<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_22_1833255</id>
	<title>No More Fair-Price Refund For Declining XP EULA</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1258917720000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>mark0 writes <i>"Getting a fair-price refund from Amazon or Asus after declining the Windows XP EULA appears to be a thing of the past.  In contrast to <a href="http://news.slashdot.org/story/09/07/31/1215248/Amazon-US-Refunds-Windows-License-Fee-Too">reports from the US</a> <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/07/23/1855211">and the UK</a> from earlier in the year, Amazon simply refuses and provides information to contact Microsoft.  Asus is offering US$6.  Despite being confronted with <a href="http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009/06/microsoft-currently-asking-45-to-55-for-windows-7-starter.ars">publicly available information</a> <a href="http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=118">about the real OEM price of Windows XP Home Edition</a> being $US25-US$30, Asus replies,  'The refund price for the decline of the EULA is correct in it being US$6. This price unfortunately is not negotiable. I do apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused. Please be assured that it is not ASUS intentions to steer you away in any which way.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>mark0 writes " Getting a fair-price refund from Amazon or Asus after declining the Windows XP EULA appears to be a thing of the past .
In contrast to reports from the US and the UK from earlier in the year , Amazon simply refuses and provides information to contact Microsoft .
Asus is offering US $ 6 .
Despite being confronted with publicly available information about the real OEM price of Windows XP Home Edition being $ US25-US $ 30 , Asus replies , 'The refund price for the decline of the EULA is correct in it being US $ 6 .
This price unfortunately is not negotiable .
I do apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused .
Please be assured that it is not ASUS intentions to steer you away in any which way .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>mark0 writes "Getting a fair-price refund from Amazon or Asus after declining the Windows XP EULA appears to be a thing of the past.
In contrast to reports from the US and the UK from earlier in the year, Amazon simply refuses and provides information to contact Microsoft.
Asus is offering US$6.
Despite being confronted with publicly available information about the real OEM price of Windows XP Home Edition being $US25-US$30, Asus replies,  'The refund price for the decline of the EULA is correct in it being US$6.
This price unfortunately is not negotiable.
I do apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused.
Please be assured that it is not ASUS intentions to steer you away in any which way.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196280</id>
	<title>Guess this means XP is Abandonware?</title>
	<author>Kartoffel</author>
	<datestamp>1258884060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well unless Microsoft steps up an provides the refund, this could mean that XP is finally abandonware.  Free XP for all?  Yeah... I can't imagine MS would go for that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well unless Microsoft steps up an provides the refund , this could mean that XP is finally abandonware .
Free XP for all ?
Yeah... I ca n't imagine MS would go for that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well unless Microsoft steps up an provides the refund, this could mean that XP is finally abandonware.
Free XP for all?
Yeah... I can't imagine MS would go for that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30198412</id>
	<title>Re:Apparent invented story trolls ASUS</title>
	<author>ClosedSource</author>
	<datestamp>1258901940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perhaps their day job is evaluating iPhone apps. The qualifications seem similar.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps their day job is evaluating iPhone apps .
The qualifications seem similar .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps their day job is evaluating iPhone apps.
The qualifications seem similar.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195666</id>
	<title>Re:Piracy?</title>
	<author>newcastlejon</author>
	<datestamp>1258922460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Has there ever been a case of someone being (successfully) sued for just downloading software? I understand there's a difference between obtaining it from TBP or wherever through Bittorrent (so uploading too) and just downloading it from some warez site, assuming they still exist.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Has there ever been a case of someone being ( successfully ) sued for just downloading software ?
I understand there 's a difference between obtaining it from TBP or wherever through Bittorrent ( so uploading too ) and just downloading it from some warez site , assuming they still exist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Has there ever been a case of someone being (successfully) sued for just downloading software?
I understand there's a difference between obtaining it from TBP or wherever through Bittorrent (so uploading too) and just downloading it from some warez site, assuming they still exist.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195578</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195734</id>
	<title>Sooo...</title>
	<author>Junta</author>
	<datestamp>1258923180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I wanted to buy a copy of XP, I should be able to get it for $6?</p><p>I implore the laptop manufacturing sector to make more than token offerings of linux on your products.  Every time I look for a laptop with linux preloaded, they are all very specific models with unappealing specs compared to the full selection available with Windows.  If I were cynical, I would presume your linux offerings are intentionally screwed up so as to give Microsoft marketing material about how unpopular linux computers are.  Oh, what the hell, I am that cynical.</p><p>I would have the same problem in the desktop sector, except I assemble my stuff piece-wise.</p><p>Typed from a linux laptop with a Windows Vista sticker still on it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I wanted to buy a copy of XP , I should be able to get it for $ 6 ? I implore the laptop manufacturing sector to make more than token offerings of linux on your products .
Every time I look for a laptop with linux preloaded , they are all very specific models with unappealing specs compared to the full selection available with Windows .
If I were cynical , I would presume your linux offerings are intentionally screwed up so as to give Microsoft marketing material about how unpopular linux computers are .
Oh , what the hell , I am that cynical.I would have the same problem in the desktop sector , except I assemble my stuff piece-wise.Typed from a linux laptop with a Windows Vista sticker still on it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I wanted to buy a copy of XP, I should be able to get it for $6?I implore the laptop manufacturing sector to make more than token offerings of linux on your products.
Every time I look for a laptop with linux preloaded, they are all very specific models with unappealing specs compared to the full selection available with Windows.
If I were cynical, I would presume your linux offerings are intentionally screwed up so as to give Microsoft marketing material about how unpopular linux computers are.
Oh, what the hell, I am that cynical.I would have the same problem in the desktop sector, except I assemble my stuff piece-wise.Typed from a linux laptop with a Windows Vista sticker still on it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197542</id>
	<title>Vista Sticker</title>
	<author>Frankie70</author>
	<datestamp>1258894260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Typed from a linux laptop with a Windows Vista sticker still on it.</p></div></blockquote><p>Maybe you could return the sticker &amp; get a refund on the sticker?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Typed from a linux laptop with a Windows Vista sticker still on it.Maybe you could return the sticker &amp; get a refund on the sticker ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Typed from a linux laptop with a Windows Vista sticker still on it.Maybe you could return the sticker &amp; get a refund on the sticker?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196352</id>
	<title>Re:Apparent invented story trolls ASUS</title>
	<author>westlake</author>
	<datestamp>1258884600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>How did this badly researched, apparent hoax of a story get to the frontpage?</i> </p><p>The geek knowingly goes out and buys the dirt cheap mass market OEM Windows PC - which represents about 90\%-95\% of all consumer PC sales.</p><p>He will then demand a  refund to punish the OEM, Microsoft, and the big box retailer for delivering the marketable and well-advertised Windows product and - not at all incidentally to his purpose - shave another few bucks off the price of his new Linux laptop.</p><p>This cheeky little scam costs everyone in the chain a little bit of time and money. It costs the independent Linux-friendly retailer a sale.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How did this badly researched , apparent hoax of a story get to the frontpage ?
The geek knowingly goes out and buys the dirt cheap mass market OEM Windows PC - which represents about 90 \ % -95 \ % of all consumer PC sales.He will then demand a refund to punish the OEM , Microsoft , and the big box retailer for delivering the marketable and well-advertised Windows product and - not at all incidentally to his purpose - shave another few bucks off the price of his new Linux laptop.This cheeky little scam costs everyone in the chain a little bit of time and money .
It costs the independent Linux-friendly retailer a sale .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How did this badly researched, apparent hoax of a story get to the frontpage?
The geek knowingly goes out and buys the dirt cheap mass market OEM Windows PC - which represents about 90\%-95\% of all consumer PC sales.He will then demand a  refund to punish the OEM, Microsoft, and the big box retailer for delivering the marketable and well-advertised Windows product and - not at all incidentally to his purpose - shave another few bucks off the price of his new Linux laptop.This cheeky little scam costs everyone in the chain a little bit of time and money.
It costs the independent Linux-friendly retailer a sale.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196000</id>
	<title>Re:Old OS</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1258882020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So, you think that if you were to buy something today (a couch, a table, a pair of pants) that was first marketed 15 years ago, that you should get a depreciated refund if you returned it?</p> </div><p>Spam was first marketed more than fifteen years ago, and the price has gone up. I do not think that word means what you think it means. Either you want the word "sold" or you're way the hell off in left field. They're still shipping XP, so clearly it's a current product, and you should get the full value for it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , you think that if you were to buy something today ( a couch , a table , a pair of pants ) that was first marketed 15 years ago , that you should get a depreciated refund if you returned it ?
Spam was first marketed more than fifteen years ago , and the price has gone up .
I do not think that word means what you think it means .
Either you want the word " sold " or you 're way the hell off in left field .
They 're still shipping XP , so clearly it 's a current product , and you should get the full value for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, you think that if you were to buy something today (a couch, a table, a pair of pants) that was first marketed 15 years ago, that you should get a depreciated refund if you returned it?
Spam was first marketed more than fifteen years ago, and the price has gone up.
I do not think that word means what you think it means.
Either you want the word "sold" or you're way the hell off in left field.
They're still shipping XP, so clearly it's a current product, and you should get the full value for it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195538</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30201068</id>
	<title>The Crux of the Issue: Consumer Choice Infringed</title>
	<author>dtschmitz</author>
	<datestamp>1258985760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The issue, as I see it, is very simple.  This should be applied not just regionally, but globally: Open PC.

Mandate: The Consumer is given the ultimate right and therefore choice to determine which Operating System, if any, should be installed at 'Point of Sale'.

That includes brick and mortar and on the internet.

The effort required to burn an oem image to a machine might be a minor inconvenience for the technician or operating business concern, but that is the price to pay for making the Consumer's interests the prime concern.  Even anticipating the array of configurations and having in stock inventory of pre-imaged drives would take less than 10 minutes for a proficient technician to install.

