<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_28_1723257</id>
	<title>Microsoft Advice Against Nehalem Xeons Snuffed Out</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1259433180000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Eukariote writes <i>"In an article outlining hidden strife in the processor world, Andreas Stiller has reported the scoop that <a href="http://www.h-online.com/newsticker/news/item/Processor-Whispers-About-War-and-Peace-865886.html">Microsoft advised against the use of Intel Nehalem Xeon (Core i7/i5) processors</a> under Windows Server 2008 R2, but was pressured by Intel to refrain from publishing this advisory. The issue concerns a <a href="http://support.microsoft.com/kb/975530">bug causing spurious interrupts</a> that locks up the Hypervisor of Server 2008. Though there is a hotfix, it is unattractive as it disables power savings and turbo boost states. (The original <a href="http://www.heise.de/ct/artikel/Prozessorgefluester-862083.html">German-language version of the article</a> is also available.)"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Eukariote writes " In an article outlining hidden strife in the processor world , Andreas Stiller has reported the scoop that Microsoft advised against the use of Intel Nehalem Xeon ( Core i7/i5 ) processors under Windows Server 2008 R2 , but was pressured by Intel to refrain from publishing this advisory .
The issue concerns a bug causing spurious interrupts that locks up the Hypervisor of Server 2008 .
Though there is a hotfix , it is unattractive as it disables power savings and turbo boost states .
( The original German-language version of the article is also available .
) "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Eukariote writes "In an article outlining hidden strife in the processor world, Andreas Stiller has reported the scoop that Microsoft advised against the use of Intel Nehalem Xeon (Core i7/i5) processors under Windows Server 2008 R2, but was pressured by Intel to refrain from publishing this advisory.
The issue concerns a bug causing spurious interrupts that locks up the Hypervisor of Server 2008.
Though there is a hotfix, it is unattractive as it disables power savings and turbo boost states.
(The original German-language version of the article is also available.
)"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255862</id>
	<title>First Rev of New Architecture</title>
	<author>bill\_mcgonigle</author>
	<datestamp>1259437740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Many of the benchmarking sites have also posted some poor results - I was thinking this might be a generation to skip, but now I wonder if a flaw has been discovered that could be fixed with a microcode upload.  Might help the benchmarks too if it was a hidden variable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Many of the benchmarking sites have also posted some poor results - I was thinking this might be a generation to skip , but now I wonder if a flaw has been discovered that could be fixed with a microcode upload .
Might help the benchmarks too if it was a hidden variable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Many of the benchmarking sites have also posted some poor results - I was thinking this might be a generation to skip, but now I wonder if a flaw has been discovered that could be fixed with a microcode upload.
Might help the benchmarks too if it was a hidden variable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255796</id>
	<title>AMD is looking better and this is the type of stuf</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259437020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>AMD is looking better and this is the type of stuff that intel worshipers say amd systems do and now what will they say about intel?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>AMD is looking better and this is the type of stuff that intel worshipers say amd systems do and now what will they say about intel ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>AMD is looking better and this is the type of stuff that intel worshipers say amd systems do and now what will they say about intel?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256030</id>
	<title>Please Explain Further</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259439240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I read the article, I read the MS support report, and I read the Intel advisory.  And I don't think that the summary is correct.<br>
<br>
The summary says that the hotfix disables power savings and turbo boost.  But my reading of the MS report is that an affected system has two options, (1) a workaround, and (2) the hotfix.  The difference is that the workaround disables advanced power savings and is known to be stable without side effects, but the hotfix actually fixes the problem with the vector table, presumably by following the instructions provided in the Intel advisory note.<br>
<br>
Said another way, the hotfix doesn't disable power savings and doesn't disable turbo boost.<br>
<br>
I expect that this is another fine example where Slashdot editors misunderstand a situation.  Someone prove me wrong.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I read the article , I read the MS support report , and I read the Intel advisory .
And I do n't think that the summary is correct .
The summary says that the hotfix disables power savings and turbo boost .
But my reading of the MS report is that an affected system has two options , ( 1 ) a workaround , and ( 2 ) the hotfix .
The difference is that the workaround disables advanced power savings and is known to be stable without side effects , but the hotfix actually fixes the problem with the vector table , presumably by following the instructions provided in the Intel advisory note .
Said another way , the hotfix does n't disable power savings and does n't disable turbo boost .
I expect that this is another fine example where Slashdot editors misunderstand a situation .
Someone prove me wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I read the article, I read the MS support report, and I read the Intel advisory.
And I don't think that the summary is correct.
The summary says that the hotfix disables power savings and turbo boost.
But my reading of the MS report is that an affected system has two options, (1) a workaround, and (2) the hotfix.
The difference is that the workaround disables advanced power savings and is known to be stable without side effects, but the hotfix actually fixes the problem with the vector table, presumably by following the instructions provided in the Intel advisory note.
Said another way, the hotfix doesn't disable power savings and doesn't disable turbo boost.
I expect that this is another fine example where Slashdot editors misunderstand a situation.
Someone prove me wrong.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30260510</id>
	<title>Re:Broken processors</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259500260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This reality is clearly broken. Microsoft does the pressuring, and isn't ever seen on the receiving end.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This reality is clearly broken .
