even exist.  And on past events, they don't deserve to.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is little good in them coming out of their litigation.Winding back the clock a little , Amiga Inc came out of the broken bones of the old Amiga organisation .
They came up with some plans , most of which broke down.What they did do , was ally themselves up in an evil triumverate , with two other companies.Amiga Inc , Hyperion , and a third company , Eyetech.These three cooked up a goofy plan to ship a half baked OS , on severely half baked PPC hardware , so broken it became an in joke .
The worst lunatics in the 'community ' bandwagoned this complete junk , and the vast majority of people who fell for it , paid a lot of money for over priced junk .
The warranty was worthless .
A great many people walked away during this time , and a great deal of friction arose because of these antics.The fact that two of these were killing themselves through litigation led to a hope they might destroy themselves , if for no other reason than they be denied the ground to sell their next 'release ' on the unwise , the ill educated , or the stupid.Putting that aside , its hard to consider Amiga OS , and the hardware choices are appallingly bad ( unless you like crippled and old PPC equipment tied to old junk from the PC world ) - so unless this 'new ' start comes up with very serious improvements in every area , including warranty and support , and merchantable quality in their goods and services , and decent , reasonably priced hardware , then there is no reason for them to even exist .
And on past events , they do n't deserve to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is little good in them coming out of their litigation.Winding back the clock a little, Amiga Inc came out of the broken bones of the old Amiga organisation.
They came up with some plans, most of which broke down.What they did do, was ally themselves up in an evil triumverate, with two other companies.Amiga Inc, Hyperion, and a third company, Eyetech.These three cooked up a goofy plan to ship a half baked OS, on severely half baked PPC hardware, so broken it became an in joke.
The worst lunatics in the 'community' bandwagoned this complete junk, and the vast majority of people who fell for it, paid a lot of money for over priced junk.
The warranty was worthless.
A great many people walked away during this time, and a great deal of friction arose because of these antics.The fact that two of these were killing themselves through litigation led to a hope they might destroy themselves, if for no other reason than they be denied the ground to sell their next 'release' on the unwise, the ill educated, or the stupid.Putting that aside, its hard to consider Amiga OS, and the hardware choices are appallingly bad (unless you like crippled and old PPC equipment tied to old junk from the PC world) - so unless this 'new' start comes up with very serious improvements in every area, including warranty and support, and merchantable quality in their goods and services, and decent, reasonably priced hardware, then there is no reason for them to even exist.
And on past events, they don't deserve to.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793403</id>
	<title>Re:let the flames begin</title>
	<author>Troy</author>
	<datestamp>1255964040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The difference is that what made the Amiga so revolutionary was it's ability to get mid-90s quality media and performance from mid-80s hardware. While the OS doubtlessly played a role in this, the question of the relevancy of AmigaOS in 2009 goes back to that same issue: does Amiga have the potential to out-perform contemporary hardware to the same degree that it did back in 1985?</p><p>Given the people at the helm today and the rate of development of modern PC hardware, I would be kind of surprised if they could. It's a shame, because I upgraded from a Commodore 64 to an Amiga 500 back in 1987, and used it faithfully for several years until I went to college.</p><p>Amiga had its chance to make its mark in the mid-80s, and Commodore unfortunately squandered that opportunity.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The difference is that what made the Amiga so revolutionary was it 's ability to get mid-90s quality media and performance from mid-80s hardware .
While the OS doubtlessly played a role in this , the question of the relevancy of AmigaOS in 2009 goes back to that same issue : does Amiga have the potential to out-perform contemporary hardware to the same degree that it did back in 1985 ? Given the people at the helm today and the rate of development of modern PC hardware , I would be kind of surprised if they could .
It 's a shame , because I upgraded from a Commodore 64 to an Amiga 500 back in 1987 , and used it faithfully for several years until I went to college.Amiga had its chance to make its mark in the mid-80s , and Commodore unfortunately squandered that opportunity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The difference is that what made the Amiga so revolutionary was it's ability to get mid-90s quality media and performance from mid-80s hardware.
While the OS doubtlessly played a role in this, the question of the relevancy of AmigaOS in 2009 goes back to that same issue: does Amiga have the potential to out-perform contemporary hardware to the same degree that it did back in 1985?Given the people at the helm today and the rate of development of modern PC hardware, I would be kind of surprised if they could.
It's a shame, because I upgraded from a Commodore 64 to an Amiga 500 back in 1987, and used it faithfully for several years until I went to college.Amiga had its chance to make its mark in the mid-80s, and Commodore unfortunately squandered that opportunity.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792823</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29812307</id>
	<title>AmigaOS could still teach us a thing or two</title>
	<author>asteinmetz</author>
	<datestamp>1256067840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, the ship sank long ago and if we raised it we wouldn't want to sail in it.  Still, I never tire of these nostalgic reveries that the occasional Amiga article triggers.  I'm not a musician or an artist or a programmer, for that matter, but the Amiga allowed me to be quite the dilettante and be part of a community where we felt like we where really pushing the envelope.  I was writing Mandelbrot set generators, sampling and sequencing music, rendering 3D animations with image-captured texture mapping, etc.  (and there was a lot of etc).  Ahh, good times...but no big deal by today's standards.


There is one feature that I wish would catch on in the PC arena - inter-application scripting. Why can't Excel talk to Photoshop?  By 1990, just about every Amiga application could talk to each other using ARexx.  I commend Microsoft for implementing VB scripting across Office apps but wish this had caught on.  I use past perfect tense because I think this ship has sailed (to reuse the sailing metaphor).  With everything moving into the cloud we are seeing incredible mash-ups of apps, but it is all out of the hands of the casual user.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , the ship sank long ago and if we raised it we would n't want to sail in it .
Still , I never tire of these nostalgic reveries that the occasional Amiga article triggers .
I 'm not a musician or an artist or a programmer , for that matter , but the Amiga allowed me to be quite the dilettante and be part of a community where we felt like we where really pushing the envelope .
I was writing Mandelbrot set generators , sampling and sequencing music , rendering 3D animations with image-captured texture mapping , etc .
( and there was a lot of etc ) .
Ahh , good times...but no big deal by today 's standards .
There is one feature that I wish would catch on in the PC arena - inter-application scripting .
Why ca n't Excel talk to Photoshop ?
By 1990 , just about every Amiga application could talk to each other using ARexx .
I commend Microsoft for implementing VB scripting across Office apps but wish this had caught on .
I use past perfect tense because I think this ship has sailed ( to reuse the sailing metaphor ) .
With everything moving into the cloud we are seeing incredible mash-ups of apps , but it is all out of the hands of the casual user .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, the ship sank long ago and if we raised it we wouldn't want to sail in it.
Still, I never tire of these nostalgic reveries that the occasional Amiga article triggers.
I'm not a musician or an artist or a programmer, for that matter, but the Amiga allowed me to be quite the dilettante and be part of a community where we felt like we where really pushing the envelope.
I was writing Mandelbrot set generators, sampling and sequencing music, rendering 3D animations with image-captured texture mapping, etc.
(and there was a lot of etc).
Ahh, good times...but no big deal by today's standards.
There is one feature that I wish would catch on in the PC arena - inter-application scripting.
Why can't Excel talk to Photoshop?
By 1990, just about every Amiga application could talk to each other using ARexx.
I commend Microsoft for implementing VB scripting across Office apps but wish this had caught on.
I use past perfect tense because I think this ship has sailed (to reuse the sailing metaphor).
With everything moving into the cloud we are seeing incredible mash-ups of apps, but it is all out of the hands of the casual user.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29800971</id>
	<title>The amiga os is still usefull...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255950840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>   I constantly see people post, 'let it go', or 'how is it usefull', well personally I STILL USE the Amiga OS for a number of reasons.   I use amikit with os3.9 almost entirely for using arexx.   Often I find it easier and faster to whip together an arexx script to accomplish a vast number of things that I either can't do on other platforms or it takes much longer to do.    For example not long ago I needed a way to automatically cycle displaying a group of websites.   It took me about 2 minutes to script this in arexx.   I also use it simply because it's fun.  I often find myself wishing windows or mac os could be skinned and altered as easily as I can the amiga os.  And I find myself wishing there was a shell (for any other platform) that even came close to kingcon.    I find myself wishing other os's had the simple amiga windows push/pull button for windows stacking.   And I find myself constantly missing the application control of arexx. (sorry, applescript sucked but nice try).  So... yes, I still use the amiga os, and still find it usefull.   (and yes I also use many other os's, linux centos, win xp &amp; mac osx)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I constantly see people post , 'let it go ' , or 'how is it usefull ' , well personally I STILL USE the Amiga OS for a number of reasons .