That is not a huge burden for businesses to carry.
If then I choose to purchase at an agreed price WITHOUT any operating system installed--that *should* be my prerogative as a Consumer.
So, I say, the direction that should be taken is to leave the decision for the Consumer to make--it is their choice and right.

Thank You.
Dietrich T. Schmitz
Linux Advocate</htmltext>
<tokenext>The issue , as I see it , is very simple .
This should be applied not just regionally , but globally : Open PC .
Mandate : The Consumer is given the ultimate right and therefore choice to determine which Operating System , if any , should be installed at 'Point of Sale' .
That includes brick and mortar and on the internet .
The effort required to burn an oem image to a machine might be a minor inconvenience for the technician or operating business concern , but that is the price to pay for making the Consumer 's interests the prime concern .
Even anticipating the array of configurations and having in stock inventory of pre-imaged drives would take less than 10 minutes for a proficient technician to install .
That is not a huge burden for businesses to carry .
If then I choose to purchase at an agreed price WITHOUT any operating system installed--that * should * be my prerogative as a Consumer .
So , I say , the direction that should be taken is to leave the decision for the Consumer to make--it is their choice and right .
Thank You .
Dietrich T. Schmitz Linux Advocate</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The issue, as I see it, is very simple.
This should be applied not just regionally, but globally: Open PC.
Mandate: The Consumer is given the ultimate right and therefore choice to determine which Operating System, if any, should be installed at 'Point of Sale'.
That includes brick and mortar and on the internet.
The effort required to burn an oem image to a machine might be a minor inconvenience for the technician or operating business concern, but that is the price to pay for making the Consumer's interests the prime concern.
Even anticipating the array of configurations and having in stock inventory of pre-imaged drives would take less than 10 minutes for a proficient technician to install.
That is not a huge burden for businesses to carry.
If then I choose to purchase at an agreed price WITHOUT any operating system installed--that *should* be my prerogative as a Consumer.
So, I say, the direction that should be taken is to leave the decision for the Consumer to make--it is their choice and right.
Thank You.
Dietrich T. Schmitz
Linux Advocate</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196464</id>
	<title>Re:Might not be their intention</title>
	<author>phantomfive</author>
	<datestamp>1258886100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How do you know it's dishonorable? I mean, have you looked at their books?  Seems you're being awfully quick to judge, there.<br> <br>
As another person mentioned, when you don't get Windows XP, you also don't get the pre-installed crapware. That could be the entire reason for the price difference.<br> <br>
Not everything that looks bad on the surface is really bad underneath. And vice versa.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How do you know it 's dishonorable ?
I mean , have you looked at their books ?
Seems you 're being awfully quick to judge , there .
As another person mentioned , when you do n't get Windows XP , you also do n't get the pre-installed crapware .
That could be the entire reason for the price difference .
Not everything that looks bad on the surface is really bad underneath .
And vice versa .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do you know it's dishonorable?
I mean, have you looked at their books?
Seems you're being awfully quick to judge, there.
As another person mentioned, when you don't get Windows XP, you also don't get the pre-installed crapware.
That could be the entire reason for the price difference.
Not everything that looks bad on the surface is really bad underneath.
And vice versa.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196364</id>
	<title>Re:Might not be their intention</title>
	<author>interval1066</author>
	<datestamp>1258884840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Intention or not it should be illegal. If I refuse a product or service, I should not be compelled to pay for it anyway. Being forced to bay for something I don't want is simply wrong. Another excellent case for geeks like me who don't mind putting in the time to build their own rig, which I have always done. Of course, if I want a laptop, that strategy blows and I'm forced to pay the Microsoft tax anyway. I just pisses me off having to pay that money.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Intention or not it should be illegal .
If I refuse a product or service , I should not be compelled to pay for it anyway .
Being forced to bay for something I do n't want is simply wrong .
Another excellent case for geeks like me who do n't mind putting in the time to build their own rig , which I have always done .
Of course , if I want a laptop , that strategy blows and I 'm forced to pay the Microsoft tax anyway .
I just pisses me off having to pay that money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Intention or not it should be illegal.
If I refuse a product or service, I should not be compelled to pay for it anyway.
Being forced to bay for something I don't want is simply wrong.
Another excellent case for geeks like me who don't mind putting in the time to build their own rig, which I have always done.
Of course, if I want a laptop, that strategy blows and I'm forced to pay the Microsoft tax anyway.
I just pisses me off having to pay that money.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195872</id>
	<title>Why reject just one component?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258881120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Can I also send back the graphics card for a full refund if I decide I want to use a card that's not offered?  And return the hard disk because I'm only interested in using external drives?<br> <br>
The software is part of the entire package.  If I'm not happy with it I'll send the whole thing back. What other products allow you to reject single components?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Can I also send back the graphics card for a full refund if I decide I want to use a card that 's not offered ?
And return the hard disk because I 'm only interested in using external drives ?
The software is part of the entire package .
If I 'm not happy with it I 'll send the whole thing back .
What other products allow you to reject single components ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can I also send back the graphics card for a full refund if I decide I want to use a card that's not offered?
And return the hard disk because I'm only interested in using external drives?
The software is part of the entire package.
If I'm not happy with it I'll send the whole thing back.
What other products allow you to reject single components?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30204276</id>
	<title>McDonalds - Bundle Deals</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259004180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>From McDonald's "Value Menu" you can order the following separately:
<br> <br>
Medium drink - $1.00 (+ tax)<br>
Double cheese burger - $1.20 (+ tax)<br>
Small fries - $1.00 (+ tax)<br>
<br> <br>
You can order a "double cheese burger" combo meal for $2.79 (+ tax) which includes all of the above.
<br> <br>
If you order the combo meal but do not want fries, do you really expect to receive a full $1.00 off? No, because the $2.79 price is discounted since it is part of a combo meal, even if the individual parts separately would cost more than $2.79. In this example, if you did not want fries, it would be cheaper to buy the drink + double cheese burger separately instead of purchasing the combo meal and excluding the fries.
<br> <br>
The main problem with my analogy is while it is simple to buy a drink + cheeseburger separately, it is not as easy to buy computer parts without an OS. Desktops are highly customizable, but laptops/portables/etc are difficult to find in either barebones, diy kits, or individual parts.</htmltext>
<tokenext>From McDonald 's " Value Menu " you can order the following separately : Medium drink - $ 1.00 ( + tax ) Double cheese burger - $ 1.20 ( + tax ) Small fries - $ 1.00 ( + tax ) You can order a " double cheese burger " combo meal for $ 2.79 ( + tax ) which includes all of the above .
If you order the combo meal but do not want fries , do you really expect to receive a full $ 1.00 off ?
No , because the $ 2.79 price is discounted since it is part of a combo meal , even if the individual parts separately would cost more than $ 2.79 .
In this example , if you did not want fries , it would be cheaper to buy the drink + double cheese burger separately instead of purchasing the combo meal and excluding the fries .
The main problem with my analogy is while it is simple to buy a drink + cheeseburger separately , it is not as easy to buy computer parts without an OS .
Desktops are highly customizable , but laptops/portables/etc are difficult to find in either barebones , diy kits , or individual parts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From McDonald's "Value Menu" you can order the following separately:
 
Medium drink - $1.00 (+ tax)
Double cheese burger - $1.20 (+ tax)
Small fries - $1.00 (+ tax)
 
You can order a "double cheese burger" combo meal for $2.79 (+ tax) which includes all of the above.
If you order the combo meal but do not want fries, do you really expect to receive a full $1.00 off?
No, because the $2.79 price is discounted since it is part of a combo meal, even if the individual parts separately would cost more than $2.79.
In this example, if you did not want fries, it would be cheaper to buy the drink + double cheese burger separately instead of purchasing the combo meal and excluding the fries.
The main problem with my analogy is while it is simple to buy a drink + cheeseburger separately, it is not as easy to buy computer parts without an OS.
Desktops are highly customizable, but laptops/portables/etc are difficult to find in either barebones, diy kits, or individual parts.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196046</id>
	<title>Re:Translation, please</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1258882320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Sounds like someone cheap or non English wrote that last sentence.</p></div><p>Asus is both; they make cheap product (check the prices as compared to the more expensive vensors like Abit) and they're based out of Taiwan.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like someone cheap or non English wrote that last sentence.Asus is both ; they make cheap product ( check the prices as compared to the more expensive vensors like Abit ) and they 're based out of Taiwan .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like someone cheap or non English wrote that last sentence.Asus is both; they make cheap product (check the prices as compared to the more expensive vensors like Abit) and they're based out of Taiwan.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197124</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft dumping to gain netbook marketshare?</title>
	<author>rahvin112</author>
	<datestamp>1258890360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I thought it was understood that when the netbook debuted Microsoft knocked the price down to almost nothing to eliminate Linux in the space. This article is nothing more than official confirmation that Microsoft did knock the price down to $6 a copy for ASUS to keep linux off the netbooks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought it was understood that when the netbook debuted Microsoft knocked the price down to almost nothing to eliminate Linux in the space .
This article is nothing more than official confirmation that Microsoft did knock the price down to $ 6 a copy for ASUS to keep linux off the netbooks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought it was understood that when the netbook debuted Microsoft knocked the price down to almost nothing to eliminate Linux in the space.