Microsoft does the pressuring , and is n't ever seen on the receiving end .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This reality is clearly broken.
Microsoft does the pressuring, and isn't ever seen on the receiving end.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255780</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256330</id>
	<title>The article supposes that Intel blocked this</title>
	<author>YesIAmAScript</author>
	<datestamp>1259441940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is no evidence Intel pressured MS into their wording of the fix/workaround. It's quite possible that after not finding a fix/workaround for it and writing an initial draft saying not to use the processors, MS developed a workaround/fix (perhaps with Intel's help) that actually does work and put that in instead of saying not to use the chips.</p><p>To those are are suddenly concerned about Intel chips because they have an errata, every chip has errata, tons of them. AMD has them too, trust me.</p><p>I've been running a Core i7 (920) for a year and it's worked great under Vista and Windows 7. I'm sure it has faults, but they don't seem to be an issue in my regular use.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no evidence Intel pressured MS into their wording of the fix/workaround .
It 's quite possible that after not finding a fix/workaround for it and writing an initial draft saying not to use the processors , MS developed a workaround/fix ( perhaps with Intel 's help ) that actually does work and put that in instead of saying not to use the chips.To those are are suddenly concerned about Intel chips because they have an errata , every chip has errata , tons of them .
AMD has them too , trust me.I 've been running a Core i7 ( 920 ) for a year and it 's worked great under Vista and Windows 7 .
I 'm sure it has faults , but they do n't seem to be an issue in my regular use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no evidence Intel pressured MS into their wording of the fix/workaround.
It's quite possible that after not finding a fix/workaround for it and writing an initial draft saying not to use the processors, MS developed a workaround/fix (perhaps with Intel's help) that actually does work and put that in instead of saying not to use the chips.To those are are suddenly concerned about Intel chips because they have an errata, every chip has errata, tons of them.
AMD has them too, trust me.I've been running a Core i7 (920) for a year and it's worked great under Vista and Windows 7.
I'm sure it has faults, but they don't seem to be an issue in my regular use.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30257314</id>
	<title>Newsflash</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259410200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A Xeon proc is not the same as an i5 or i7.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A Xeon proc is not the same as an i5 or i7 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A Xeon proc is not the same as an i5 or i7.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30258882</id>
	<title>Suggestion:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259427000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perhaps said companies would benefit by migrating their servers to Linux?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps said companies would benefit by migrating their servers to Linux ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps said companies would benefit by migrating their servers to Linux?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256156</id>
	<title>Re:Please Explain Further</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259440140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your explanation is exactly how I interpreted the KB article.  I think Slashdot was going for some sensationalistic journalism.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p><p>Taken from TFA:<br>You can disable the Advance Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) C-states by using a BIOS firmware option on the computer. If the firmware does not include this option, a software workaround is available. You can disable the ACPI C2-state and C3-state by setting a registry key. To do this, follow these steps:</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 1. At a command prompt, run the following command:<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; reg add HKLM\System\CurrentControlSet\Control\Processor<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/v Capabilities<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/t REG\_DWORD<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/d 0x0007c044<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 2. Restart the computer.</p><p>Note The computer idle power consumption will increase significantly if the deeper ACPI C-states (processor idle sleep states) are disabled. Windows Server 2008 R2 uses these deeper C-states on the Xeon 5500 series as a key energy saving feature.</p><p>To continue to benefit from these energy saving states, remove this registry key after you install the hotfix that this article describes. To do remove this registry key, follow these steps:</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 1. At a command prompt, run the following command:<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; reg delete HKLM\System\CurrentControlSet\Control\Processor<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/v Capabilities<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/f<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 2. Restart the computer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your explanation is exactly how I interpreted the KB article .
I think Slashdot was going for some sensationalistic journalism .
: - ) Taken from TFA : You can disable the Advance Configuration and Power Interface ( ACPI ) C-states by using a BIOS firmware option on the computer .
If the firmware does not include this option , a software workaround is available .
You can disable the ACPI C2-state and C3-state by setting a registry key .
To do this , follow these steps :       1 .
At a command prompt , run the following command :             reg add HKLM \ System \ CurrentControlSet \ Control \ Processor /v Capabilities /t REG \ _DWORD /d 0x0007c044       2 .
Restart the computer.Note The computer idle power consumption will increase significantly if the deeper ACPI C-states ( processor idle sleep states ) are disabled .
Windows Server 2008 R2 uses these deeper C-states on the Xeon 5500 series as a key energy saving feature.To continue to benefit from these energy saving states , remove this registry key after you install the hotfix that this article describes .
To do remove this registry key , follow these steps :       1 .
At a command prompt , run the following command :             reg delete HKLM \ System \ CurrentControlSet \ Control \ Processor /v Capabilities /f       2 .
Restart the computer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your explanation is exactly how I interpreted the KB article.
I think Slashdot was going for some sensationalistic journalism.
:-)Taken from TFA:You can disable the Advance Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) C-states by using a BIOS firmware option on the computer.
If the firmware does not include this option, a software workaround is available.
You can disable the ACPI C2-state and C3-state by setting a registry key.
To do this, follow these steps:
      1.
At a command prompt, run the following command:
            reg add HKLM\System\CurrentControlSet\Control\Processor /v Capabilities /t REG\_DWORD /d 0x0007c044
      2.