I use amikit with os3.9 almost entirely for using arexx .
Often I find it easier and faster to whip together an arexx script to accomplish a vast number of things that I either ca n't do on other platforms or it takes much longer to do .
For example not long ago I needed a way to automatically cycle displaying a group of websites .
It took me about 2 minutes to script this in arexx .
I also use it simply because it 's fun .
I often find myself wishing windows or mac os could be skinned and altered as easily as I can the amiga os .
And I find myself wishing there was a shell ( for any other platform ) that even came close to kingcon .
I find myself wishing other os 's had the simple amiga windows push/pull button for windows stacking .
And I find myself constantly missing the application control of arexx .
( sorry , applescript sucked but nice try ) .
So... yes , I still use the amiga os , and still find it usefull .
( and yes I also use many other os 's , linux centos , win xp &amp; mac osx )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>   I constantly see people post, 'let it go', or 'how is it usefull', well personally I STILL USE the Amiga OS for a number of reasons.
I use amikit with os3.9 almost entirely for using arexx.
Often I find it easier and faster to whip together an arexx script to accomplish a vast number of things that I either can't do on other platforms or it takes much longer to do.
For example not long ago I needed a way to automatically cycle displaying a group of websites.
It took me about 2 minutes to script this in arexx.
I also use it simply because it's fun.
I often find myself wishing windows or mac os could be skinned and altered as easily as I can the amiga os.
And I find myself wishing there was a shell (for any other platform) that even came close to kingcon.
I find myself wishing other os's had the simple amiga windows push/pull button for windows stacking.
And I find myself constantly missing the application control of arexx.
(sorry, applescript sucked but nice try).
So... yes, I still use the amiga os, and still find it usefull.
(and yes I also use many other os's, linux centos, win xp &amp; mac osx)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793843</id>
	<title>Re:let the flames begin</title>
	<author>itsdapead</author>
	<datestamp>1255965900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"I know I'll be flamed, but in all honesty, is the Mac platform even relevant any more? The hardware and OS were revolutionary in 1989, but 20 years later..."</p></div><p>...they have been through 20 years of intensive development in order to stay competitive in the market. The hardware platform has changed fundamentally - twice - and the original Mac OS has been torn up and replaced. Enough software developers have been kept sweet to ensure a substantial set of quality applications for the platform. Because Mac has a non-negligible market share, there is reasonable support from peripheral manufacturers.
</p><p>Basically, Mac has been a going, evolving, concern with a significant user base for 20 years, while AmigaOS has been in the doldrums, kept dimly flickering by a few die-hard fans.
</p><p>However, as a media-optimzed OS, I'm a re-vamped AmigaOS might be able to make serious inroads into BeOS's market share.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" I know I 'll be flamed , but in all honesty , is the Mac platform even relevant any more ?
The hardware and OS were revolutionary in 1989 , but 20 years later... " ...they have been through 20 years of intensive development in order to stay competitive in the market .
The hardware platform has changed fundamentally - twice - and the original Mac OS has been torn up and replaced .
Enough software developers have been kept sweet to ensure a substantial set of quality applications for the platform .
Because Mac has a non-negligible market share , there is reasonable support from peripheral manufacturers .
Basically , Mac has been a going , evolving , concern with a significant user base for 20 years , while AmigaOS has been in the doldrums , kept dimly flickering by a few die-hard fans .
However , as a media-optimzed OS , I 'm a re-vamped AmigaOS might be able to make serious inroads into BeOS 's market share .
: - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I know I'll be flamed, but in all honesty, is the Mac platform even relevant any more?
The hardware and OS were revolutionary in 1989, but 20 years later..."...they have been through 20 years of intensive development in order to stay competitive in the market.
The hardware platform has changed fundamentally - twice - and the original Mac OS has been torn up and replaced.
Enough software developers have been kept sweet to ensure a substantial set of quality applications for the platform.
Because Mac has a non-negligible market share, there is reasonable support from peripheral manufacturers.
Basically, Mac has been a going, evolving, concern with a significant user base for 20 years, while AmigaOS has been in the doldrums, kept dimly flickering by a few die-hard fans.
However, as a media-optimzed OS, I'm a re-vamped AmigaOS might be able to make serious inroads into BeOS's market share.
:-)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792823</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29798843</id>
	<title>Re:Amiga comeback</title>
	<author>Speare</author>
	<datestamp>1255985220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'mma gonna let you finish but</p> </div><p>It's like you stepped on a kitten, Atrox666.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I'mma gon na let you finish but It 's like you stepped on a kitten , Atrox666 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'mma gonna let you finish but It's like you stepped on a kitten, Atrox666.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793435</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29798157</id>
	<title>Re:Wow, my clock must be broken</title>
	<author>Libertarian001</author>
	<datestamp>1255983000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Right.  It's not Linux, so who the fuck cares?  Right?  You don't deserve a civilized a response.  Get back in the shed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Right .
It 's not Linux , so who the fuck cares ?
Right ? You do n't deserve a civilized a response .
Get back in the shed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right.
It's not Linux, so who the fuck cares?
Right?  You don't deserve a civilized a response.
Get back in the shed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793651</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29797299</id>
	<title>guys.. let it go</title>
	<author>synthesizerpatel</author>
	<datestamp>1255979820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Every time I hear about the Amiga now I remember an NPR story that talked about how the clothing you wear in your 30s is usually slightly updated versions of the same things you wore in your 20s -- for the simple fact that you equate the clothing you wear with a more youthful and fun time and have a sub-concious comfort in persisting.</p><p>If you ask any 'hip' 20 year old, no matter how hip you were 10 years ago -- whatever you're wearing now is stupid and you're completely out of touch with whats cool now.</p><p>I can say this as a die-hard Amiga user (die hard until C= folded that is..)</p><p>Those who dwell in the past are doomed to repeat it to anyone who will listen. And those people are also doomed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Every time I hear about the Amiga now I remember an NPR story that talked about how the clothing you wear in your 30s is usually slightly updated versions of the same things you wore in your 20s -- for the simple fact that you equate the clothing you wear with a more youthful and fun time and have a sub-concious comfort in persisting.If you ask any 'hip ' 20 year old , no matter how hip you were 10 years ago -- whatever you 're wearing now is stupid and you 're completely out of touch with whats cool now.I can say this as a die-hard Amiga user ( die hard until C = folded that is.. ) Those who dwell in the past are doomed to repeat it to anyone who will listen .
And those people are also doomed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Every time I hear about the Amiga now I remember an NPR story that talked about how the clothing you wear in your 30s is usually slightly updated versions of the same things you wore in your 20s -- for the simple fact that you equate the clothing you wear with a more youthful and fun time and have a sub-concious comfort in persisting.If you ask any 'hip' 20 year old, no matter how hip you were 10 years ago -- whatever you're wearing now is stupid and you're completely out of touch with whats cool now.I can say this as a die-hard Amiga user (die hard until C= folded that is..)Those who dwell in the past are doomed to repeat it to anyone who will listen.
And those people are also doomed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29805213</id>
	<title>Re:Wow, my clock must be broken</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256032620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>One key reason the Amiga appeared to be so responsive is that it had DMA, and a rudimentary graphics accelerator, slinging pixels around on a 512x384x8 bit display at a time</p></div></blockquote><p>You mean x4 or x5, x8 wasn't available until the AGA chipset came about at which time PCs had completely outpaced the Amiga.</p><blockquote><div><p>the Amiga was streaming 16 bit stereo via DMA</p></div></blockquote><p>The Amiga's sound hardware never advanced beyond four channels of 8-bit samples played at below 30 kHz. Expansion cards were available for the expandable models, but that's no different from any PC.</p><blockquote><div><p>the Copper and Blitter could easily be pushed into service for lots of different tasks that would easily bring a 68K to it's knees</p></div></blockquote><p>On later models, games used to paint polygons using the CPU because it was faster than using the blitter. The chipset was advanced when the Amiga was released, but it soon became a millstone around the machine's neck. Eg. using bitplanes was a clever way of getting more colours out of slow memory, but hopeless for high resolutions and bitdepths.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>One key reason the Amiga appeared to be so responsive is that it had DMA , and a rudimentary graphics accelerator , slinging pixels around on a 512x384x8 bit display at a timeYou mean x4 or x5 , x8 was n't available until the AGA chipset came about at which time PCs had completely outpaced the Amiga.the Amiga was streaming 16 bit stereo via DMAThe Amiga 's sound hardware never advanced beyond four channels of 8-bit samples played at below 30 kHz .
Expansion cards were available for the expandable models , but that 's no different from any PC.the Copper and Blitter could easily be pushed into service for lots of different tasks that would easily bring a 68K to it 's kneesOn later models , games used to paint polygons using the CPU because it was faster than using the blitter .