This article is nothing more than official confirmation that Microsoft did knock the price down to $6 a copy for ASUS to keep linux off the netbooks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195736</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195802</id>
	<title>Priceless</title>
	<author>poormanjoe</author>
	<datestamp>1258880580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>2 Gallons of gas: <b>$6</b> <br>1 Pack of Cigarettes: <b>$6</b> <br> Prescription refill at Wal-mart: <b>$6</b> <br>Blockbuster late fee's: <b>$6</b> <br> Sticking it to at least one of the men: <b>Priceless</b></htmltext>
<tokenext>2 Gallons of gas : $ 6 1 Pack of Cigarettes : $ 6 Prescription refill at Wal-mart : $ 6 Blockbuster late fee 's : $ 6 Sticking it to at least one of the men : Priceless</tokentext>
<sentencetext>2 Gallons of gas: $6 1 Pack of Cigarettes: $6  Prescription refill at Wal-mart: $6 Blockbuster late fee's: $6  Sticking it to at least one of the men: Priceless</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195914</id>
	<title>this is evil!!!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258881360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>jesus fuck! microsfot charges for teh software?!?!!?!@!?!?:!!?!!!? how fucked up iz that?<br> <br>i have a right to a free os. i demand that manufacturers sell me the hardware they would for windows and even back up their warrenty although i'm going to put one of 15000 distros on it that has been jerry rigged in god knows what way!!!!! i demand this!~!!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>jesus fuck !
microsfot charges for teh software ? ! ? ! ! ? ! @ ! ? ! ? : ! ! ? ! ! ! ?
how fucked up iz that ?
i have a right to a free os .
i demand that manufacturers sell me the hardware they would for windows and even back up their warrenty although i 'm going to put one of 15000 distros on it that has been jerry rigged in god knows what way ! ! ! ! !
i demand this ! ~ ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>jesus fuck!
microsfot charges for teh software?!?!!?!@!?!?:!!?!!!?
how fucked up iz that?
i have a right to a free os.
i demand that manufacturers sell me the hardware they would for windows and even back up their warrenty although i'm going to put one of 15000 distros on it that has been jerry rigged in god knows what way!!!!!
i demand this!~!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30198860</id>
	<title>Who is he?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1258906020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This price unfortunately is not negotiable</p></div><p>So who exactly is that guy/company, to tell me what is how, and what is allowed or not allowed?<br>Do they really think their clients are just cattle that follow whatever made-up own rules they throw out there?</p><p>If that price is negotiable is <strong>not</strong> your decision Amazon! It is ours. Because without us, you&rsquo;re fucked.<br>The <em>Spore</em> debacle has shown, that the times of companies dominating their clients is over. The Internet killed it, by freeing us.</p><p>Hey Companies! You&rsquo;re our clients too, you know? You buy our money with your products. And we now put rules to when you get that right, too!<br>And hey bosses and managers! You&rsquo;re next!</p><p>(Then again, fair companies and bosses with good deals will now <em>earn</em> what they deserve, too.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This price unfortunately is not negotiableSo who exactly is that guy/company , to tell me what is how , and what is allowed or not allowed ? Do they really think their clients are just cattle that follow whatever made-up own rules they throw out there ? If that price is negotiable is not your decision Amazon !
It is ours .
Because without us , you    re fucked.The Spore debacle has shown , that the times of companies dominating their clients is over .
The Internet killed it , by freeing us.Hey Companies !
You    re our clients too , you know ?
You buy our money with your products .
And we now put rules to when you get that right , too ! And hey bosses and managers !
You    re next !
( Then again , fair companies and bosses with good deals will now earn what they deserve , too .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This price unfortunately is not negotiableSo who exactly is that guy/company, to tell me what is how, and what is allowed or not allowed?Do they really think their clients are just cattle that follow whatever made-up own rules they throw out there?If that price is negotiable is not your decision Amazon!
It is ours.
Because without us, you’re fucked.The Spore debacle has shown, that the times of companies dominating their clients is over.
The Internet killed it, by freeing us.Hey Companies!
You’re our clients too, you know?
You buy our money with your products.
And we now put rules to when you get that right, too!And hey bosses and managers!
You’re next!
(Then again, fair companies and bosses with good deals will now earn what they deserve, too.
)
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30198224</id>
	<title>This is ridiculous.</title>
	<author>tjstork</author>
	<datestamp>1258900140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The whole Windows refund thing is ridiculous.  Please, just go into a restaraunt, and see how much you can get discounted because you order a dinner with green beans instead of mash potatoes.  Maybe buy a car without the original set of tires and get some other tire swapped.  If you don't want a computer with Windows, don't buy a computer with Windows.  It's pretty basic.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The whole Windows refund thing is ridiculous .
Please , just go into a restaraunt , and see how much you can get discounted because you order a dinner with green beans instead of mash potatoes .
Maybe buy a car without the original set of tires and get some other tire swapped .
If you do n't want a computer with Windows , do n't buy a computer with Windows .
It 's pretty basic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The whole Windows refund thing is ridiculous.
Please, just go into a restaraunt, and see how much you can get discounted because you order a dinner with green beans instead of mash potatoes.
Maybe buy a car without the original set of tires and get some other tire swapped.
If you don't want a computer with Windows, don't buy a computer with Windows.
It's pretty basic.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30198598</id>
	<title>Re:Why reject just one component?</title>
	<author>AK Marc</author>
	<datestamp>1258903740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>The software is part of the entire package. If I'm not happy with it I'll send the whole thing back.</i> <br> <br>But the license for the software says "if you aren't happy with this, return the software for a full refund."  It would be like buying a car and the tires said "these tires will not work off road (including gravel roads and dirt roads)" and that restriction wasn't told to you until after you pay for the car.  But, you have the option to return the tires for a full refund and get whatever other ones you want.  Does that mean that if you bought the car, you should ignore that option, and if you don't like the tires, then return the whole car?  After all, returning something when instructed to return it if you don't want it is somehow a bad thing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The software is part of the entire package .
If I 'm not happy with it I 'll send the whole thing back .
But the license for the software says " if you are n't happy with this , return the software for a full refund .
" It would be like buying a car and the tires said " these tires will not work off road ( including gravel roads and dirt roads ) " and that restriction was n't told to you until after you pay for the car .
But , you have the option to return the tires for a full refund and get whatever other ones you want .
Does that mean that if you bought the car , you should ignore that option , and if you do n't like the tires , then return the whole car ?
After all , returning something when instructed to return it if you do n't want it is somehow a bad thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The software is part of the entire package.
If I'm not happy with it I'll send the whole thing back.
But the license for the software says "if you aren't happy with this, return the software for a full refund.
"  It would be like buying a car and the tires said "these tires will not work off road (including gravel roads and dirt roads)" and that restriction wasn't told to you until after you pay for the car.
But, you have the option to return the tires for a full refund and get whatever other ones you want.
Does that mean that if you bought the car, you should ignore that option, and if you don't like the tires, then return the whole car?
After all, returning something when instructed to return it if you don't want it is somehow a bad thing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195872</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197016</id>
	<title>Re:Apparent invented story trolls ASUS</title>
	<author>Fished</author>
	<datestamp>1258889700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>How did this badly researched, apparent hoax of a story get to the frontpage?</p></div>
</blockquote><p>

You must be new here.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How did this badly researched , apparent hoax of a story get to the frontpage ?
You must be new here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How did this badly researched, apparent hoax of a story get to the frontpage?
You must be new here.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30214612</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft dumping to gain netbook marketshare?</title>
	<author>Richard\_at\_work</author>
	<datestamp>1259081940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>To prove dumping, you would have to prove that Microsoft are selling it for less than the cost to manufacture it, including original investment.  On an 8 year, two generations old very successful software product I have a feeling that proving dumping would be hard.  Very hard.</htmltext>
<tokenext>To prove dumping , you would have to prove that Microsoft are selling it for less than the cost to manufacture it , including original investment .
On an 8 year , two generations old very successful software product I have a feeling that proving dumping would be hard .
Very hard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To prove dumping, you would have to prove that Microsoft are selling it for less than the cost to manufacture it, including original investment.
On an 8 year, two generations old very successful software product I have a feeling that proving dumping would be hard.
Very hard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195736</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195560</id>
	<title>Might not be their intention</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258921920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>"Please be assured that it is not ASUS intentions to steer you away in any which way.'"</i></p><p>but they've definitely steered me away from Asus. I probably wouldn't have even bothered with trying to get a refund, but their dishonorable actions disgust me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Please be assured that it is not ASUS intentions to steer you away in any which way .
' " but they 've definitely steered me away from Asus .
I probably would n't have even bothered with trying to get a refund , but their dishonorable actions disgust me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Please be assured that it is not ASUS intentions to steer you away in any which way.
'"but they've definitely steered me away from Asus.
I probably wouldn't have even bothered with trying to get a refund, but their dishonorable actions disgust me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197248</id>
	<title>Re:Why reject just one component?</title>
	<author>91degrees</author>
	<datestamp>1258891320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That would be <i>"MICROSOFT WINDOWS XP HOME EDITION (RETAIL)"</i> <br> <br>
The OEM version tells you "AND YOU SHOULD PROMPTLY CONTACT MANUFACTURER FOR INSTRUCTIONS ON RETURN OF THE UNUSED PRODUCT(S) FOR A REFUND IN ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURER'S RETURN POLICIES."  So it's up to the manufacturer what their return policy is.  If they insist you return the entire machine that's the policy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That would be " MICROSOFT WINDOWS XP HOME EDITION ( RETAIL ) " The OEM version tells you " AND YOU SHOULD PROMPTLY CONTACT MANUFACTURER FOR INSTRUCTIONS ON RETURN OF THE UNUSED PRODUCT ( S ) FOR A REFUND IN ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURER 'S RETURN POLICIES .
" So it 's up to the manufacturer what their return policy is .
If they insist you return the entire machine that 's the policy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That would be "MICROSOFT WINDOWS XP HOME EDITION (RETAIL)"  
The OEM version tells you "AND YOU SHOULD PROMPTLY CONTACT MANUFACTURER FOR INSTRUCTIONS ON RETURN OF THE UNUSED PRODUCT(S) FOR A REFUND IN ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURER'S RETURN POLICIES.