Restart the computer.Note The computer idle power consumption will increase significantly if the deeper ACPI C-states (processor idle sleep states) are disabled.
Windows Server 2008 R2 uses these deeper C-states on the Xeon 5500 series as a key energy saving feature.To continue to benefit from these energy saving states, remove this registry key after you install the hotfix that this article describes.
To do remove this registry key, follow these steps:
      1.
At a command prompt, run the following command:
            reg delete HKLM\System\CurrentControlSet\Control\Processor /v Capabilities /f
      2.
Restart the computer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256030</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30263156</id>
	<title>Re:DL370 G6 virtualization working OK for me...</title>
	<author>Virtucon</author>
	<datestamp>1259526060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm running a brand new DL370 G7 with a pair of 2.93GHz Nehalams and Oracle VM Server 2.2 (specialized RHEL 5.3 Xen) and it seems to be working fine, except for a completely unrelated SAS backplane / SmartArray p410 failure I experienced before the box was a month old, but that was just a simple fluke of a hardware failure like any server can experience.</p></div><p>That Smart Array problem bit me as well.  G7s?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm running a brand new DL370 G7 with a pair of 2.93GHz Nehalams and Oracle VM Server 2.2 ( specialized RHEL 5.3 Xen ) and it seems to be working fine , except for a completely unrelated SAS backplane / SmartArray p410 failure I experienced before the box was a month old , but that was just a simple fluke of a hardware failure like any server can experience.That Smart Array problem bit me as well .
G7s ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm running a brand new DL370 G7 with a pair of 2.93GHz Nehalams and Oracle VM Server 2.2 (specialized RHEL 5.3 Xen) and it seems to be working fine, except for a completely unrelated SAS backplane / SmartArray p410 failure I experienced before the box was a month old, but that was just a simple fluke of a hardware failure like any server can experience.That Smart Array problem bit me as well.
G7s?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30259200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256096</id>
	<title>Re:Broken processors</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259439720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>All hardware has errata. This one is no more serious than many others.</htmltext>
<tokenext>All hardware has errata .
This one is no more serious than many others .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All hardware has errata.
This one is no more serious than many others.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255780</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255824</id>
	<title>Spurious Interrupt, eh?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259437440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe Xeons are what end up being used on the UESG Marathon. I mean, half of the terminal messages on that ship are subject to the same bug. Just look at this typical example:</p><p><a href="http://marathon.bungie.org/story/nawmanhesclose.html#M3.13.1.1" title="bungie.org">http://marathon.bungie.org/story/nawmanhesclose.html#M3.13.1.1</a> [bungie.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe Xeons are what end up being used on the UESG Marathon .
I mean , half of the terminal messages on that ship are subject to the same bug .
Just look at this typical example : http : //marathon.bungie.org/story/nawmanhesclose.html # M3.13.1.1 [ bungie.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe Xeons are what end up being used on the UESG Marathon.
I mean, half of the terminal messages on that ship are subject to the same bug.
Just look at this typical example:http://marathon.bungie.org/story/nawmanhesclose.html#M3.13.1.1 [bungie.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255898</id>
	<title>Linux works fine</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259437980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Gee, Linux is working fine with all of these really hot, super fast chips.  Goes like the wind, no bugs, no errors, no problems, and if I remember reading the microsofts internal documentation (from microsoft research of all places), Linux does context switches with about 5 times less code than microsofts best and newest, and also switches contexts about 5 times as fast as well (and these are full processes, not threads).  Seems like microsoft is having problems (again), not that I would troll the fanboidom or anything.  Just sayin'.  One of these systems goes like stink running high octane, and one can't stay in the kitchen 'cause its too darn hot (and stay away from those Xeons too, cause someone can't make software well enough to run with the big boys).  Oh, and thanks for showing up!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Gee , Linux is working fine with all of these really hot , super fast chips .
Goes like the wind , no bugs , no errors , no problems , and if I remember reading the microsofts internal documentation ( from microsoft research of all places ) , Linux does context switches with about 5 times less code than microsofts best and newest , and also switches contexts about 5 times as fast as well ( and these are full processes , not threads ) .
Seems like microsoft is having problems ( again ) , not that I would troll the fanboidom or anything .
Just sayin' .
One of these systems goes like stink running high octane , and one ca n't stay in the kitchen 'cause its too darn hot ( and stay away from those Xeons too , cause someone ca n't make software well enough to run with the big boys ) .
Oh , and thanks for showing up !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gee, Linux is working fine with all of these really hot, super fast chips.
Goes like the wind, no bugs, no errors, no problems, and if I remember reading the microsofts internal documentation (from microsoft research of all places), Linux does context switches with about 5 times less code than microsofts best and newest, and also switches contexts about 5 times as fast as well (and these are full processes, not threads).
Seems like microsoft is having problems (again), not that I would troll the fanboidom or anything.
Just sayin'.
One of these systems goes like stink running high octane, and one can't stay in the kitchen 'cause its too darn hot (and stay away from those Xeons too, cause someone can't make software well enough to run with the big boys).