The chipset was advanced when the Amiga was released , but it soon became a millstone around the machine 's neck .
Eg. using bitplanes was a clever way of getting more colours out of slow memory , but hopeless for high resolutions and bitdepths .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One key reason the Amiga appeared to be so responsive is that it had DMA, and a rudimentary graphics accelerator, slinging pixels around on a 512x384x8 bit display at a timeYou mean x4 or x5, x8 wasn't available until the AGA chipset came about at which time PCs had completely outpaced the Amiga.the Amiga was streaming 16 bit stereo via DMAThe Amiga's sound hardware never advanced beyond four channels of 8-bit samples played at below 30 kHz.
Expansion cards were available for the expandable models, but that's no different from any PC.the Copper and Blitter could easily be pushed into service for lots of different tasks that would easily bring a 68K to it's kneesOn later models, games used to paint polygons using the CPU because it was faster than using the blitter.
The chipset was advanced when the Amiga was released, but it soon became a millstone around the machine's neck.
Eg. using bitplanes was a clever way of getting more colours out of slow memory, but hopeless for high resolutions and bitdepths.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29804095</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29794813</id>
	<title>yayayayayayaya</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255970160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As someone who still uses classic Amiga HW/SW (along with windows and linux on x86 and morphos on ppc), these two companies have been so far below my radar for so long, this news is new, but less than newsworthy, IMO. I did buy AmigaOS 3.5 andd 3.9, but I never really used them much as it seemed to me that the benefits were outweighed by the hassles of upgrading. I also have a copy of that AmigaDE SDK thing that was basically Tao Group's ElateOS, but I never got very far with it. I *can* say that my ca. 1991 A3000 running AmigaOS 3.1 is a far more dependable system than newer (dell) windows boxes we've bought at work. So when I need to do stuff that isn't impossible to do on a 25Mhz 68040, I use my desktop. If I need more speed, or resolution, or whatever, I use my WinXP/Inspiron 8600 (6 years old). All my web stuff runs on my CentOS x86 server. And if I want to hack, I turn to my Pegasos I running MorphOS. (As long as one of my cats hasn't already commandeered it for mouse research purposes.) IMO, this story is about as useful as an announcement that scientists have discovered that chocolate and peanut butter taste good together.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As someone who still uses classic Amiga HW/SW ( along with windows and linux on x86 and morphos on ppc ) , these two companies have been so far below my radar for so long , this news is new , but less than newsworthy , IMO .
I did buy AmigaOS 3.5 andd 3.9 , but I never really used them much as it seemed to me that the benefits were outweighed by the hassles of upgrading .
I also have a copy of that AmigaDE SDK thing that was basically Tao Group 's ElateOS , but I never got very far with it .
I * can * say that my ca .
1991 A3000 running AmigaOS 3.1 is a far more dependable system than newer ( dell ) windows boxes we 've bought at work .
So when I need to do stuff that is n't impossible to do on a 25Mhz 68040 , I use my desktop .
If I need more speed , or resolution , or whatever , I use my WinXP/Inspiron 8600 ( 6 years old ) .
All my web stuff runs on my CentOS x86 server .
And if I want to hack , I turn to my Pegasos I running MorphOS .
( As long as one of my cats has n't already commandeered it for mouse research purposes .
) IMO , this story is about as useful as an announcement that scientists have discovered that chocolate and peanut butter taste good together .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As someone who still uses classic Amiga HW/SW (along with windows and linux on x86 and morphos on ppc), these two companies have been so far below my radar for so long, this news is new, but less than newsworthy, IMO.
I did buy AmigaOS 3.5 andd 3.9, but I never really used them much as it seemed to me that the benefits were outweighed by the hassles of upgrading.
I also have a copy of that AmigaDE SDK thing that was basically Tao Group's ElateOS, but I never got very far with it.
I *can* say that my ca.
1991 A3000 running AmigaOS 3.1 is a far more dependable system than newer (dell) windows boxes we've bought at work.
So when I need to do stuff that isn't impossible to do on a 25Mhz 68040, I use my desktop.
If I need more speed, or resolution, or whatever, I use my WinXP/Inspiron 8600 (6 years old).
All my web stuff runs on my CentOS x86 server.
And if I want to hack, I turn to my Pegasos I running MorphOS.
(As long as one of my cats hasn't already commandeered it for mouse research purposes.
) IMO, this story is about as useful as an announcement that scientists have discovered that chocolate and peanut butter taste good together.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792823</id>
	<title>Re:let the flames begin</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255961220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"I know I'll be flamed, but in all honesty, is the Mac platform even relevant any more? The hardware and OS were revolutionary in 1989, but 20 years later, is it really something all that different?"</p><p>See, if I posted that to every Mac story, I'd get modded down in an instant. Please, mod the parent down, as it's no different a troll. Why must every Amiga story (it's not like we get them often, unlike the three Apple stories a day) be bogged down with these flames?</p><p>In answer to your question - go to an Apple versus Windows debate, note that every pro-Mac argument is simply an argument against Windows, and therefore note they can be applied here in favour of the Amiga too. E.g., you don't have to worry about viruses, DRM, bloatware. Or perhaps borrow from Iphone arguments - e.g., "it doesn't matter that it gets features later, it just does them better. Amiga are a market leader, because other companies looked to them in the past. If it lacks certain features like Flash or Java, that's obviously a good thing, as they're obviously bloated".</p><p>See? I used to have trouble arguing for the Amiga in the late 90s, but now supporting a non-Windows platform here on Slashdot is easy<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:) A shame the anti-Amiga trolls are still around though - why not moan about the platforms we hear more often about?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I know I 'll be flamed , but in all honesty , is the Mac platform even relevant any more ?
The hardware and OS were revolutionary in 1989 , but 20 years later , is it really something all that different ?
" See , if I posted that to every Mac story , I 'd get modded down in an instant .
Please , mod the parent down , as it 's no different a troll .
Why must every Amiga story ( it 's not like we get them often , unlike the three Apple stories a day ) be bogged down with these flames ? In answer to your question - go to an Apple versus Windows debate , note that every pro-Mac argument is simply an argument against Windows , and therefore note they can be applied here in favour of the Amiga too .
E.g. , you do n't have to worry about viruses , DRM , bloatware .
Or perhaps borrow from Iphone arguments - e.g. , " it does n't matter that it gets features later , it just does them better .
Amiga are a market leader , because other companies looked to them in the past .
If it lacks certain features like Flash or Java , that 's obviously a good thing , as they 're obviously bloated " .See ?
I used to have trouble arguing for the Amiga in the late 90s , but now supporting a non-Windows platform here on Slashdot is easy : ) A shame the anti-Amiga trolls are still around though - why not moan about the platforms we hear more often about ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I know I'll be flamed, but in all honesty, is the Mac platform even relevant any more?
The hardware and OS were revolutionary in 1989, but 20 years later, is it really something all that different?
"See, if I posted that to every Mac story, I'd get modded down in an instant.
Please, mod the parent down, as it's no different a troll.
Why must every Amiga story (it's not like we get them often, unlike the three Apple stories a day) be bogged down with these flames?In answer to your question - go to an Apple versus Windows debate, note that every pro-Mac argument is simply an argument against Windows, and therefore note they can be applied here in favour of the Amiga too.
E.g., you don't have to worry about viruses, DRM, bloatware.
Or perhaps borrow from Iphone arguments - e.g., "it doesn't matter that it gets features later, it just does them better.
Amiga are a market leader, because other companies looked to them in the past.
If it lacks certain features like Flash or Java, that's obviously a good thing, as they're obviously bloated".See?
I used to have trouble arguing for the Amiga in the late 90s, but now supporting a non-Windows platform here on Slashdot is easy :) A shame the anti-Amiga trolls are still around though - why not moan about the platforms we hear more often about?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792347</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792385</id>
	<title>Re:let the flames begin</title>
	<author>BuR4N</author>
	<datestamp>1255958220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>is the Amiga platform even relevant any more? The hardware and OS were revolutionary in 1989</p></div><p>Thats 20 years after Unix was released, right ?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>is the Amiga platform even relevant any more ?
The hardware and OS were revolutionary in 1989Thats 20 years after Unix was released , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is the Amiga platform even relevant any more?
The hardware and OS were revolutionary in 1989Thats 20 years after Unix was released, right ?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792347</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793435</id>
	<title>Amiga comeback</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255964160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'mma gonna let you finish but OS/2 came out with the greatest OS that's going to take over the world. I always hear about these OSes like OS/2 and Amiga OS, BeOS, and Linux that are going to take over everything. I had an Amiga. It was a great machine and it took a long time for the PCs and the Macs to catch up(Long after it was dead). What Amiga taught me most was that you would not win in the computer market by being better. I also learned to let go of past technology.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I'mma gon na let you finish but OS/2 came out with the greatest OS that 's going to take over the world .