"  So it's up to the manufacturer what their return policy is.
If they insist you return the entire machine that's the policy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196322</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30199086</id>
	<title>So tired of this</title>
	<author>leeosenton</author>
	<datestamp>1258908000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why sit around and debate what the proper value of a refund is for a Windows license when you dont want it anyway? What happened to voting with your dollars? Do you want HP, Gateway, Toshiba, and Sony to sell Linux systems? Then buy a machine that comes with an "alternate" OS!
I am typing this on my Dell Mini 9 netbook running Linux. I ordered it from them so I could cast a vote for alternate operating systems on new machines. I wiped the Dell Linux (old ubuntu w/ Dell launcher) and loaded UNR, but I wanted my vote to count. Yes, my desktop runs Windows and that is the right OS for the tasks that I do. Linux is the right OS for my little travel machine. I eventually chose another distro, but Dell sold a PC with Linux and got positive feedback from a customer. I actually liked the HP machine a little better, but wanted to support Linux by recording a sale, and I have no regrets. Canonical rewarded me with UNR 9.1 which is most excellent! So, want to thumb your nose at the big boys? Stop supporting them, there are many vendors out there with alternate choices. Vote with your Dollar!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why sit around and debate what the proper value of a refund is for a Windows license when you dont want it anyway ?
What happened to voting with your dollars ?
Do you want HP , Gateway , Toshiba , and Sony to sell Linux systems ?
Then buy a machine that comes with an " alternate " OS !
I am typing this on my Dell Mini 9 netbook running Linux .
I ordered it from them so I could cast a vote for alternate operating systems on new machines .
I wiped the Dell Linux ( old ubuntu w/ Dell launcher ) and loaded UNR , but I wanted my vote to count .
Yes , my desktop runs Windows and that is the right OS for the tasks that I do .
Linux is the right OS for my little travel machine .
I eventually chose another distro , but Dell sold a PC with Linux and got positive feedback from a customer .
I actually liked the HP machine a little better , but wanted to support Linux by recording a sale , and I have no regrets .
Canonical rewarded me with UNR 9.1 which is most excellent !
So , want to thumb your nose at the big boys ?
Stop supporting them , there are many vendors out there with alternate choices .
Vote with your Dollar !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why sit around and debate what the proper value of a refund is for a Windows license when you dont want it anyway?
What happened to voting with your dollars?
Do you want HP, Gateway, Toshiba, and Sony to sell Linux systems?
Then buy a machine that comes with an "alternate" OS!
I am typing this on my Dell Mini 9 netbook running Linux.
I ordered it from them so I could cast a vote for alternate operating systems on new machines.
I wiped the Dell Linux (old ubuntu w/ Dell launcher) and loaded UNR, but I wanted my vote to count.
Yes, my desktop runs Windows and that is the right OS for the tasks that I do.
Linux is the right OS for my little travel machine.
I eventually chose another distro, but Dell sold a PC with Linux and got positive feedback from a customer.
I actually liked the HP machine a little better, but wanted to support Linux by recording a sale, and I have no regrets.
Canonical rewarded me with UNR 9.1 which is most excellent!
So, want to thumb your nose at the big boys?
Stop supporting them, there are many vendors out there with alternate choices.
Vote with your Dollar!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195672</id>
	<title>Re:Piracy?</title>
	<author>sopssa</author>
	<datestamp>1258922580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Usually the downloaders don't get sued but the uploaders. And if you've uploaded to hundreds or even thousands of people, it's easily argued that you've contributed for that kind of losses.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Usually the downloaders do n't get sued but the uploaders .
And if you 've uploaded to hundreds or even thousands of people , it 's easily argued that you 've contributed for that kind of losses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Usually the downloaders don't get sued but the uploaders.
And if you've uploaded to hundreds or even thousands of people, it's easily argued that you've contributed for that kind of losses.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195578</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195800</id>
	<title>If that's the fair price, then</title>
	<author>joeflies</author>
	<datestamp>1258880580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd like to see which stores offer a $6 OEM option for buying XP licenses when you buy a bare motherboard.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd like to see which stores offer a $ 6 OEM option for buying XP licenses when you buy a bare motherboard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd like to see which stores offer a $6 OEM option for buying XP licenses when you buy a bare motherboard.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30214560</id>
	<title>Re:Sooo...</title>
	<author>Richard\_at\_work</author>
	<datestamp>1259081700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If I wanted to buy a copy of XP, I should be able to get it for $6?</p></div><p>Sign an OEM agreement, buy in (very big) numbers and yes, you can get it for $6.  I find it interesting that the combined intellect of Slashdot cannot come to the realisation that different purchasers get different rates.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I wanted to buy a copy of XP , I should be able to get it for $ 6 ? Sign an OEM agreement , buy in ( very big ) numbers and yes , you can get it for $ 6 .
I find it interesting that the combined intellect of Slashdot can not come to the realisation that different purchasers get different rates .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I wanted to buy a copy of XP, I should be able to get it for $6?Sign an OEM agreement, buy in (very big) numbers and yes, you can get it for $6.
I find it interesting that the combined intellect of Slashdot cannot come to the realisation that different purchasers get different rates.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196020</id>
	<title>Re:Apparent invented story trolls ASUS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258882080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Read <a href="http://slashdot.org/faq/editorial.shtml#ed750" title="slashdot.org">the FAQ</a> [slashdot.org] - the editors intentionally do not do any fact checking whatsoever on submitted stories.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Read the FAQ [ slashdot.org ] - the editors intentionally do not do any fact checking whatsoever on submitted stories .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Read the FAQ [slashdot.org] - the editors intentionally do not do any fact checking whatsoever on submitted stories.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30200634</id>
	<title>In the EU the EULA is void</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258979700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In the EU there is legislation to require 'fairness' in contracts. In the UK there are guidelines to indicate what is or is not fair in a contract. One of the types of contract considered unfair is a requirement for the purchaser of a thing, to also purchase a non integral component for the thing in question. For example an auto sales room cannot require you to also purchase petrol (gasoline) from them. It does not matter whether it is in the 'contract' or not. It is an unfair condition.</p><p>It is on those grounds that many people have asked for the Windows cost to be returned. Windows is not an integral part of the system being purchased and has been added to the bundle solely because of contractual requirements between the seller and the software manufacturer.</p><p>If you want to claim the money back, cite the Unfair Contract Terms Act 2005. If they still refuse use the small claims court citing the act and listing the circumstances. The costs will likely be minimal even if you were to loose the case.</p><p>Don't give in to these crooks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the EU there is legislation to require 'fairness ' in contracts .
In the UK there are guidelines to indicate what is or is not fair in a contract .
One of the types of contract considered unfair is a requirement for the purchaser of a thing , to also purchase a non integral component for the thing in question .
For example an auto sales room can not require you to also purchase petrol ( gasoline ) from them .
It does not matter whether it is in the 'contract ' or not .
It is an unfair condition.It is on those grounds that many people have asked for the Windows cost to be returned .
Windows is not an integral part of the system being purchased and has been added to the bundle solely because of contractual requirements between the seller and the software manufacturer.If you want to claim the money back , cite the Unfair Contract Terms Act 2005 .
If they still refuse use the small claims court citing the act and listing the circumstances .
The costs will likely be minimal even if you were to loose the case.Do n't give in to these crooks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the EU there is legislation to require 'fairness' in contracts.
In the UK there are guidelines to indicate what is or is not fair in a contract.
One of the types of contract considered unfair is a requirement for the purchaser of a thing, to also purchase a non integral component for the thing in question.
For example an auto sales room cannot require you to also purchase petrol (gasoline) from them.
It does not matter whether it is in the 'contract' or not.
It is an unfair condition.It is on those grounds that many people have asked for the Windows cost to be returned.
Windows is not an integral part of the system being purchased and has been added to the bundle solely because of contractual requirements between the seller and the software manufacturer.If you want to claim the money back, cite the Unfair Contract Terms Act 2005.
If they still refuse use the small claims court citing the act and listing the circumstances.
The costs will likely be minimal even if you were to loose the case.Don't give in to these crooks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197574</id>
	<title>Re:Why reject just one component?</title>
	<author>hisstory student</author>
	<datestamp>1258894680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"IF APPLICABLE" is the gotcha there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" IF APPLICABLE " is the gotcha there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"IF APPLICABLE" is the gotcha there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196322</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30210186</id>
	<title>Re:$6 is a good deal</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258998180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Really?  They're "loosing" money?  It could be worse, they could be losing money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Really ?
They 're " loosing " money ?
It could be worse , they could be losing money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really?
They're "loosing" money?
It could be worse, they could be losing money.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196658</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30198236</id>
	<title>Re:Apparent invented story trolls ASUS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258900200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Read <a href="http://slashdot.org/faq/editorial.shtml#ed750" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">the FAQ</a> [slashdot.org] - the editors intentionally do not do any fact checking whatsoever on submitted stories.</p></div><p>Then they would seem to be more accurately described as moderators instead of editors.  Slashdot has always been something of a metagame when it comes to truth.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Read the FAQ [ slashdot.org ] - the editors intentionally do not do any fact checking whatsoever on submitted stories.Then they would seem to be more accurately described as moderators instead of editors .
Slashdot has always been something of a metagame when it comes to truth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Read the FAQ [slashdot.org] - the editors intentionally do not do any fact checking whatsoever on submitted stories.Then they would seem to be more accurately described as moderators instead of editors.