Oh, and thanks for showing up!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256228</id>
	<title>No evidence of problem in Xen or VMWare -MSFT bug</title>
	<author>Glasswire</author>
	<datestamp>1259440860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Looks like it's a Microsoft coding problem if there is no problem in Xen or VMWare ESX Hypervisors (post on VMware above is far from useful).<br>And poster didn't read the MSFT article very closely.  The hotfix doesn't preclude the energy saving sleep states, it's the workaround that inhibits their use.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Looks like it 's a Microsoft coding problem if there is no problem in Xen or VMWare ESX Hypervisors ( post on VMware above is far from useful ) .And poster did n't read the MSFT article very closely .
The hotfix does n't preclude the energy saving sleep states , it 's the workaround that inhibits their use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Looks like it's a Microsoft coding problem if there is no problem in Xen or VMWare ESX Hypervisors (post on VMware above is far from useful).And poster didn't read the MSFT article very closely.
The hotfix doesn't preclude the energy saving sleep states, it's the workaround that inhibits their use.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256272</id>
	<title>Re:Linux works fine</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259441340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>and also switches contexts about 5 times as fast as well (and these are full processes, not threads)</i></p><p>Seeing as Linux has about 1/5th of useful software compared to Windows, I guess it all balances out in the end.</p><p>And here's me, with a ton of recent Insightfuls and a good backlog of Excellent karma, pissing it all up the wall for one dig at an obvious Linux fanboi<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... when will I ever learn ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and also switches contexts about 5 times as fast as well ( and these are full processes , not threads ) Seeing as Linux has about 1/5th of useful software compared to Windows , I guess it all balances out in the end.And here 's me , with a ton of recent Insightfuls and a good backlog of Excellent karma , pissing it all up the wall for one dig at an obvious Linux fanboi ... when will I ever learn ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and also switches contexts about 5 times as fast as well (and these are full processes, not threads)Seeing as Linux has about 1/5th of useful software compared to Windows, I guess it all balances out in the end.And here's me, with a ton of recent Insightfuls and a good backlog of Excellent karma, pissing it all up the wall for one dig at an obvious Linux fanboi ... when will I ever learn ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256680</id>
	<title>Re:Broken processors</title>
	<author>InlawBiker</author>
	<datestamp>1259401980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>All they need is a sticker that says "Windows 2008 Server Ready."</htmltext>
<tokenext>All they need is a sticker that says " Windows 2008 Server Ready .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All they need is a sticker that says "Windows 2008 Server Ready.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255780</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256086</id>
	<title>Re:AMD is looking better and this is the type of s</title>
	<author>amorsen</author>
	<datestamp>1259439660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Read the link. 5 pages of errata, and that's just headlines. Modern processors are very complicated, and they will have bugs.</p><p>The major difference between Intel and AMD when it comes to errata is that Intel learned its lesson about secrecy from the Pentium FPU fiasco. Since then they have had a very open approach to processor bugs. AMD hasn't had such a PR disaster and isn't quite as open. That doesn't mean they are particularly less buggy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Read the link .
5 pages of errata , and that 's just headlines .
Modern processors are very complicated , and they will have bugs.The major difference between Intel and AMD when it comes to errata is that Intel learned its lesson about secrecy from the Pentium FPU fiasco .
Since then they have had a very open approach to processor bugs .
AMD has n't had such a PR disaster and is n't quite as open .
That does n't mean they are particularly less buggy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Read the link.
5 pages of errata, and that's just headlines.
Modern processors are very complicated, and they will have bugs.The major difference between Intel and AMD when it comes to errata is that Intel learned its lesson about secrecy from the Pentium FPU fiasco.
Since then they have had a very open approach to processor bugs.
AMD hasn't had such a PR disaster and isn't quite as open.
That doesn't mean they are particularly less buggy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255796</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30284404</id>
	<title>Re:What about for Windows 7?</title>
	<author>LWATCDR</author>
	<datestamp>1259688240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Big deal I was doing all that back in 86 with my Amiga 1000 with a 2 MB starboard off of floppies no less.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Big deal I was doing all that back in 86 with my Amiga 1000 with a 2 MB starboard off of floppies no less .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Big deal I was doing all that back in 86 with my Amiga 1000 with a 2 MB starboard off of floppies no less.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256010</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256596</id>
	<title>Re:Broken processors</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259401320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>HOw are the processors broken? Its the OS that has the issue...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>HOw are the processors broken ?
Its the OS that has the issue.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>HOw are the processors broken?
Its the OS that has the issue...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255780</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256894</id>
	<title>Re:Broken processors</title>
	<author>sznupi</author>
	<datestamp>1259404680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, at least it seems to appear that fines on the scale of recent EU one don't seem to bother Intel that much...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , at least it seems to appear that fines on the scale of recent EU one do n't seem to bother Intel that much.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, at least it seems to appear that fines on the scale of recent EU one don't seem to bother Intel that much...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255780</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256524</id>
	<title>Re:Actual errata</title>
	<author>YesIAmAScript</author>
	<datestamp>1259400600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't think it's either of them. The top one about changing vectors would be unlikely to happen in commercial software like Windows, because they would have handlers installed for all interrupts already.</p><p>I think it issue really is the watchdog, MS is using the APIC during C6 state and as the 119 errata, the APIC counter stops during C6 state. So some interrupt that is supposed to fire to reset the watchdog doesn't fire and thus the watchdog goes off (as indicated by the error code).</p><p>So the 119 errata is related only as much as it mentions that the APIC counter doesn't increment during C6 state (which is also probably documented elsewhere).</p><p>There really isn't enough info in this article to know for sure what is up. That didn't stop the slashdot editors from going off half-cocked though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think it 's either of them .