I always hear about these OSes like OS/2 and Amiga OS , BeOS , and Linux that are going to take over everything .
I had an Amiga .
It was a great machine and it took a long time for the PCs and the Macs to catch up ( Long after it was dead ) .
What Amiga taught me most was that you would not win in the computer market by being better .
I also learned to let go of past technology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'mma gonna let you finish but OS/2 came out with the greatest OS that's going to take over the world.
I always hear about these OSes like OS/2 and Amiga OS, BeOS, and Linux that are going to take over everything.
I had an Amiga.
It was a great machine and it took a long time for the PCs and the Macs to catch up(Long after it was dead).
What Amiga taught me most was that you would not win in the computer market by being better.
I also learned to let go of past technology.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29794039</id>
	<title>The brilliance is hard to see but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255966620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...there are GREAT things to come out of this, and I'm surprised no one caught on or figured out how this will ~.,,,(a6 ** GURU MEDITATION ERROR **</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...there are GREAT things to come out of this , and I 'm surprised no one caught on or figured out how this will ~ .,, , ( a6 * * GURU MEDITATION ERROR * *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...there are GREAT things to come out of this, and I'm surprised no one caught on or figured out how this will ~.,,,(a6 ** GURU MEDITATION ERROR **</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792595</id>
	<title>Re:let the flames begin</title>
	<author>rossdee</author>
	<datestamp>1255959720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The amiga was still a good system in 1994, but unfortunately C= went bust. I owned amiga computers from 1986 til 2002 and the only reason I sold the last of them was I emigrated and couldn't bring all my stuff with me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The amiga was still a good system in 1994 , but unfortunately C = went bust .
I owned amiga computers from 1986 til 2002 and the only reason I sold the last of them was I emigrated and could n't bring all my stuff with me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The amiga was still a good system in 1994, but unfortunately C= went bust.
I owned amiga computers from 1986 til 2002 and the only reason I sold the last of them was I emigrated and couldn't bring all my stuff with me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792347</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793411</id>
	<title>In other news...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255964100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In other news, the way is open for new Peterodactyl harness companies to prosper-- the  basic patent has been overturned.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In other news , the way is open for new Peterodactyl harness companies to prosper-- the basic patent has been overturned .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In other news, the way is open for new Peterodactyl harness companies to prosper-- the  basic patent has been overturned.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793835</id>
	<title>Re:let the flames begin</title>
	<author>KnownIssues</author>
	<datestamp>1255965840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
As much as I love (or at least loved) the Amiga, to be fair, there is a difference between 20 years of near stagnation (notice I don't say complete stagnation) with Amiga development, and 20 years of continuous development for Windows, Mac, and Linux. And while the goal with Amiga seems to be to keep it as much like the original product as possible, Windows, Mac, and (as far as I know) Linux have each had almost complete transformation since their original releases.
</p><p>
This argument has nothing to do with the quality, impressiveness, or relevance of what the Amiga <i>was</i>, but of what it is now. Legal dispute has kept the product from evolving with the market as the other operating systems have done. That's not a slam against the Amiga. Its simply the reality of where the product is.
</p><p>
I sincerely hope that this latest development can change all that and that the Amiga's inherent quality will let rise from the ashes, like something that, er, rises from ashes.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As much as I love ( or at least loved ) the Amiga , to be fair , there is a difference between 20 years of near stagnation ( notice I do n't say complete stagnation ) with Amiga development , and 20 years of continuous development for Windows , Mac , and Linux .
And while the goal with Amiga seems to be to keep it as much like the original product as possible , Windows , Mac , and ( as far as I know ) Linux have each had almost complete transformation since their original releases .
This argument has nothing to do with the quality , impressiveness , or relevance of what the Amiga was , but of what it is now .
Legal dispute has kept the product from evolving with the market as the other operating systems have done .
That 's not a slam against the Amiga .
Its simply the reality of where the product is .
I sincerely hope that this latest development can change all that and that the Amiga 's inherent quality will let rise from the ashes , like something that , er , rises from ashes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
As much as I love (or at least loved) the Amiga, to be fair, there is a difference between 20 years of near stagnation (notice I don't say complete stagnation) with Amiga development, and 20 years of continuous development for Windows, Mac, and Linux.
And while the goal with Amiga seems to be to keep it as much like the original product as possible, Windows, Mac, and (as far as I know) Linux have each had almost complete transformation since their original releases.
This argument has nothing to do with the quality, impressiveness, or relevance of what the Amiga was, but of what it is now.
Legal dispute has kept the product from evolving with the market as the other operating systems have done.
That's not a slam against the Amiga.
Its simply the reality of where the product is.
I sincerely hope that this latest development can change all that and that the Amiga's inherent quality will let rise from the ashes, like something that, er, rises from ashes.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792823</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29805843</id>
	<title>Nostalgia thy name is Amiga</title>
	<author>joetrip</author>
	<datestamp>1256041200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I won an EMMY-award for a documentary I produced that contained 100\% Amiga animation, titles and effects. I had three Amigas all genlocked with each other, overlaying multiple graphics in real-time to a 3/4" linear editing system.  The trick was to have another operator trigger the effects on the furthest computer, since your arms couldn't reach that far.  Otherwise, you had to be quick and have a well-oiled rolling chair. See clips here: <a href="http://bit.ly/wvECq" title="bit.ly" rel="nofollow">http://bit.ly/wvECq</a> [bit.ly]</htmltext>
<tokenext>I won an EMMY-award for a documentary I produced that contained 100 \ % Amiga animation , titles and effects .
I had three Amigas all genlocked with each other , overlaying multiple graphics in real-time to a 3/4 " linear editing system .
The trick was to have another operator trigger the effects on the furthest computer , since your arms could n't reach that far .
Otherwise , you had to be quick and have a well-oiled rolling chair .
See clips here : http : //bit.ly/wvECq [ bit.ly ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I won an EMMY-award for a documentary I produced that contained 100\% Amiga animation, titles and effects.
I had three Amigas all genlocked with each other, overlaying multiple graphics in real-time to a 3/4" linear editing system.
The trick was to have another operator trigger the effects on the furthest computer, since your arms couldn't reach that far.
Otherwise, you had to be quick and have a well-oiled rolling chair.
See clips here: http://bit.ly/wvECq [bit.ly]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29797877</id>
	<title>So which is better, and why?</title>
	<author>zogger</author>
	<datestamp>1255982160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We see these nostalgia OS articles all the time, but I have never personally used any of them (outside of mac classic, which we will leave out for this discussion). So...all you greybeards, which is better, AmigaOS, BeOS, or OS/2? Which would you like to see REALLY resurrected with a lot of interest and development?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We see these nostalgia OS articles all the time , but I have never personally used any of them ( outside of mac classic , which we will leave out for this discussion ) .
So...all you greybeards , which is better , AmigaOS , BeOS , or OS/2 ?
Which would you like to see REALLY resurrected with a lot of interest and development ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We see these nostalgia OS articles all the time, but I have never personally used any of them (outside of mac classic, which we will leave out for this discussion).
So...all you greybeards, which is better, AmigaOS, BeOS, or OS/2?
Which would you like to see REALLY resurrected with a lot of interest and development?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793337</id>
	<title>Re:let the flames begin</title>
	<author>iroll</author>
	<datestamp>1255963740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>DERP</p><p>In one corner we've got a global powerhouse of a company that commands 10\% US market share (shipments) of personal computers, with even better numbers if you look at laptops only, and a huge share of the smartphone market.  That's about 6 million computers per year.  Oh, and their OS has no problems dealing with Windows-centric networks and filesystems, and is POSIX-Certified.  On top of that, major software houses produce software for the Mac OS, in addition to Apple's in-house software which (in some cases, like Shake) is recognized as some of the best in the industry.</p><p>In the other, we've got the defunct today, not-quite-dead tomorrow zombie remains of a corporation that was cool but probably didn't ship that many computers in its HISTORY.  Oh, and their OS really *is* a niche OS--it's has no developers, no compatibility, and nothing special to recommend it over anything else.</p><p>derp derp derp yeah, questioning the relevance of Amiga is "just" like questioning the relevance of Apple.  If you want to try that line of reasoning, you should pick a better target for your angst:  drop some trash-talk on FreeDOS, or Minix.  I was going to throw in VMS, but then I realized that I actually use VMS all the time and people are paid to use VMS.  Amiga, not so much.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>DERPIn one corner we 've got a global powerhouse of a company that commands 10 \ % US market share ( shipments ) of personal computers , with even better numbers if you look at laptops only , and a huge share of the smartphone market .