Slashdot has always been something of a metagame when it comes to truth.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196822</id>
	<title>$6 Looks like a fair price to me</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258888380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everybody knew Microsoft had cut the price of XP to prevent companies distributing Linux.</p><p>Now we know the exact value.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everybody knew Microsoft had cut the price of XP to prevent companies distributing Linux.Now we know the exact value .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everybody knew Microsoft had cut the price of XP to prevent companies distributing Linux.Now we know the exact value.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196414</id>
	<title>My Response</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258885380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is to give the fucking operating system away to everyone I know.</p><p>I'm a white, middle class kinda guy who is sick of getting shit on and sick of seeing others getting shit on. So, my response is to pass along copies of the OS any way I can.</p><p>Tipping point is near...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is to give the fucking operating system away to everyone I know.I 'm a white , middle class kinda guy who is sick of getting shit on and sick of seeing others getting shit on .
So , my response is to pass along copies of the OS any way I can.Tipping point is near.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is to give the fucking operating system away to everyone I know.I'm a white, middle class kinda guy who is sick of getting shit on and sick of seeing others getting shit on.
So, my response is to pass along copies of the OS any way I can.Tipping point is near...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30201234</id>
	<title>It makes business sense</title>
	<author>HikingStick</author>
	<datestamp>1258987080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Even though the companies incur almost zero cost (okay, Linux fanboys, apart from reputational costs) for shipping with Windows after creating a disk master image or disk burning process, the company does incur administrative costs when processing refunds for people who decline the EULA.  While these costs would not be significant, they could easily add up to $20-$25 (the cost of employee wages, benefits, overhead, technology, recordkeeping, and the issuance of the credit). It appears that these companies are simply reducing their credits by their cost of operation--similar to a restocking fee for returns of physical goods.<br> <br>While I, too, would prefer to see clean (no-OS)PCs on the market, and prices that reflect having no OS (vs. subsidized OS installs), it's unfair to villianize the vendors who bear the brunt of the administrative responsibility in processing a refund for a declined EULA.<br> <br>On a tangental note, I'm waiting to see a court case where someone claims they never accepted the EULA(s) on their PC because the PC was set up by one of their minor children.  In most jurisdictions, minors cannot enter into contracts, so that would be the angle taken by the defense.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Even though the companies incur almost zero cost ( okay , Linux fanboys , apart from reputational costs ) for shipping with Windows after creating a disk master image or disk burning process , the company does incur administrative costs when processing refunds for people who decline the EULA .
While these costs would not be significant , they could easily add up to $ 20- $ 25 ( the cost of employee wages , benefits , overhead , technology , recordkeeping , and the issuance of the credit ) .
It appears that these companies are simply reducing their credits by their cost of operation--similar to a restocking fee for returns of physical goods .
While I , too , would prefer to see clean ( no-OS ) PCs on the market , and prices that reflect having no OS ( vs. subsidized OS installs ) , it 's unfair to villianize the vendors who bear the brunt of the administrative responsibility in processing a refund for a declined EULA .
On a tangental note , I 'm waiting to see a court case where someone claims they never accepted the EULA ( s ) on their PC because the PC was set up by one of their minor children .
In most jurisdictions , minors can not enter into contracts , so that would be the angle taken by the defense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even though the companies incur almost zero cost (okay, Linux fanboys, apart from reputational costs) for shipping with Windows after creating a disk master image or disk burning process, the company does incur administrative costs when processing refunds for people who decline the EULA.
While these costs would not be significant, they could easily add up to $20-$25 (the cost of employee wages, benefits, overhead, technology, recordkeeping, and the issuance of the credit).
It appears that these companies are simply reducing their credits by their cost of operation--similar to a restocking fee for returns of physical goods.
While I, too, would prefer to see clean (no-OS)PCs on the market, and prices that reflect having no OS (vs. subsidized OS installs), it's unfair to villianize the vendors who bear the brunt of the administrative responsibility in processing a refund for a declined EULA.
On a tangental note, I'm waiting to see a court case where someone claims they never accepted the EULA(s) on their PC because the PC was set up by one of their minor children.
In most jurisdictions, minors cannot enter into contracts, so that would be the angle taken by the defense.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195882</id>
	<title>Translation, please</title>
	<author>Threni</author>
	<datestamp>1258881180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Please be assured that it is not ASUS intentions to steer you away in any which way</p><p>Sounds like someone cheap or non English wrote that last sentence.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Please be assured that it is not ASUS intentions to steer you away in any which waySounds like someone cheap or non English wrote that last sentence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Please be assured that it is not ASUS intentions to steer you away in any which waySounds like someone cheap or non English wrote that last sentence.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196858</id>
	<title>Too bad you can't build your own laptop/netbook</title>
	<author>Just Brew It!</author>
	<datestamp>1258888620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>A DIY system build with the Open Source OS of your choice is by far the best route to avoid the Microsoft Tax. I put trying to get a refund for Windows after the fact right up there with mail-in rebates and free upgrade coupons -- in other words, I would not take it into consideration when making a purchasing decision, because I am not going to count on actually getting it. As often as not the vendor (or their hired-gun fulfillment company) will try to screw you, and you're left trying to explain the situation to the Nice Man in India who has no incentive to actually help you.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A DIY system build with the Open Source OS of your choice is by far the best route to avoid the Microsoft Tax .
I put trying to get a refund for Windows after the fact right up there with mail-in rebates and free upgrade coupons -- in other words , I would not take it into consideration when making a purchasing decision , because I am not going to count on actually getting it .
As often as not the vendor ( or their hired-gun fulfillment company ) will try to screw you , and you 're left trying to explain the situation to the Nice Man in India who has no incentive to actually help you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A DIY system build with the Open Source OS of your choice is by far the best route to avoid the Microsoft Tax.
I put trying to get a refund for Windows after the fact right up there with mail-in rebates and free upgrade coupons -- in other words, I would not take it into consideration when making a purchasing decision, because I am not going to count on actually getting it.
As often as not the vendor (or their hired-gun fulfillment company) will try to screw you, and you're left trying to explain the situation to the Nice Man in India who has no incentive to actually help you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30198966</id>
	<title>MS Refunds</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258907040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have never purchased a computer based on the operating system offered.  In the past ten years, I have generally not used the operating system originally provided with the computers I have purchased.  With the exception of laptop computers, I see no difference in the price of a computer I build myself, without an integrated operating system, and a commercial offering of the same capabilities with an integrated  operating system.  Ergo, the operating system really has no value.  If ASUS or any other provider wants to offer me $6 for something I know I won't use, I will accept their money.  But, if Toshiba offers me the capabilities I am looking for, for a price I consider reasonable, then I do not care whether I am paying for a Microsoft operating system or not.  As soon as I turn on the computer, the first command is usually, format c:\" anyway- I am buying hardware, not software....Arguing over $6 today is not the same as arguing over $6 back in the days when gasoline was $0.15 per gallon....</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have never purchased a computer based on the operating system offered .
In the past ten years , I have generally not used the operating system originally provided with the computers I have purchased .
With the exception of laptop computers , I see no difference in the price of a computer I build myself , without an integrated operating system , and a commercial offering of the same capabilities with an integrated operating system .
Ergo , the operating system really has no value .
If ASUS or any other provider wants to offer me $ 6 for something I know I wo n't use , I will accept their money .
But , if Toshiba offers me the capabilities I am looking for , for a price I consider reasonable , then I do not care whether I am paying for a Microsoft operating system or not .
As soon as I turn on the computer , the first command is usually , format c : \ " anyway- I am buying hardware , not software....Arguing over $ 6 today is not the same as arguing over $ 6 back in the days when gasoline was $ 0.15 per gallon... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have never purchased a computer based on the operating system offered.
In the past ten years, I have generally not used the operating system originally provided with the computers I have purchased.
With the exception of laptop computers, I see no difference in the price of a computer I build myself, without an integrated operating system, and a commercial offering of the same capabilities with an integrated  operating system.
Ergo, the operating system really has no value.
If ASUS or any other provider wants to offer me $6 for something I know I won't use, I will accept their money.
But, if Toshiba offers me the capabilities I am looking for, for a price I consider reasonable, then I do not care whether I am paying for a Microsoft operating system or not.
As soon as I turn on the computer, the first command is usually, format c:\" anyway- I am buying hardware, not software....Arguing over $6 today is not the same as arguing over $6 back in the days when gasoline was $0.15 per gallon....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195702</id>
	<title>ma8e</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258922820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Res0und as fitting</htmltext>
<tokenext>Res0und as fitting</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Res0und as fitting</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195484</id>
	<title>Old OS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258921380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What, we are talking about XP here? It was released in 2001, 8 years ago. As much as I'd like to join for a good bash, 8 year old software that since then has got several new versions will lose its value over time. And you also have to remember that major manufacturers who sell millions of Windowses have got the licenses cheaper, hence the actual cost and the refund being a lot less than if you bought it yourself.</p><p>I dont except to get a same kind of refund value for my 15 year old SDTV either than I would get for my new HDTV.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What , we are talking about XP here ?
It was released in 2001 , 8 years ago .
As much as I 'd like to join for a good bash , 8 year old software that since then has got several new versions will lose its value over time .
And you also have to remember that major manufacturers who sell millions of Windowses have got the licenses cheaper , hence the actual cost and the refund being a lot less than if you bought it yourself.I dont except to get a same kind of refund value for my 15 year old SDTV either than I would get for my new HDTV .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What, we are talking about XP here?
It was released in 2001, 8 years ago.
As much as I'd like to join for a good bash, 8 year old software that since then has got several new versions will lose its value over time.
And you also have to remember that major manufacturers who sell millions of Windowses have got the licenses cheaper, hence the actual cost and the refund being a lot less than if you bought it yourself.I dont except to get a same kind of refund value for my 15 year old SDTV either than I would get for my new HDTV.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196658</id>
	<title>$6 is a good deal</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258887300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At a conference on the west coast, an industry insider told me that MS basically gave ASUS XP for free (as part of a deal to FUD Linux).  That means that ASUS may be loosing money on this "refund".</p><p>Oh, and it also means that ASUS will sell out easily, which makes me interested in ignoring their products.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At a conference on the west coast , an industry insider told me that MS basically gave ASUS XP for free ( as part of a deal to FUD Linux ) .