The top one about changing vectors would be unlikely to happen in commercial software like Windows , because they would have handlers installed for all interrupts already.I think it issue really is the watchdog , MS is using the APIC during C6 state and as the 119 errata , the APIC counter stops during C6 state .
So some interrupt that is supposed to fire to reset the watchdog does n't fire and thus the watchdog goes off ( as indicated by the error code ) .So the 119 errata is related only as much as it mentions that the APIC counter does n't increment during C6 state ( which is also probably documented elsewhere ) .There really is n't enough info in this article to know for sure what is up .
That did n't stop the slashdot editors from going off half-cocked though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think it's either of them.
The top one about changing vectors would be unlikely to happen in commercial software like Windows, because they would have handlers installed for all interrupts already.I think it issue really is the watchdog, MS is using the APIC during C6 state and as the 119 errata, the APIC counter stops during C6 state.
So some interrupt that is supposed to fire to reset the watchdog doesn't fire and thus the watchdog goes off (as indicated by the error code).So the 119 errata is related only as much as it mentions that the APIC counter doesn't increment during C6 state (which is also probably documented elsewhere).There really isn't enough info in this article to know for sure what is up.
That didn't stop the slashdot editors from going off half-cocked though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256160</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30263952</id>
	<title>Re:Broken processors</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259491200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>     That's absurd.  There's numerous NUMEROUS instances where windows driver bugs, design flaws, etc. have caused it to not operate with hardware that Linux, and even other versions of Windows, etc. work with fine.  This is not grounds to get a refund or exchange IMHO.  As doucmented below --V Microsoft was using the APIC timer which is frequently unreliable, then crashing because of too many timer interrupts.  That's shoddy coding -- the Linux kernel in particular will detect when a timer source is acting up and switch to a better one (i.e. instead of crashing, it'd detect excessive timer interrupts and use a different source for timer interrupts.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's absurd .
There 's numerous NUMEROUS instances where windows driver bugs , design flaws , etc .
have caused it to not operate with hardware that Linux , and even other versions of Windows , etc .
work with fine .
This is not grounds to get a refund or exchange IMHO .
As doucmented below --V Microsoft was using the APIC timer which is frequently unreliable , then crashing because of too many timer interrupts .
That 's shoddy coding -- the Linux kernel in particular will detect when a timer source is acting up and switch to a better one ( i.e .
instead of crashing , it 'd detect excessive timer interrupts and use a different source for timer interrupts .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>     That's absurd.
There's numerous NUMEROUS instances where windows driver bugs, design flaws, etc.
have caused it to not operate with hardware that Linux, and even other versions of Windows, etc.
work with fine.
This is not grounds to get a refund or exchange IMHO.
As doucmented below --V Microsoft was using the APIC timer which is frequently unreliable, then crashing because of too many timer interrupts.
That's shoddy coding -- the Linux kernel in particular will detect when a timer source is acting up and switch to a better one (i.e.
instead of crashing, it'd detect excessive timer interrupts and use a different source for timer interrupts.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255780</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30257036</id>
	<title>AMD looking better?  Bullshit</title>
	<author>TopSpin</author>
	<datestamp>1259406840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>AMD has also built parts with equally screwed up timers, particularly TSC clock skew on multi-cores.  Timers are just messed up on x86 from either company.  This nonsense goes back years.  There are now at least four distinct general purpose clock sources that must be present on modern systems; tsc, apci\_pm, hpet and pit (as labeled by the Linux kernel.)  There will probably be further proliferation in the future as ALL of the existing timers are inadequate in subtle ways.  Implementations from both manufacturers have been plagued with bugs that require nasty work-arounds; google "clocksource tsc unstable", "pm-timer bug" or "athlon x2 tsc" for some examples.  This nonsense that Microsoft has stumbled upon is just the latest in a long and colorful history of failure that we'll now have to add to the list.</p><p>Computers are supposed to keep time.  Today that means high resolution clocks that work correctly regardless of power saving, concurrency, etc.  Using these crucial timers is not suppose to cause spurious interrupts, bus contention or other subtle problems.  People that must work with this stuff are thoroughly fed up with this ever growing pile of half-baked bullshit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>AMD has also built parts with equally screwed up timers , particularly TSC clock skew on multi-cores .
Timers are just messed up on x86 from either company .
This nonsense goes back years .
There are now at least four distinct general purpose clock sources that must be present on modern systems ; tsc , apci \ _pm , hpet and pit ( as labeled by the Linux kernel .
) There will probably be further proliferation in the future as ALL of the existing timers are inadequate in subtle ways .
Implementations from both manufacturers have been plagued with bugs that require nasty work-arounds ; google " clocksource tsc unstable " , " pm-timer bug " or " athlon x2 tsc " for some examples .
This nonsense that Microsoft has stumbled upon is just the latest in a long and colorful history of failure that we 'll now have to add to the list.Computers are supposed to keep time .