That 's about 6 million computers per year .
Oh , and their OS has no problems dealing with Windows-centric networks and filesystems , and is POSIX-Certified .
On top of that , major software houses produce software for the Mac OS , in addition to Apple 's in-house software which ( in some cases , like Shake ) is recognized as some of the best in the industry.In the other , we 've got the defunct today , not-quite-dead tomorrow zombie remains of a corporation that was cool but probably did n't ship that many computers in its HISTORY .
Oh , and their OS really * is * a niche OS--it 's has no developers , no compatibility , and nothing special to recommend it over anything else.derp derp derp yeah , questioning the relevance of Amiga is " just " like questioning the relevance of Apple .
If you want to try that line of reasoning , you should pick a better target for your angst : drop some trash-talk on FreeDOS , or Minix .
I was going to throw in VMS , but then I realized that I actually use VMS all the time and people are paid to use VMS .
Amiga , not so much .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DERPIn one corner we've got a global powerhouse of a company that commands 10\% US market share (shipments) of personal computers, with even better numbers if you look at laptops only, and a huge share of the smartphone market.
That's about 6 million computers per year.
Oh, and their OS has no problems dealing with Windows-centric networks and filesystems, and is POSIX-Certified.
On top of that, major software houses produce software for the Mac OS, in addition to Apple's in-house software which (in some cases, like Shake) is recognized as some of the best in the industry.In the other, we've got the defunct today, not-quite-dead tomorrow zombie remains of a corporation that was cool but probably didn't ship that many computers in its HISTORY.
Oh, and their OS really *is* a niche OS--it's has no developers, no compatibility, and nothing special to recommend it over anything else.derp derp derp yeah, questioning the relevance of Amiga is "just" like questioning the relevance of Apple.
If you want to try that line of reasoning, you should pick a better target for your angst:  drop some trash-talk on FreeDOS, or Minix.
I was going to throw in VMS, but then I realized that I actually use VMS all the time and people are paid to use VMS.
Amiga, not so much.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792823</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29884393</id>
	<title>Re:Brutality</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256661000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is nearly "sad" that this "half-baked OS" as you call it runs stable and more smooth on my 1 GHz Amiga than<br>Windows Vista runs on my state-of-the-art dual-core PC. "The Application does not react", no blue screens, no minor quirk in reaction time when you just press a  save button on your editor and wonder why the **** the system should need 20 seconds for it. The system just runs smoothly. Even things like 3D Hardware support are in (despite Dave Haynie's post<br>where he shows he does not really know what he is talking about, talking about "missing 3D/Networking..."<br>and lists several things which are actually in the OS). So why Half-Baked? As there is no Mozilla/Word/etc.<br>running on it? That's the only reason I could find someone could call it that.</p><p>And to the "A500 times are over" people who always pop up on slashdot when the term "Amiga" comes up.<br>Amiga has nothing to do with A500 since a VERY long time. Do Amiga say "haha, 80286 system"<br>everytime a news-item over x86 hardware comes up? No, they don't. The Amiga is to A500 what<br>the 80286 based PC is to a modern PC. Just get that and accept it!</p><p>Asides from the missing 3rd party support (I listed Mozilla, Word, etc.) IMHO AmigaOS 4 is currently<br>the best OS out there (though Linux and OS X I also like) or at least one of the best. Asides from<br>the missing 3rd party support. Ah, and hardware support. That too, sadly. 1GHz systems are not<br>actually modern anymore. Still hoping recent events will give Amiga a chance for a new hardware.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is nearly " sad " that this " half-baked OS " as you call it runs stable and more smooth on my 1 GHz Amiga thanWindows Vista runs on my state-of-the-art dual-core PC .
" The Application does not react " , no blue screens , no minor quirk in reaction time when you just press a save button on your editor and wonder why the * * * * the system should need 20 seconds for it .
The system just runs smoothly .
Even things like 3D Hardware support are in ( despite Dave Haynie 's postwhere he shows he does not really know what he is talking about , talking about " missing 3D/Networking... " and lists several things which are actually in the OS ) .
So why Half-Baked ?
As there is no Mozilla/Word/etc.running on it ?
That 's the only reason I could find someone could call it that.And to the " A500 times are over " people who always pop up on slashdot when the term " Amiga " comes up.Amiga has nothing to do with A500 since a VERY long time .
Do Amiga say " haha , 80286 system " everytime a news-item over x86 hardware comes up ?
No , they do n't .
The Amiga is to A500 whatthe 80286 based PC is to a modern PC .
Just get that and accept it ! Asides from the missing 3rd party support ( I listed Mozilla , Word , etc .
) IMHO AmigaOS 4 is currentlythe best OS out there ( though Linux and OS X I also like ) or at least one of the best .
Asides fromthe missing 3rd party support .
Ah , and hardware support .
That too , sadly .
1GHz systems are notactually modern anymore .
Still hoping recent events will give Amiga a chance for a new hardware .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is nearly "sad" that this "half-baked OS" as you call it runs stable and more smooth on my 1 GHz Amiga thanWindows Vista runs on my state-of-the-art dual-core PC.
"The Application does not react", no blue screens, no minor quirk in reaction time when you just press a  save button on your editor and wonder why the **** the system should need 20 seconds for it.
The system just runs smoothly.
Even things like 3D Hardware support are in (despite Dave Haynie's postwhere he shows he does not really know what he is talking about, talking about "missing 3D/Networking..."and lists several things which are actually in the OS).
So why Half-Baked?
As there is no Mozilla/Word/etc.running on it?
That's the only reason I could find someone could call it that.And to the "A500 times are over" people who always pop up on slashdot when the term "Amiga" comes up.Amiga has nothing to do with A500 since a VERY long time.
Do Amiga say "haha, 80286 system"everytime a news-item over x86 hardware comes up?
No, they don't.
The Amiga is to A500 whatthe 80286 based PC is to a modern PC.
Just get that and accept it!Asides from the missing 3rd party support (I listed Mozilla, Word, etc.
) IMHO AmigaOS 4 is currentlythe best OS out there (though Linux and OS X I also like) or at least one of the best.
Asides fromthe missing 3rd party support.
Ah, and hardware support.
That too, sadly.
1GHz systems are notactually modern anymore.
Still hoping recent events will give Amiga a chance for a new hardware.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792419</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792547</id>
	<title>Aye, I had no idea these existed anymore</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255959360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am a second year student of software engineering, which means I was born after Amiga came to markets. (Sorry for any "Am I really that old?" feelings that I have invoked)</p><p>It is a famous system so of course I have heard of it but I certainly had no idea that some sort of Amiga Inc. company would still exist. For a moment, I actually thought this was some sort of a joke.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am a second year student of software engineering , which means I was born after Amiga came to markets .
( Sorry for any " Am I really that old ?
" feelings that I have invoked ) It is a famous system so of course I have heard of it but I certainly had no idea that some sort of Amiga Inc. company would still exist .
For a moment , I actually thought this was some sort of a joke .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am a second year student of software engineering, which means I was born after Amiga came to markets.
(Sorry for any "Am I really that old?
" feelings that I have invoked)It is a famous system so of course I have heard of it but I certainly had no idea that some sort of Amiga Inc. company would still exist.
For a moment, I actually thought this was some sort of a joke.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792347</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29804289</id>
	<title>Amiga to Omega, Amigos</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255975500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I always preferred the Atari ST.  Much cheaper and less crash prone.</p><p>But now I've installed a TRS80 emulator, I'm thinking we should all go back to TRSDOS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I always preferred the Atari ST. Much cheaper and less crash prone.But now I 've installed a TRS80 emulator , I 'm thinking we should all go back to TRSDOS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I always preferred the Atari ST.  Much cheaper and less crash prone.But now I've installed a TRS80 emulator, I'm thinking we should all go back to TRSDOS.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793467</id>
	<title>Oh good, I can breathe now</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255964340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because I have been holding my breath waiting for the return of Amiga since 1994.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because I have been holding my breath waiting for the return of Amiga since 1994 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because I have been holding my breath waiting for the return of Amiga since 1994.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29794635</id>
	<title>Oh god, I see it is that time of year again.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255969260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Man I really hate this.  Time flies by so fast that without me even realizing it, it is April first again.  I really hate this time of year, when slashdot is filled with a bunch of annoying April Fool jokes that try to be funny but...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Man I really hate this .
Time flies by so fast that without me even realizing it , it is April first again .
I really hate this time of year , when slashdot is filled with a bunch of annoying April Fool jokes that try to be funny but... : (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Man I really hate this.