That means that ASUS may be loosing money on this " refund " .Oh , and it also means that ASUS will sell out easily , which makes me interested in ignoring their products .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At a conference on the west coast, an industry insider told me that MS basically gave ASUS XP for free (as part of a deal to FUD Linux).
That means that ASUS may be loosing money on this "refund".Oh, and it also means that ASUS will sell out easily, which makes me interested in ignoring their products.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196996</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft dumping to gain netbook marketshare?</title>
	<author>harlows\_monkeys</author>
	<datestamp>1258889580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's not possible to do dumping with Windows XP. Even if they give it away for $0, that is (1) not lower than the competition, and (2) not lower than than the marginal cost of production.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not possible to do dumping with Windows XP .
Even if they give it away for $ 0 , that is ( 1 ) not lower than the competition , and ( 2 ) not lower than than the marginal cost of production .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not possible to do dumping with Windows XP.
Even if they give it away for $0, that is (1) not lower than the competition, and (2) not lower than than the marginal cost of production.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195736</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195528</id>
	<title>Re:Old OS</title>
	<author>Mithyx</author>
	<datestamp>1258921680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you can buy XP for 25-30$ I'd love to know where you're getting it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you can buy XP for 25-30 $ I 'd love to know where you 're getting it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you can buy XP for 25-30$ I'd love to know where you're getting it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30198342</id>
	<title>How I deal with this MS tax.</title>
	<author>3seas</author>
	<datestamp>1258901280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't even look at computer ads that include windows OS's, except to see whether or not Windows is included.</p><p>Enough walk this way and they will change their stance.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't even look at computer ads that include windows OS 's , except to see whether or not Windows is included.Enough walk this way and they will change their stance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't even look at computer ads that include windows OS's, except to see whether or not Windows is included.Enough walk this way and they will change their stance.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197814</id>
	<title>Re:Why reject just one component?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258896900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the trouble is, if you buy a package, then you cannot simply return part of the package, you are not buying windows XP, you are actually buying a package which contains a copy of windows XP alongside a computer system, the copy of XP included is a special copy for distribution with the new computer (assuming its an OEM copy) so not the same product</p><p>that would be like buying a graphics card that came with a free game disk, and then to ask for a refund on the game cos you didn't want to play it, you cant do so as it is part of a package, so you would have to return the entire package, not an individual component</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the trouble is , if you buy a package , then you can not simply return part of the package , you are not buying windows XP , you are actually buying a package which contains a copy of windows XP alongside a computer system , the copy of XP included is a special copy for distribution with the new computer ( assuming its an OEM copy ) so not the same productthat would be like buying a graphics card that came with a free game disk , and then to ask for a refund on the game cos you did n't want to play it , you cant do so as it is part of a package , so you would have to return the entire package , not an individual component</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the trouble is, if you buy a package, then you cannot simply return part of the package, you are not buying windows XP, you are actually buying a package which contains a copy of windows XP alongside a computer system, the copy of XP included is a special copy for distribution with the new computer (assuming its an OEM copy) so not the same productthat would be like buying a graphics card that came with a free game disk, and then to ask for a refund on the game cos you didn't want to play it, you cant do so as it is part of a package, so you would have to return the entire package, not an individual component</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196322</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196500</id>
	<title>Go Android!</title>
	<author>BlackCreek</author>
	<datestamp>1258886400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If there is anything I expect Android to provide wrt laptops and netbooks, is a way to buy them without paying MS tax (or Apple Tax).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If there is anything I expect Android to provide wrt laptops and netbooks , is a way to buy them without paying MS tax ( or Apple Tax ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If there is anything I expect Android to provide wrt laptops and netbooks, is a way to buy them without paying MS tax (or Apple Tax).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30199642</id>
	<title>Re:Old OS</title>
	<author>masterzora</author>
	<datestamp>1258915080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>So, you think that if you were to buy something today (a couch, a table, a pair of pants) that was first marketed 15 years ago, that you should get a depreciated refund if you returned it?</p></div><p>Spam was first marketed more than fifteen years ago, and the price has gone up. I do not think that word means what you think it means. Either you want the word "sold" or you're way the hell off in left field. They're still shipping XP, so clearly it's a current product, and you should get the full value for it.</p></div><p>Actually, the parent means marketed.  Yes, spam was first marketed marketed more than fifteen years ago and the price has gone up.  That's wonderful.  However, if I bought a can today and, for whatever reason, returned it to the store, I expect to receive a full refund of the amount for which I bought it, not some lesser value since the spam is now worth less.</p><p>Now, the spam example was terrible since, unlike OSes and tables, since those are relatively large purchases that you only need once every several years (for some sliding value of several), whereas spam ostensibly fits in as 'food', which you generally buy for 3 meals plus snacks or so per day.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , you think that if you were to buy something today ( a couch , a table , a pair of pants ) that was first marketed 15 years ago , that you should get a depreciated refund if you returned it ? Spam was first marketed more than fifteen years ago , and the price has gone up .
I do not think that word means what you think it means .
Either you want the word " sold " or you 're way the hell off in left field .
They 're still shipping XP , so clearly it 's a current product , and you should get the full value for it.Actually , the parent means marketed .
Yes , spam was first marketed marketed more than fifteen years ago and the price has gone up .
That 's wonderful .
However , if I bought a can today and , for whatever reason , returned it to the store , I expect to receive a full refund of the amount for which I bought it , not some lesser value since the spam is now worth less.Now , the spam example was terrible since , unlike OSes and tables , since those are relatively large purchases that you only need once every several years ( for some sliding value of several ) , whereas spam ostensibly fits in as 'food ' , which you generally buy for 3 meals plus snacks or so per day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, you think that if you were to buy something today (a couch, a table, a pair of pants) that was first marketed 15 years ago, that you should get a depreciated refund if you returned it?Spam was first marketed more than fifteen years ago, and the price has gone up.
I do not think that word means what you think it means.
Either you want the word "sold" or you're way the hell off in left field.
They're still shipping XP, so clearly it's a current product, and you should get the full value for it.Actually, the parent means marketed.
Yes, spam was first marketed marketed more than fifteen years ago and the price has gone up.
That's wonderful.
However, if I bought a can today and, for whatever reason, returned it to the store, I expect to receive a full refund of the amount for which I bought it, not some lesser value since the spam is now worth less.Now, the spam example was terrible since, unlike OSes and tables, since those are relatively large purchases that you only need once every several years (for some sliding value of several), whereas spam ostensibly fits in as 'food', which you generally buy for 3 meals plus snacks or so per day.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196000</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30199424</id>
	<title>Its all the crapware refunds offsetting cost</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258911720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The $6 sounds about right as all the festering pre-installed crapware and trials actually pays for XP.  If you are not going to use XP, then the vendors that pay to foist all their software onto you would not benifit and should be refunded as well...</p><p>So XP costs $A<br>Companies crapware refund $A-6<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...and you get $6 back..  Sounds about right... I think it should be against the law for HP to fill your computer with all that crap to start with in the first place..  It should be a clean desktop with a garbage can on it and the only additions would be proper hardware drivers With none of the Driver "utility" programs installed either!!!  Damn systems are slow and unusable brand new with all that junk running.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The $ 6 sounds about right as all the festering pre-installed crapware and trials actually pays for XP .
If you are not going to use XP , then the vendors that pay to foist all their software onto you would not benifit and should be refunded as well...So XP costs $ ACompanies crapware refund $ A-6 ...and you get $ 6 back.. Sounds about right... I think it should be against the law for HP to fill your computer with all that crap to start with in the first place.. It should be a clean desktop with a garbage can on it and the only additions would be proper hardware drivers With none of the Driver " utility " programs installed either ! ! !
Damn systems are slow and unusable brand new with all that junk running .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The $6 sounds about right as all the festering pre-installed crapware and trials actually pays for XP.
If you are not going to use XP, then the vendors that pay to foist all their software onto you would not benifit and should be refunded as well...So XP costs $ACompanies crapware refund $A-6 ...and you get $6 back..  Sounds about right... I think it should be against the law for HP to fill your computer with all that crap to start with in the first place..  It should be a clean desktop with a garbage can on it and the only additions would be proper hardware drivers With none of the Driver "utility" programs installed either!!!
Damn systems are slow and unusable brand new with all that junk running.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195790</id>
	<title>Proper value of operating system software</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258880520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does this mean that, given Microsoft XP is worth <b>ten times</b> the value of Microsoft Vista,<br>the vendors will only refund $0.60 if you decline the OS?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does this mean that , given Microsoft XP is worth ten times the value of Microsoft Vista,the vendors will only refund $ 0.60 if you decline the OS ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does this mean that, given Microsoft XP is worth ten times the value of Microsoft Vista,the vendors will only refund $0.60 if you decline the OS?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195846</id>
	<title>Small claims</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1258880820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Take them to small claims court instead.  They'll quickly learn that it's cheaper to provide a full refund than to pay someone to show up in small claims court.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Take them to small claims court instead .
They 'll quickly learn that it 's cheaper to provide a full refund than to pay someone to show up in small claims court .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Take them to small claims court instead.
They'll quickly learn that it's cheaper to provide a full refund than to pay someone to show up in small claims court.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197012</id>
	<title>Re:Apparent invented story trolls ASUS</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1258889700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ran out of Iphone stories today.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ran out of Iphone stories today .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ran out of Iphone stories today.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30199236</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft dumping to gain netbook marketshare?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258909620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If Asus are paying $6 for Windows XP OEM, then surely Microsoft is dumping their product on the market?</p></div><p>Since some of their competitors release distros with far more included software at $0 I don't know if any price could be considered dumping. More like it's a realistic pricing structure. I'd even consider using some MS software at that price, but not much above.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If Asus are paying $ 6 for Windows XP OEM , then surely Microsoft is dumping their product on the market ? Since some of their competitors release distros with far more included software at $ 0 I do n't know if any price could be considered dumping .