Today that means high resolution clocks that work correctly regardless of power saving , concurrency , etc .
Using these crucial timers is not suppose to cause spurious interrupts , bus contention or other subtle problems .
People that must work with this stuff are thoroughly fed up with this ever growing pile of half-baked bullshit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>AMD has also built parts with equally screwed up timers, particularly TSC clock skew on multi-cores.
Timers are just messed up on x86 from either company.
This nonsense goes back years.
There are now at least four distinct general purpose clock sources that must be present on modern systems; tsc, apci\_pm, hpet and pit (as labeled by the Linux kernel.
)  There will probably be further proliferation in the future as ALL of the existing timers are inadequate in subtle ways.
Implementations from both manufacturers have been plagued with bugs that require nasty work-arounds; google "clocksource tsc unstable", "pm-timer bug" or "athlon x2 tsc" for some examples.
This nonsense that Microsoft has stumbled upon is just the latest in a long and colorful history of failure that we'll now have to add to the list.Computers are supposed to keep time.
Today that means high resolution clocks that work correctly regardless of power saving, concurrency, etc.
Using these crucial timers is not suppose to cause spurious interrupts, bus contention or other subtle problems.
People that must work with this stuff are thoroughly fed up with this ever growing pile of half-baked bullshit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255796</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256708</id>
	<title>Re:What about for Windows 7?</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1259402280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>No problems at all. I'm running an i7 920 with 12 GB of RAM and Windows 7 64-Bit Ultimate. I've been playing BF2, GTA4, COD:MW/MW2, Batman: AA and others without any problem. Not to mention running 2 or 3 VMWare sessions, putty sessions, winscp, IE8, pidgin and streaming TV through Windows Media Center all at the same time.</i></p><p>But have you solved... love?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No problems at all .
I 'm running an i7 920 with 12 GB of RAM and Windows 7 64-Bit Ultimate .
I 've been playing BF2 , GTA4 , COD : MW/MW2 , Batman : AA and others without any problem .
Not to mention running 2 or 3 VMWare sessions , putty sessions , winscp , IE8 , pidgin and streaming TV through Windows Media Center all at the same time.But have you solved... love ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No problems at all.
I'm running an i7 920 with 12 GB of RAM and Windows 7 64-Bit Ultimate.
I've been playing BF2, GTA4, COD:MW/MW2, Batman: AA and others without any problem.
Not to mention running 2 or 3 VMWare sessions, putty sessions, winscp, IE8, pidgin and streaming TV through Windows Media Center all at the same time.But have you solved... love?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256010</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256004</id>
	<title>Re:What about for Windows 7?</title>
	<author>Interoperable</author>
	<datestamp>1259439000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Looks like it's only if you're doing some virtualization. It probably wouldn't affect games.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Looks like it 's only if you 're doing some virtualization .
It probably would n't affect games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Looks like it's only if you're doing some virtualization.
It probably wouldn't affect games.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255858</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256594</id>
	<title>Re:AMD is looking better and this is the type of s</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259401320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Intel i7(quad) @ 3.33ghz Idle: 117watts Full-Load: 247watts</p><p>Phenom2 x4(quad) @ 3.2ghz Idle: 148watts Full-Load: 236watts</p><p>Now, include Intel's cpu being 2x-4x faster(depending on type of work) and check your performance per watt and tell me which is better</p><p>I'm trying to follow your logic of AMD being better (at least for now, bulldozer has a lot of promise)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Intel i7 ( quad ) @ 3.33ghz Idle : 117watts Full-Load : 247wattsPhenom2 x4 ( quad ) @ 3.2ghz Idle : 148watts Full-Load : 236wattsNow , include Intel 's cpu being 2x-4x faster ( depending on type of work ) and check your performance per watt and tell me which is betterI 'm trying to follow your logic of AMD being better ( at least for now , bulldozer has a lot of promise )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Intel i7(quad) @ 3.33ghz Idle: 117watts Full-Load: 247wattsPhenom2 x4(quad) @ 3.2ghz Idle: 148watts Full-Load: 236wattsNow, include Intel's cpu being 2x-4x faster(depending on type of work) and check your performance per watt and tell me which is betterI'm trying to follow your logic of AMD being better (at least for now, bulldozer has a lot of promise)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255796</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256608</id>
	<title>Re:AMD is looking better and this is the type of s</title>
	<author>mysidia</author>
	<datestamp>1259401380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
It's not a processor bug, it's a Windows bug.
The advisory should say "download this Windows update" that properly fixes it, not "stop using this processor, because it causes our bug to show up"
</p><p>
By the sound of it MS' fix is abysmal and shoddy.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not a processor bug , it 's a Windows bug .
The advisory should say " download this Windows update " that properly fixes it , not " stop using this processor , because it causes our bug to show up " By the sound of it MS ' fix is abysmal and shoddy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
It's not a processor bug, it's a Windows bug.
The advisory should say "download this Windows update" that properly fixes it, not "stop using this processor, because it causes our bug to show up"

By the sound of it MS' fix is abysmal and shoddy.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255796</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30258920</id>
	<title>Re:What about for Windows 7?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259427480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't do it. USB 3.0 is right around the corner, you would be better off waiting a couple of months for new motherboards with the support added.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't do it .