Time flies by so fast that without me even realizing it, it is April first again.
I really hate this time of year, when slashdot is filled with a bunch of annoying April Fool jokes that try to be funny but... :(</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29800389</id>
	<title>Re:Wow, my clock must be broken</title>
	<author>idlehanz</author>
	<datestamp>1255947960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not so loud!  The Amiga1000 that I have in the garage can hear you and you hurt its feeling.
<br> <br>
While good for multitasking in 1987 the emotion chip wasn't developed until Star Trek TNG so the Amiga1000 was limited to a single emotion; that of feeling superior to their pc-brethren.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not so loud !
The Amiga1000 that I have in the garage can hear you and you hurt its feeling .
While good for multitasking in 1987 the emotion chip was n't developed until Star Trek TNG so the Amiga1000 was limited to a single emotion ; that of feeling superior to their pc-brethren .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not so loud!
The Amiga1000 that I have in the garage can hear you and you hurt its feeling.
While good for multitasking in 1987 the emotion chip wasn't developed until Star Trek TNG so the Amiga1000 was limited to a single emotion; that of feeling superior to their pc-brethren.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793651</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29794611</id>
	<title>mo3 down</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255969080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">it.  Do no7 share</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>it .
Do no7 share [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it.
Do no7 share [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793857</id>
	<title>Re:Hardware?</title>
	<author>Abcd1234</author>
	<datestamp>1255965960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>You don't need an MMU, you need careful programmers.</i></p><p>Yeah, fuck virtual memory!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't need an MMU , you need careful programmers.Yeah , fuck virtual memory !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't need an MMU, you need careful programmers.Yeah, fuck virtual memory!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792981</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792403</id>
	<title>Amiga filter</title>
	<author>Ltap</author>
	<datestamp>1255958400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>heh, I bet that's not used too often any more.

In all seriousness, though - the Amiga community is pretty stubborn. Most of them have a single machine, and just order new parts as stuff breaks - some of them are pretty brilliant about diagnosing problems and hacking their software.

It'd actually make a pretty interesting study - take a group of computer hobbyists, then give them the same hardware to work with for 20+ years. It'd be interesting to see what they could probably reverse-engineer if they had a mind to.</htmltext>
<tokenext>heh , I bet that 's not used too often any more .
In all seriousness , though - the Amiga community is pretty stubborn .
Most of them have a single machine , and just order new parts as stuff breaks - some of them are pretty brilliant about diagnosing problems and hacking their software .
It 'd actually make a pretty interesting study - take a group of computer hobbyists , then give them the same hardware to work with for 20 + years .
It 'd be interesting to see what they could probably reverse-engineer if they had a mind to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>heh, I bet that's not used too often any more.
In all seriousness, though - the Amiga community is pretty stubborn.
Most of them have a single machine, and just order new parts as stuff breaks - some of them are pretty brilliant about diagnosing problems and hacking their software.
It'd actually make a pretty interesting study - take a group of computer hobbyists, then give them the same hardware to work with for 20+ years.
It'd be interesting to see what they could probably reverse-engineer if they had a mind to.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29796027</id>
	<title>Re:let the flames begin</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255975020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I do believe you are missing the point. The point is not that is is 20 years old and therefore can not be relevant, the point it that is was relevant 20 years ago, but no longer it. It's the same as saying she was beautiful 20 years so, but now at 40 she is not. That statement does not imply that no 40 year old women are beautiful, quite the contrary (women don't even start to get really interesting until their 30's and while the part might be a little firmer at 20, they sure as hell now how to use them better in the 30's), but only states that at 20, she was beautiful, but 20 years later, she no longer is.</p><p>To go further, and talk about the Unix reference. Unix today is not even in essence the same Unix it was in 1989. Unix (and its successors) have/has been continually in development as has kept up with the times quite well, adding support for the newest networking architectures and newer hardware. AmigaOS, by comparison has not. Mismanagement and lawsuits and general apathy by the community at large let it linger. Yes, some progress was made, but not as fast as the market changed and not as fast as hardware changed.</p><p>I started out with Commodore. I owned a Vic-20, C64, C128 and finally an Amiga. I will always have a soft spot in my heart for all of those machines, but lets not have a soft spot in my heart create a soft spot in my head, none of them are truly relevant platforms anymore.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do believe you are missing the point .
The point is not that is is 20 years old and therefore can not be relevant , the point it that is was relevant 20 years ago , but no longer it .
It 's the same as saying she was beautiful 20 years so , but now at 40 she is not .
That statement does not imply that no 40 year old women are beautiful , quite the contrary ( women do n't even start to get really interesting until their 30 's and while the part might be a little firmer at 20 , they sure as hell now how to use them better in the 30 's ) , but only states that at 20 , she was beautiful , but 20 years later , she no longer is.To go further , and talk about the Unix reference .
Unix today is not even in essence the same Unix it was in 1989 .
Unix ( and its successors ) have/has been continually in development as has kept up with the times quite well , adding support for the newest networking architectures and newer hardware .
AmigaOS , by comparison has not .
Mismanagement and lawsuits and general apathy by the community at large let it linger .
Yes , some progress was made , but not as fast as the market changed and not as fast as hardware changed.I started out with Commodore .
I owned a Vic-20 , C64 , C128 and finally an Amiga .
I will always have a soft spot in my heart for all of those machines , but lets not have a soft spot in my heart create a soft spot in my head , none of them are truly relevant platforms anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I do believe you are missing the point.
The point is not that is is 20 years old and therefore can not be relevant, the point it that is was relevant 20 years ago, but no longer it.
It's the same as saying she was beautiful 20 years so, but now at 40 she is not.
That statement does not imply that no 40 year old women are beautiful, quite the contrary (women don't even start to get really interesting until their 30's and while the part might be a little firmer at 20, they sure as hell now how to use them better in the 30's), but only states that at 20, she was beautiful, but 20 years later, she no longer is.To go further, and talk about the Unix reference.
Unix today is not even in essence the same Unix it was in 1989.
Unix (and its successors) have/has been continually in development as has kept up with the times quite well, adding support for the newest networking architectures and newer hardware.
AmigaOS, by comparison has not.
Mismanagement and lawsuits and general apathy by the community at large let it linger.
Yes, some progress was made, but not as fast as the market changed and not as fast as hardware changed.I started out with Commodore.
I owned a Vic-20, C64, C128 and finally an Amiga.
I will always have a soft spot in my heart for all of those machines, but lets not have a soft spot in my heart create a soft spot in my head, none of them are truly relevant platforms anymore.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792739</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29804067</id>
	<title>Re:Wow, my clock must be broken</title>
	<author>Meski</author>
	<datestamp>1255972740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You laugh about clock radios and 2009, but this is Hyperion, a planet with time tombs that move backwards through time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You laugh about clock radios and 2009 , but this is Hyperion , a planet with time tombs that move backwards through time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You laugh about clock radios and 2009, but this is Hyperion, a planet with time tombs that move backwards through time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792345</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793013</id>
	<title>Re:A little late?</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1255962180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Indeed, they probably can't, but would they have to?</p><p>Apple realised they were no longer able to compete with their MacOS, or hardware, so now we have Macs that are PC hardware running an OS derived from Next.</p><p>Does anyone mind? On the contrary, Apple fans seem to love the new platform better than the old. They seem to be doing better than before, now they've made the switch.</p><p><i>can begin producing hardware and operating systems that are going to compete with current market players in any meaningful way.</i></p><p>But you're conflating things - just because they can't compete on hardware doesn't mean they can't compete. I don't see how it isn't "meaningful", when you can make money and sell computers doing it. The market's moved on - people don't make custom hardware anymore, not even Apple.</p><p><i> Coleco announces they have a Windows 7 killer in a brand new updated ColecoVision 2009?</i></p><p>More like Apple announces they have a Windows 7 killer in a brand new updated Mac.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Indeed , they probably ca n't , but would they have to ? Apple realised they were no longer able to compete with their MacOS , or hardware , so now we have Macs that are PC hardware running an OS derived from Next.Does anyone mind ?
On the contrary , Apple fans seem to love the new platform better than the old .
They seem to be doing better than before , now they 've made the switch.can begin producing hardware and operating systems that are going to compete with current market players in any meaningful way.But you 're conflating things - just because they ca n't compete on hardware does n't mean they ca n't compete .
I do n't see how it is n't " meaningful " , when you can make money and sell computers doing it .
The market 's moved on - people do n't make custom hardware anymore , not even Apple .
Coleco announces they have a Windows 7 killer in a brand new updated ColecoVision 2009 ? More like Apple announces they have a Windows 7 killer in a brand new updated Mac .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Indeed, they probably can't, but would they have to?Apple realised they were no longer able to compete with their MacOS, or hardware, so now we have Macs that are PC hardware running an OS derived from Next.Does anyone mind?