More like it 's a realistic pricing structure .
I 'd even consider using some MS software at that price , but not much above .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Asus are paying $6 for Windows XP OEM, then surely Microsoft is dumping their product on the market?Since some of their competitors release distros with far more included software at $0 I don't know if any price could be considered dumping.
More like it's a realistic pricing structure.
I'd even consider using some MS software at that price, but not much above.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195736</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196040</id>
	<title>Re:Apparent invented story trolls ASUS</title>
	<author>wampus</author>
	<datestamp>1258882260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To push the open source agenda, duh.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To push the open source agenda , duh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To push the open source agenda, duh.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196018</id>
	<title>Re:Why reject just one component?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258882080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What other products come with a legal document stating that, if you so choose, you can return a single component for a refund?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What other products come with a legal document stating that , if you so choose , you can return a single component for a refund ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What other products come with a legal document stating that, if you so choose, you can return a single component for a refund?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195872</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197156</id>
	<title>Asus is overcompensating</title>
	<author>amiga3D</author>
	<datestamp>1258890660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Six dollars is far more than windoze is worth.

I know it's flamebait but I just couldn't help myself.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Six dollars is far more than windoze is worth .
I know it 's flamebait but I just could n't help myself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Six dollars is far more than windoze is worth.
I know it's flamebait but I just couldn't help myself.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30199456</id>
	<title>Hang all the lawyers</title>
	<author>microbox</author>
	<datestamp>1258912200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Only the consumer is agreeing to the EULA. It's the perfect legal bum steer.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Only the consumer is agreeing to the EULA .
It 's the perfect legal bum steer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only the consumer is agreeing to the EULA.
It's the perfect legal bum steer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196322</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197104</id>
	<title>Think US$6 is right?  Another way to calculate:</title>
	<author>mark0</author>
	<datestamp>1258890180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>A 1005HA with Windows 7 starter on Amazon.com: US$336.  Same system with Windows XP Home: US$312.  Difference: US$24.  Subtract that from the US$50 estimate OEM price in the ars technica article and the remainder would be the price Asus is charging for XP home: US$26.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A 1005HA with Windows 7 starter on Amazon.com : US $ 336 .
Same system with Windows XP Home : US $ 312 .
Difference : US $ 24 .
Subtract that from the US $ 50 estimate OEM price in the ars technica article and the remainder would be the price Asus is charging for XP home : US $ 26 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A 1005HA with Windows 7 starter on Amazon.com: US$336.
Same system with Windows XP Home: US$312.
Difference: US$24.
Subtract that from the US$50 estimate OEM price in the ars technica article and the remainder would be the price Asus is charging for XP home: US$26.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195526</id>
	<title>Re:Old OS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258921680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Manufacturers who still sell XP are also probably getting them dirt-cheap now. The <a href="http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=118" title="zdnet.com" rel="nofollow">blog post linked</a> [zdnet.com] in summary is from 2006, before Vista and way before Windows 7...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Manufacturers who still sell XP are also probably getting them dirt-cheap now .
The blog post linked [ zdnet.com ] in summary is from 2006 , before Vista and way before Windows 7.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Manufacturers who still sell XP are also probably getting them dirt-cheap now.
The blog post linked [zdnet.com] in summary is from 2006, before Vista and way before Windows 7...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196322</id>
	<title>Re:Why reject just one component?</title>
	<author>JStegmaier</author>
	<datestamp>1258884360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ones where you have to agree to an end user license agree that states " IF YOU DO NOT AGREE, DO NOT INSTALL, COPY, OR USE THE SOFTWARE; YOU MAY RETURN IT TO YOUR PLACE OF PURCHASE FOR A FULL REFUND, IF APPLICABLE." <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/eula/home.mspx" title="microsoft.com">Windows XP EULA</a> [microsoft.com] <br>Surely Microsoft's license doesn't apply to all the components, but it specifically says you can get a refund from where you purchased the software. Companies don't want to honor the Windows EULA? Don't sell computers with Windows.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ones where you have to agree to an end user license agree that states " IF YOU DO NOT AGREE , DO NOT INSTALL , COPY , OR USE THE SOFTWARE ; YOU MAY RETURN IT TO YOUR PLACE OF PURCHASE FOR A FULL REFUND , IF APPLICABLE .
" Windows XP EULA [ microsoft.com ] Surely Microsoft 's license does n't apply to all the components , but it specifically says you can get a refund from where you purchased the software .
Companies do n't want to honor the Windows EULA ?
Do n't sell computers with Windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ones where you have to agree to an end user license agree that states " IF YOU DO NOT AGREE, DO NOT INSTALL, COPY, OR USE THE SOFTWARE; YOU MAY RETURN IT TO YOUR PLACE OF PURCHASE FOR A FULL REFUND, IF APPLICABLE.
" Windows XP EULA [microsoft.com] Surely Microsoft's license doesn't apply to all the components, but it specifically says you can get a refund from where you purchased the software.
Companies don't want to honor the Windows EULA?
Don't sell computers with Windows.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195872</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196434</id>
	<title>Re:Apparent invented story trolls ASUS</title>
	<author>MSTCrow5429</author>
	<datestamp>1258885740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>This isn't about fact-checking, this is about the editors taking the time to RTFA.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is n't about fact-checking , this is about the editors taking the time to RTFA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This isn't about fact-checking, this is about the editors taking the time to RTFA.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30198232</id>
	<title>Re:Might not be their intention</title>
	<author>travisco\_nabisco</author>
	<datestamp>1258900200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As other have said, when you buy the computer you are paying for the whole bundle that the manufacturer put together. You can't go return the 5400 rpm hard drive from the laptop. If you don't like buying a bundle that includes a Windows license, that you can get a certain amount of money back for, think of it is a restocking fee being applied, then go find one of the barebones laptops and build your own. Otherwise get off your elitist ass and petition to more manufacturers to offer laptops without Windows installed on them. Sitting on Slashdot complaining isn't going to change anyone's practices.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As other have said , when you buy the computer you are paying for the whole bundle that the manufacturer put together .
You ca n't go return the 5400 rpm hard drive from the laptop .
If you do n't like buying a bundle that includes a Windows license , that you can get a certain amount of money back for , think of it is a restocking fee being applied , then go find one of the barebones laptops and build your own .
Otherwise get off your elitist ass and petition to more manufacturers to offer laptops without Windows installed on them .
Sitting on Slashdot complaining is n't going to change anyone 's practices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As other have said, when you buy the computer you are paying for the whole bundle that the manufacturer put together.
You can't go return the 5400 rpm hard drive from the laptop.
If you don't like buying a bundle that includes a Windows license, that you can get a certain amount of money back for, think of it is a restocking fee being applied, then go find one of the barebones laptops and build your own.
Otherwise get off your elitist ass and petition to more manufacturers to offer laptops without Windows installed on them.
Sitting on Slashdot complaining isn't going to change anyone's practices.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197374</id>
	<title>Re:If that's the fair price, then</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258892580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>search harder.</p><p>I can get XP licenses for $10 in lots of 10. I assume if I wanted a larger quantity the price would go down.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>search harder.I can get XP licenses for $ 10 in lots of 10 .
I assume if I wanted a larger quantity the price would go down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>search harder.I can get XP licenses for $10 in lots of 10.
I assume if I wanted a larger quantity the price would go down.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197938</id>
	<title>Don't buy from Amazon or ASUS (or anyone else)</title>
	<author>HermMunster</author>
	<datestamp>1258897860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If they don't offer a refund on software you didn't choose to have then don't buy from them.  If they don't offer a unit without an OS don't buy from them.  ASUS is ripping you off and it is absolutely a unfair refund price.  They are cheating you.  Don't buy from them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If they do n't offer a refund on software you did n't choose to have then do n't buy from them .
If they do n't offer a unit without an OS do n't buy from them .
ASUS is ripping you off and it is absolutely a unfair refund price .
They are cheating you .
Do n't buy from them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they don't offer a refund on software you didn't choose to have then don't buy from them.
If they don't offer a unit without an OS don't buy from them.
ASUS is ripping you off and it is absolutely a unfair refund price.
They are cheating you.
Don't buy from them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196026</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>rrohbeck</author>
	<datestamp>1258882080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At least they didn't say "Wait, it says 'Press F12 for more information'" like the call center drone I talked to yesterday (not related to ASUS or this issue.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At least they did n't say " Wait , it says 'Press F12 for more information ' " like the call center drone I talked to yesterday ( not related to ASUS or this issue .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At least they didn't say "Wait, it says 'Press F12 for more information'" like the call center drone I talked to yesterday (not related to ASUS or this issue.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195564</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30200380</id>
	<title>Wait, maybe ASUS isn't the bad guy here</title>
	<author>Provocateur</author>
	<datestamp>1258974360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think $6 *IS* the correct price for the <i>declining</i> value of XP considering it's been EOL'ed repeatedly, and ASUS is just telling us what its current street value is.</p><p>Oh THERE's my sarcasm tag, it was on the floor all this time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think $ 6 * IS * the correct price for the declining value of XP considering it 's been EOL'ed repeatedly , and ASUS is just telling us what its current street value is.Oh THERE 's my sarcasm tag , it was on the floor all this time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think $6 *IS* the correct price for the declining value of XP considering it's been EOL'ed repeatedly, and ASUS is just telling us what its current street value is.Oh THERE's my sarcasm tag, it was on the floor all this time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195904</id>
	<title>Have to get that 2 Minutes Hate in.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258881360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A day without 2 Minutes Hate is like a day without sunshine!</htmltext>
<tokenext>A day without 2 Minutes Hate is like a day without sunshine !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A day without 2 Minutes Hate is like a day without sunshine!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195736</id>
	<title>Microsoft dumping to gain netbook marketshare?</title>
	<author>hattig</author>
	<datestamp>1258923180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If Asus are paying $6 for Windows XP OEM, then surely Microsoft is dumping their product on the market? Probably why they're including it in their netbooks in favour of Linux.</p><p>Dumping product? Convicted monopolist? I think that there's a good chance here that some netbook OS vendors have a case here to make an official complaint about anti-competitive predatory tactics by Microsoft.</p><p>Or the story is a load of rubbish.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If Asus are paying $ 6 for Windows XP OEM , then surely Microsoft is dumping their product on the market ?