USB 3.0 is right around the corner , you would be better off waiting a couple of months for new motherboards with the support added .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't do it.
USB 3.0 is right around the corner, you would be better off waiting a couple of months for new motherboards with the support added.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255858</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30259200</id>
	<title>DL370 G6 virtualization working OK for me...</title>
	<author>Nick Driver</author>
	<datestamp>1259431320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm running a brand new DL370 G7 with a pair of 2.93GHz Nehalams and Oracle VM Server 2.2 (specialized RHEL 5.3 Xen) and it seems to be working fine, except for a completely unrelated SAS backplane / SmartArray p410 failure I experienced before the box was a month old, but that was just a simple fluke of a hardware failure like any server can experience.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm running a brand new DL370 G7 with a pair of 2.93GHz Nehalams and Oracle VM Server 2.2 ( specialized RHEL 5.3 Xen ) and it seems to be working fine , except for a completely unrelated SAS backplane / SmartArray p410 failure I experienced before the box was a month old , but that was just a simple fluke of a hardware failure like any server can experience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm running a brand new DL370 G7 with a pair of 2.93GHz Nehalams and Oracle VM Server 2.2 (specialized RHEL 5.3 Xen) and it seems to be working fine, except for a completely unrelated SAS backplane / SmartArray p410 failure I experienced before the box was a month old, but that was just a simple fluke of a hardware failure like any server can experience.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255868</id>
	<title>Windows specific?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259437800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It sounds like microsoft should retract the advice and issue a warning that no OS should be run on a processor with such spurious interrupts?</p><p>Or is this the sort of crappy hardware kernels are supposed to put up with in which case it should be Intel advising against running windows on it's hardware?</p><p>Int&euro;l bashing..check<br>M$ bahing...check<br>now i just sit back and watch the karma roll in</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It sounds like microsoft should retract the advice and issue a warning that no OS should be run on a processor with such spurious interrupts ? Or is this the sort of crappy hardware kernels are supposed to put up with in which case it should be Intel advising against running windows on it 's hardware ? Int    l bashing..checkM $ bahing...checknow i just sit back and watch the karma roll in</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It sounds like microsoft should retract the advice and issue a warning that no OS should be run on a processor with such spurious interrupts?Or is this the sort of crappy hardware kernels are supposed to put up with in which case it should be Intel advising against running windows on it's hardware?Int€l bashing..checkM$ bahing...checknow i just sit back and watch the karma roll in</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255904</id>
	<title>Damn pesky kids</title>
	<author>oldhack</author>
	<datestamp>1259438040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nothing to see here.  Move along.   What?  Nevermind where I work.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nothing to see here .
Move along .
What ? Nevermind where I work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nothing to see here.
Move along.
What?  Nevermind where I work.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30258360</id>
	<title>Price For Bleeding Edege</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259421840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is a price to pay for being on the "bleeding edge" of technology.</p><p>You are essentially being an unpaid BETA tester for both Microsoft, Intel, and whatever other components you happen to be using.</p><p>You are paying for the privilige of BETA testing , and since your software comes with NO WARRANTY, or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, and contains, KNOWN DEFECTS, you should be happy to know your hard work will be used to make other peoples life easier.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is a price to pay for being on the " bleeding edge " of technology.You are essentially being an unpaid BETA tester for both Microsoft , Intel , and whatever other components you happen to be using.You are paying for the privilige of BETA testing , and since your software comes with NO WARRANTY , or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE , and contains , KNOWN DEFECTS , you should be happy to know your hard work will be used to make other peoples life easier .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is a price to pay for being on the "bleeding edge" of technology.You are essentially being an unpaid BETA tester for both Microsoft, Intel, and whatever other components you happen to be using.You are paying for the privilige of BETA testing , and since your software comes with NO WARRANTY, or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, and contains, KNOWN DEFECTS, you should be happy to know your hard work will be used to make other peoples life easier.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255858</id>
	<title>What about for Windows 7?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259437680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This story is interesting and timely because I plan on buying a new desktop in the next 2 weeks, just waiting for the right deal to come out, hopefully on Cyber Monday.  While not getting a server, I will be getting Windows 7.  I had been planning on an i7, but now am hesitant.  Is there a problem with these processors for home use/gaming purposes under Windows 7?  Or would I better off going with a Quad Core?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This story is interesting and timely because I plan on buying a new desktop in the next 2 weeks , just waiting for the right deal to come out , hopefully on Cyber Monday .
While not getting a server , I will be getting Windows 7 .
I had been planning on an i7 , but now am hesitant .
Is there a problem with these processors for home use/gaming purposes under Windows 7 ?
Or would I better off going with a Quad Core ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This story is interesting and timely because I plan on buying a new desktop in the next 2 weeks, just waiting for the right deal to come out, hopefully on Cyber Monday.
While not getting a server, I will be getting Windows 7.
I had been planning on an i7, but now am hesitant.
Is there a problem with these processors for home use/gaming purposes under Windows 7?