On the contrary, Apple fans seem to love the new platform better than the old.
They seem to be doing better than before, now they've made the switch.can begin producing hardware and operating systems that are going to compete with current market players in any meaningful way.But you're conflating things - just because they can't compete on hardware doesn't mean they can't compete.
I don't see how it isn't "meaningful", when you can make money and sell computers doing it.
The market's moved on - people don't make custom hardware anymore, not even Apple.
Coleco announces they have a Windows 7 killer in a brand new updated ColecoVision 2009?More like Apple announces they have a Windows 7 killer in a brand new updated Mac.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792441</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29794139</id>
	<title>Why do people still fight for Amiga?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255967040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I imagine there are patents involved with the hardware and operating system that earn $$.</p><p>The hardware chips in the Amiga were years and years ahead of anything similar in the PC world.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I imagine there are patents involved with the hardware and operating system that earn $ $ .The hardware chips in the Amiga were years and years ahead of anything similar in the PC world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I imagine there are patents involved with the hardware and operating system that earn $$.The hardware chips in the Amiga were years and years ahead of anything similar in the PC world.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793651</id>
	<title>Re:Wow, my clock must be broken</title>
	<author>ciderVisor</author>
	<datestamp>1255965120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Amiga offered one helluva lot of bang for your bucks back in the day. The OS was relatively slick from both the user and developer perspectives. The graphics and sound hardware was pretty decent, too. A good quantity of third-party software and games. Genlock abilities and TV-standard screen modes made for great video-captioning abilities, etc.</p><p>But come on. Even a mid-spec'ed Windows PC can handle genuine video editing, multi-track virtual recording studios with awesome soft synths and effects plug-ins, 24-bit colour to massive resolutions. All without having to work too hard in order to play nice with other apps and the OS itself.</p><p>Great in the day, but only interesting in a historical context. The same could be said of the Atari ST or Acorn Archimedes.</p><p>(Ex-Amiga 500+ owner and developer.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Amiga offered one helluva lot of bang for your bucks back in the day .
The OS was relatively slick from both the user and developer perspectives .
The graphics and sound hardware was pretty decent , too .
A good quantity of third-party software and games .
Genlock abilities and TV-standard screen modes made for great video-captioning abilities , etc.But come on .
Even a mid-spec'ed Windows PC can handle genuine video editing , multi-track virtual recording studios with awesome soft synths and effects plug-ins , 24-bit colour to massive resolutions .
All without having to work too hard in order to play nice with other apps and the OS itself.Great in the day , but only interesting in a historical context .
The same could be said of the Atari ST or Acorn Archimedes .
( Ex-Amiga 500 + owner and developer .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Amiga offered one helluva lot of bang for your bucks back in the day.
The OS was relatively slick from both the user and developer perspectives.
The graphics and sound hardware was pretty decent, too.
A good quantity of third-party software and games.
Genlock abilities and TV-standard screen modes made for great video-captioning abilities, etc.But come on.
Even a mid-spec'ed Windows PC can handle genuine video editing, multi-track virtual recording studios with awesome soft synths and effects plug-ins, 24-bit colour to massive resolutions.
All without having to work too hard in order to play nice with other apps and the OS itself.Great in the day, but only interesting in a historical context.
The same could be said of the Atari ST or Acorn Archimedes.
(Ex-Amiga 500+ owner and developer.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792345</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29798353</id>
	<title>Re:Wow, my clock must be broken</title>
	<author>adisakp</author>
	<datestamp>1255983660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The Amiga offered one helluva lot of bang for your bucks back in the day. </p><p>But come on. Even a mid-spec'ed Windows PC can handle genuine video editing, multi-track virtual recording studios with awesome soft synths and effects plug-ins, 24-bit colour to massive resolutions. All without having to work too hard in order to play nice with other apps and the OS itself.</p><p>Great in the day, but only interesting in a historical context.</p><p>(Ex-Amiga 500+ owner and
developer.)</p></div><p>The thing that interests me about the Amiga OS was its efficiency -- the ability to do all those things and multitask so long ago.  An Amiga 500 had a 7MHz 68000 (which took 4-8 cycles minimum per instruction) that had around 1.5 MIPS CPU processing capability and no FPU and came with 512K of RAM and no CPU Cache.<br> <br>
The current mid-spec PC is 2GHz superscalar pipelined CPU with FPU with about 3,000 MIPS capability and comes with 2 MB of cache (plus 2GB of RAM).  The CPU cache alone for a PC is 2-4X greater than the ENTIRE System RAM for an Amiga.<br> <br>
Current low-to-mid-range PC's are at least 2,000 times more powerful on paper than an Amiga 500 in raw MIPS and probably 200,000+ times higher in FPU FLOPS (if timing fmadds) -- with SSE and/or double precision that number could go up to nearly a MILLION times faster for FP performance.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Amiga offered one helluva lot of bang for your bucks back in the day .
But come on .
Even a mid-spec'ed Windows PC can handle genuine video editing , multi-track virtual recording studios with awesome soft synths and effects plug-ins , 24-bit colour to massive resolutions .
All without having to work too hard in order to play nice with other apps and the OS itself.Great in the day , but only interesting in a historical context .
( Ex-Amiga 500 + owner and developer .
) The thing that interests me about the Amiga OS was its efficiency -- the ability to do all those things and multitask so long ago .
An Amiga 500 had a 7MHz 68000 ( which took 4-8 cycles minimum per instruction ) that had around 1.5 MIPS CPU processing capability and no FPU and came with 512K of RAM and no CPU Cache .
The current mid-spec PC is 2GHz superscalar pipelined CPU with FPU with about 3,000 MIPS capability and comes with 2 MB of cache ( plus 2GB of RAM ) .
The CPU cache alone for a PC is 2-4X greater than the ENTIRE System RAM for an Amiga .
Current low-to-mid-range PC 's are at least 2,000 times more powerful on paper than an Amiga 500 in raw MIPS and probably 200,000 + times higher in FPU FLOPS ( if timing fmadds ) -- with SSE and/or double precision that number could go up to nearly a MILLION times faster for FP performance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Amiga offered one helluva lot of bang for your bucks back in the day.
But come on.
Even a mid-spec'ed Windows PC can handle genuine video editing, multi-track virtual recording studios with awesome soft synths and effects plug-ins, 24-bit colour to massive resolutions.
All without having to work too hard in order to play nice with other apps and the OS itself.Great in the day, but only interesting in a historical context.
(Ex-Amiga 500+ owner and
developer.
)The thing that interests me about the Amiga OS was its efficiency -- the ability to do all those things and multitask so long ago.
An Amiga 500 had a 7MHz 68000 (which took 4-8 cycles minimum per instruction) that had around 1.5 MIPS CPU processing capability and no FPU and came with 512K of RAM and no CPU Cache.
The current mid-spec PC is 2GHz superscalar pipelined CPU with FPU with about 3,000 MIPS capability and comes with 2 MB of cache (plus 2GB of RAM).
The CPU cache alone for a PC is 2-4X greater than the ENTIRE System RAM for an Amiga.
Current low-to-mid-range PC's are at least 2,000 times more powerful on paper than an Amiga 500 in raw MIPS and probably 200,000+ times higher in FPU FLOPS (if timing fmadds) -- with SSE and/or double precision that number could go up to nearly a MILLION times faster for FP performance.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793651</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793577</id>
	<title>I'ld buy it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255964820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I grew up with the C64 and Amiga 500, I remember it being ahead of any other pc functionality wise, until fps's were made.<br>THAT was the only thing this machine lacked I remember when PC's were catching on with the public, and the average Joe Schmoe was able to afford them..<br>I wouldn't break the bank if they started producing things again, but I would definately support them and buy stuff...</p><p>I mean cmon, even until 1998-99, my high school used a Video Toaster setup for video editing.</p><p>If you look at movies and the timelines, the original Stargate was fully created with the Amiga video editing powas...and it was incredible for it's time...</p><p>Yes, times have changed, and the world is in an Intel vs Mac vs Microshaft vs Nvidia vs ATI vs every other company...<br>And the Amiga is nowhere to be seen, but as soon as it is mentioned, the old support base comes out of the woodwork.</p><p>It's not the hardware, it's the people and ideas behind it, and they made it work once, whos to say they can't do it again, they've got my vote.</p><p>Anyways, I've still got a pic of Bill Cosby and a promotional setup selling a C64, he can't be wrong!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I grew up with the C64 and Amiga 500 , I remember it being ahead of any other pc functionality wise , until fps 's were made.THAT was the only thing this machine lacked I remember when PC 's were catching on with the public , and the average Joe Schmoe was able to afford them..I would n't break the bank if they started producing things again , but I would definately support them and buy stuff...I mean cmon , even until 1998-99 , my high school used a Video Toaster setup for video editing.If you look at movies and the timelines , the original Stargate was fully created with the Amiga video editing powas...and it was incredible for it 's time...Yes , times have changed , and the world is in an Intel vs Mac vs Microshaft vs Nvidia vs ATI vs every other company...And the Amiga is nowhere to be seen , but as soon as it is mentioned , the old support base comes out of the woodwork.It 's not the hardware , it 's the people and ideas behind it , and they made it work once , whos to say they ca n't do it again , they 've got my vote.Anyways , I 've still got a pic of Bill Cosby and a promotional setup selling a C64 , he ca n't be wrong !