Probably why they 're including it in their netbooks in favour of Linux.Dumping product ?
Convicted monopolist ?
I think that there 's a good chance here that some netbook OS vendors have a case here to make an official complaint about anti-competitive predatory tactics by Microsoft.Or the story is a load of rubbish .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Asus are paying $6 for Windows XP OEM, then surely Microsoft is dumping their product on the market?
Probably why they're including it in their netbooks in favour of Linux.Dumping product?
Convicted monopolist?
I think that there's a good chance here that some netbook OS vendors have a case here to make an official complaint about anti-competitive predatory tactics by Microsoft.Or the story is a load of rubbish.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196408</id>
	<title>No refund needed, by a laptop or pc without OS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258885320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For myself I prevent paying the Windows tax by buying 'white books' which do come without installed software. For example Compal FL90 is my current machine. You have to search a little but there are ways to get a laptop/PC system without Windows installed. For me the 450euro PC was sold without OS for almost 100 Euro less.</p><p>Many hardware vendors are very depending on the deals the have with Microsoft. The discount they got on the os is very important for being able to compete. So if Microsoft takes away the discounts it will have a significant change on the sales.</p><p>So hardware vendors are of course afraid of Microsoft for loosing their discounts.</p><p>Only via some small dealers, direct from the manufacturers in China laptops can be obtained without an OS. For PC's you can be of the hook by assembling a PC from parts. Some companies are specialized in building your PC from parts you select.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For myself I prevent paying the Windows tax by buying 'white books ' which do come without installed software .
For example Compal FL90 is my current machine .
You have to search a little but there are ways to get a laptop/PC system without Windows installed .
For me the 450euro PC was sold without OS for almost 100 Euro less.Many hardware vendors are very depending on the deals the have with Microsoft .
The discount they got on the os is very important for being able to compete .
So if Microsoft takes away the discounts it will have a significant change on the sales.So hardware vendors are of course afraid of Microsoft for loosing their discounts.Only via some small dealers , direct from the manufacturers in China laptops can be obtained without an OS .
For PC 's you can be of the hook by assembling a PC from parts .
Some companies are specialized in building your PC from parts you select .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For myself I prevent paying the Windows tax by buying 'white books' which do come without installed software.
For example Compal FL90 is my current machine.
You have to search a little but there are ways to get a laptop/PC system without Windows installed.
For me the 450euro PC was sold without OS for almost 100 Euro less.Many hardware vendors are very depending on the deals the have with Microsoft.
The discount they got on the os is very important for being able to compete.
So if Microsoft takes away the discounts it will have a significant change on the sales.So hardware vendors are of course afraid of Microsoft for loosing their discounts.Only via some small dealers, direct from the manufacturers in China laptops can be obtained without an OS.
For PC's you can be of the hook by assembling a PC from parts.
Some companies are specialized in building your PC from parts you select.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195588</id>
	<title>Apparent invented story trolls ASUS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258922040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>This story has no link whatsoever to anything about ASUS.  Of the two links on pricing, one is from June 15 2009, months before Windows 7 was released, while the other is an ancient article from fall 2006.  How did this badly researched, apparent hoax of a story get to the frontpage?</htmltext>
<tokenext>This story has no link whatsoever to anything about ASUS .
Of the two links on pricing , one is from June 15 2009 , months before Windows 7 was released , while the other is an ancient article from fall 2006 .
How did this badly researched , apparent hoax of a story get to the frontpage ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This story has no link whatsoever to anything about ASUS.
Of the two links on pricing, one is from June 15 2009, months before Windows 7 was released, while the other is an ancient article from fall 2006.
How did this badly researched, apparent hoax of a story get to the frontpage?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195538</id>
	<title>Re:Old OS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258921740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I dont except to get a same kind of refund value for my 15 year old SDTV either than I would get for my new HDTV.</p></div></blockquote><p>So, you think that if you were to buy something today (a couch, a table, a pair of pants) that was first marketed 15 years ago, that you should get a depreciated refund if you returned it?
</p><p>Brand new table, buy for $1100, return it, get $200?  I think not.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I dont except to get a same kind of refund value for my 15 year old SDTV either than I would get for my new HDTV.So , you think that if you were to buy something today ( a couch , a table , a pair of pants ) that was first marketed 15 years ago , that you should get a depreciated refund if you returned it ?
Brand new table , buy for $ 1100 , return it , get $ 200 ?
I think not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I dont except to get a same kind of refund value for my 15 year old SDTV either than I would get for my new HDTV.So, you think that if you were to buy something today (a couch, a table, a pair of pants) that was first marketed 15 years ago, that you should get a depreciated refund if you returned it?
Brand new table, buy for $1100, return it, get $200?
I think not.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195564</id>
	<title>Wow</title>
	<author>nametaken</author>
	<datestamp>1258921920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What kind of babble talk answer is that?  I hope this is a misquote from a phone conversation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What kind of babble talk answer is that ?
I hope this is a misquote from a phone conversation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What kind of babble talk answer is that?
I hope this is a misquote from a phone conversation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195578</id>
	<title>Piracy?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258921980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The refund price for the decline of the EULA is correct in it being US$6. This price unfortunately is not negotiable...</p></div><p>So when I download XP off TPB or a similar site, they're going to sue me for $6 in damages? Yeah. Right.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The refund price for the decline of the EULA is correct in it being US $ 6 .
This price unfortunately is not negotiable...So when I download XP off TPB or a similar site , they 're going to sue me for $ 6 in damages ?
Yeah. Right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The refund price for the decline of the EULA is correct in it being US$6.
This price unfortunately is not negotiable...So when I download XP off TPB or a similar site, they're going to sue me for $6 in damages?
Yeah. Right.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197182</id>
	<title>They've got a problem in the EU then.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258890900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The French courts have already slapped down this sort of avoidance trickery and loaded on damages for obstruction. The complainer ended up with more compensation than he paid for the machine in the first place</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The French courts have already slapped down this sort of avoidance trickery and loaded on damages for obstruction .
The complainer ended up with more compensation than he paid for the machine in the first place</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The French courts have already slapped down this sort of avoidance trickery and loaded on damages for obstruction.
The complainer ended up with more compensation than he paid for the machine in the first place</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195578</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195732</id>
	<title>Re:Piracy?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258923120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>So when I download XP off TPB or a similar site, they're going to sue me for $6 in damages</p></div></blockquote><p>I'm not sure anyone (yet) has been sued for downloading. Typically people are sued for the uploading bit (that typically goes hand in hand with downloading in most clients), where you are making it available to others.</p><p>It's a lot easier for them to convince the judge and jury to award astronomical awards if they show you were sharing the file, not just downloading it for personal usage.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So when I download XP off TPB or a similar site , they 're going to sue me for $ 6 in damagesI 'm not sure anyone ( yet ) has been sued for downloading .
Typically people are sued for the uploading bit ( that typically goes hand in hand with downloading in most clients ) , where you are making it available to others.It 's a lot easier for them to convince the judge and jury to award astronomical awards if they show you were sharing the file , not just downloading it for personal usage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So when I download XP off TPB or a similar site, they're going to sue me for $6 in damagesI'm not sure anyone (yet) has been sued for downloading.
Typically people are sued for the uploading bit (that typically goes hand in hand with downloading in most clients), where you are making it available to others.It's a lot easier for them to convince the judge and jury to award astronomical awards if they show you were sharing the file, not just downloading it for personal usage.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195578</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30199236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195736
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197248
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196322
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195564
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196434
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195588
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195588
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30199642
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196000
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195538
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30210186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196658
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197814
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196322
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195736
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196046
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195882
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197574
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196322
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30199456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196322
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195732
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195578
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30198412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195588
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197016
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195588
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196464
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195560
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195528
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30214612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195736
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195672
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195578
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30198236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195588
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195526
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30214560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195578
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195800
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195666
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195578
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30198598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195588
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30198232
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195560
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197124
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195736
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195588
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_1833255_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195588
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_1833255.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195800
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197374
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_1833255.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195560
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196464
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196364
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30198232
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_1833255.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196658
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30210186
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_1833255.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30198860
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_1833255.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195846
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_1833255.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195736
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30214612
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197124
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196996
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30199236
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_1833255.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195564
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196026
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_1833255.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30204276
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_1833255.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30201068
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_1833255.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30198966
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_1833255.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30198224
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_1833255.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195588
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195904
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197012
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196020
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30198236
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30198412
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196434
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196040
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196352
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197016
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_1833255.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195734
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197542
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30214560
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_1833255.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195484
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195528
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195538
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196000
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30199642
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195526
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_1833255.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197938
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_1833255.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195872
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196322
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30199456
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197248
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197574
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197814
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30198598
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196018
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_1833255.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195882
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196046
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_1833255.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30196858
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_1833255.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30198342
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_1833255.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195578
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195732
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30197182
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195666
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_1833255.30195672
</commentlist>
</conversation>