: D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I grew up with the C64 and Amiga 500, I remember it being ahead of any other pc functionality wise, until fps's were made.THAT was the only thing this machine lacked I remember when PC's were catching on with the public, and the average Joe Schmoe was able to afford them..I wouldn't break the bank if they started producing things again, but I would definately support them and buy stuff...I mean cmon, even until 1998-99, my high school used a Video Toaster setup for video editing.If you look at movies and the timelines, the original Stargate was fully created with the Amiga video editing powas...and it was incredible for it's time...Yes, times have changed, and the world is in an Intel vs Mac vs Microshaft vs Nvidia vs ATI vs every other company...And the Amiga is nowhere to be seen, but as soon as it is mentioned, the old support base comes out of the woodwork.It's not the hardware, it's the people and ideas behind it, and they made it work once, whos to say they can't do it again, they've got my vote.Anyways, I've still got a pic of Bill Cosby and a promotional setup selling a C64, he can't be wrong!
:D</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29801437</id>
	<title>Let me just be the first to say...</title>
	<author>Narcocide</author>
	<datestamp>1255953240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>LONG LIVE AMIGA!!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>LONG LIVE AMIGA ! !
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>LONG LIVE AMIGA!!
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792345</id>
	<title>Wow, my clock must be broken</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255957860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For a second there, it looked like I was reading a story about the Amiga OS in 2009. Ha ha ha! Silly clock radio.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For a second there , it looked like I was reading a story about the Amiga OS in 2009 .
Ha ha ha !
Silly clock radio .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For a second there, it looked like I was reading a story about the Amiga OS in 2009.
Ha ha ha!
Silly clock radio.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29794345</id>
	<title>Toooooo little waaaay tooooo late</title>
	<author>McNihil</author>
	<datestamp>1255967940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>word!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>word !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>word!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793721</id>
	<title>OK, I'll buy it, but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255965360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Amiga heads all. I agree the Amiga was totally ahead of it's time in many ways... etc, etc.</p><p>What I'm curious about is (and I ask this without a hint of trolling) what do you use your Amigas for now? Are there still relevant contemporary uses for this system?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Amiga heads all .
I agree the Amiga was totally ahead of it 's time in many ways... etc , etc.What I 'm curious about is ( and I ask this without a hint of trolling ) what do you use your Amigas for now ?
Are there still relevant contemporary uses for this system ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Amiga heads all.
I agree the Amiga was totally ahead of it's time in many ways... etc, etc.What I'm curious about is (and I ask this without a hint of trolling) what do you use your Amigas for now?
Are there still relevant contemporary uses for this system?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29794199</id>
	<title>Re:A little late?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255967340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You got it all wrong.. Amiga or Hyperion is no hardware company. Hyperion could port it to whatever hardware that suited them and i am pretty sure they are working on something behind the scenes. Why would they plan SMP support for OS 4.2 if they dont plan to port it to modern hardware?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You got it all wrong.. Amiga or Hyperion is no hardware company .
Hyperion could port it to whatever hardware that suited them and i am pretty sure they are working on something behind the scenes .
Why would they plan SMP support for OS 4.2 if they dont plan to port it to modern hardware ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You got it all wrong.. Amiga or Hyperion is no hardware company.
Hyperion could port it to whatever hardware that suited them and i am pretty sure they are working on something behind the scenes.
Why would they plan SMP support for OS 4.2 if they dont plan to port it to modern hardware?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792441</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792961</id>
	<title>Re:Brutality</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1255961940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, it's sad that a series of PC companies drove the Amiga into the ground. It says something that the Amiga is still around in some form, despite all these set backs (remember the jokes we used to get about a new Amiga being vaporware? Then witness the back-pedalling when one was released (years ago, in fact) - they're suspiciously silent in this thread).</p><p>Imagine what computing might have been like today? We might have had something better than a choice between one monopoly, and a niche platform that still did all the same tricks as the aforemented platform.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , it 's sad that a series of PC companies drove the Amiga into the ground .
It says something that the Amiga is still around in some form , despite all these set backs ( remember the jokes we used to get about a new Amiga being vaporware ?
Then witness the back-pedalling when one was released ( years ago , in fact ) - they 're suspiciously silent in this thread ) .Imagine what computing might have been like today ?
We might have had something better than a choice between one monopoly , and a niche platform that still did all the same tricks as the aforemented platform .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, it's sad that a series of PC companies drove the Amiga into the ground.
It says something that the Amiga is still around in some form, despite all these set backs (remember the jokes we used to get about a new Amiga being vaporware?
Then witness the back-pedalling when one was released (years ago, in fact) - they're suspiciously silent in this thread).Imagine what computing might have been like today?
We might have had something better than a choice between one monopoly, and a niche platform that still did all the same tricks as the aforemented platform.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792419</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792513</id>
	<title>Re:let the flames begin</title>
	<author>Richard\_at\_work</author>
	<datestamp>1255959060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>is the Amiga platform even relevant any more? The hardware and OS were revolutionary in 1989</p></div><p>Thats 20 years after Unix was released, right ?</p></div><p>Yeah, because UNIX was the last and latest OS to be revolutionary, its impossible that something else, after UNIX, might have been revolutionary.</p><p>Now, the question remains whether the Amiga was revolutionary, but my point stands - UNIX is not the be-all end-all.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>is the Amiga platform even relevant any more ?
The hardware and OS were revolutionary in 1989Thats 20 years after Unix was released , right ? Yeah , because UNIX was the last and latest OS to be revolutionary , its impossible that something else , after UNIX , might have been revolutionary.Now , the question remains whether the Amiga was revolutionary , but my point stands - UNIX is not the be-all end-all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is the Amiga platform even relevant any more?
The hardware and OS were revolutionary in 1989Thats 20 years after Unix was released, right ?Yeah, because UNIX was the last and latest OS to be revolutionary, its impossible that something else, after UNIX, might have been revolutionary.Now, the question remains whether the Amiga was revolutionary, but my point stands - UNIX is not the be-all end-all.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792385</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793835
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792823
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792347
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793461
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792585
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792441
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29804211
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793435
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29797209
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792823
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792347
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792989
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792547
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792347
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29795321
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792981
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792357
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29794547
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792823
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792347
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792735
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792345
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29804067
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792345
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793013
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792441
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29805213
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29804095
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29798353
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793651
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792345
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792897
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792441
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793923
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792823
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792347
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792961
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792419
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29805477
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792823
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792347
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29798843
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793435
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793751
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792585
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792441
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793337
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792823
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792347
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29796027
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792739
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792513
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792385
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792347
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29884393
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792419
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793403
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792823
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792347
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29798271
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793435
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29795123
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792347
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29800389
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793651
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792345
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29796717
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792419
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29798157
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793651
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792345
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29797043
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792823
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792347
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792547
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792347
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29794199
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792441
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793843
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792823
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792347
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29799391
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792739
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792513
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792385
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792347
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29802079
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793651
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792345
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792595
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792347
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793857
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792981
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792357
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29797025
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793651
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792345
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793005
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792347
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29795643
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793651
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792345
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0128243_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792781
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792345
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0128243.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792419
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29796717
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29884393
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792961
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0128243.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792365
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0128243.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792347
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792547
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792989
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793011
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792595
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792385
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792513
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792739
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29796027
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29799391
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793005
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29795123
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792823
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29797043
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793835
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793337
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29805477
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793923
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793403
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793843
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29794547
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29797209
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0128243.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792357
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792981
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29795321
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793857
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0128243.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793435
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29798843
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29798271
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29804211
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0128243.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792345
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792781
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29804067
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792735
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793651
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29800389
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29798353
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29804095
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29805213
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29798157
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29802079
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29797025
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29795643
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0128243.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792441
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793013
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792897
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792585
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793751
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29793461
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29794199
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0128243.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0128243.29792403
</commentlist>
</conversation>