Or would I better off going with a Quad Core?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30259394</id>
	<title>Re:What about for Windows 7?</title>
	<author>omfglearntoplay</author>
	<datestamp>1259434380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Be sure to avoid any of the HP i7 processor models. They have a major motherboard problem, as I have luckily learned myself by buying one. Check some googling with HP i7 crash freeze, etc. Or go here to see gobs of users with problems:</p><p><a href="http://h30434.www3.hp.com/psg/board?board.id=lockups" title="hp.com" rel="nofollow">http://h30434.www3.hp.com/psg/board?board.id=lockups</a> [hp.com]</p><p>However, I hear that home made PCs on i7 platforms are fine as well as recent Dells. I'm going the Asus motherboard route to rectify my problem. It's just grand though b/c they are way expensive, then I need a new case (b/c HP uses the lefty cases), and I need a new heat sync/fan (b/c HP is proprietary). So to fix my $1200 HP, I have to spend 5 or 6 hundred. WEEEE!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Be sure to avoid any of the HP i7 processor models .
They have a major motherboard problem , as I have luckily learned myself by buying one .
Check some googling with HP i7 crash freeze , etc .
Or go here to see gobs of users with problems : http : //h30434.www3.hp.com/psg/board ? board.id = lockups [ hp.com ] However , I hear that home made PCs on i7 platforms are fine as well as recent Dells .
I 'm going the Asus motherboard route to rectify my problem .
It 's just grand though b/c they are way expensive , then I need a new case ( b/c HP uses the lefty cases ) , and I need a new heat sync/fan ( b/c HP is proprietary ) .
So to fix my $ 1200 HP , I have to spend 5 or 6 hundred .
WEEEE !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Be sure to avoid any of the HP i7 processor models.
They have a major motherboard problem, as I have luckily learned myself by buying one.
Check some googling with HP i7 crash freeze, etc.
Or go here to see gobs of users with problems:http://h30434.www3.hp.com/psg/board?board.id=lockups [hp.com]However, I hear that home made PCs on i7 platforms are fine as well as recent Dells.
I'm going the Asus motherboard route to rectify my problem.
It's just grand though b/c they are way expensive, then I need a new case (b/c HP uses the lefty cases), and I need a new heat sync/fan (b/c HP is proprietary).
So to fix my $1200 HP, I have to spend 5 or 6 hundred.
WEEEE!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255858</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30261652</id>
	<title>Re:Can't believe...</title>
	<author>ciroknight</author>
	<datestamp>1259512920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can't believe people buy operating systems and software from a two-decade old, twice-convicted and twice settled-out-of-court, unrepentant monopolist. And it amuses me deeply when one monopolist fights with another over who's to blame for putting out crap that the other has to deal with.
<br> <br>
However, the problem doesn't exist in their competitor's products and Intel's errata clearly spells out why it wouldn't work, so why Microsoft tried to get away with it is anyone's guess.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't believe people buy operating systems and software from a two-decade old , twice-convicted and twice settled-out-of-court , unrepentant monopolist .
And it amuses me deeply when one monopolist fights with another over who 's to blame for putting out crap that the other has to deal with .
However , the problem does n't exist in their competitor 's products and Intel 's errata clearly spells out why it would n't work , so why Microsoft tried to get away with it is anyone 's guess .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't believe people buy operating systems and software from a two-decade old, twice-convicted and twice settled-out-of-court, unrepentant monopolist.
And it amuses me deeply when one monopolist fights with another over who's to blame for putting out crap that the other has to deal with.
However, the problem doesn't exist in their competitor's products and Intel's errata clearly spells out why it wouldn't work, so why Microsoft tried to get away with it is anyone's guess.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30257156</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256200</id>
	<title>Re:What about for Windows 7?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259440440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Microsoft advisory mentions i7 800 series, so i7-920 is not affected?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft advisory mentions i7 800 series , so i7-920 is not affected ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft advisory mentions i7 800 series, so i7-920 is not affected?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256010</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256082</id>
	<title>Re:Windows specific?</title>
	<author>Alwin Henseler</author>
	<datestamp>1259439600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It sounds like microsoft should retract the advice and issue a warning that no OS should be run on a processor with such spurious interrupts?</p></div><p>Ehm, aren't these spurious interrupts a hardware feature, designed to <em>test</em> the code handling them?
</p><p>
(ducks to avoid in-flight chair)
</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It sounds like microsoft should retract the advice and issue a warning that no OS should be run on a processor with such spurious interrupts ? Ehm , are n't these spurious interrupts a hardware feature , designed to test the code handling them ?
( ducks to avoid in-flight chair )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It sounds like microsoft should retract the advice and issue a warning that no OS should be run on a processor with such spurious interrupts?Ehm, aren't these spurious interrupts a hardware feature, designed to test the code handling them?
(ducks to avoid in-flight chair)

	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255868</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30257156</id>
	<title>Can't believe...</title>
	<author>KillShill</author>
	<datestamp>1259408520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People still buy processors from a thrice-convicted, unrepentant monopolist.</p><p>3 decades of anti-consumer anti-competitive activity and still they come up smelling like roses...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People still buy processors from a thrice-convicted , unrepentant monopolist.3 decades of anti-consumer anti-competitive activity and still they come up smelling like roses.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People still buy processors from a thrice-convicted, unrepentant monopolist.3 decades of anti-consumer anti-competitive activity and still they come up smelling like roses...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256002</id>
	<title>Re:What about for Windows 7?</title>
	<author>the linux geek</author>
	<datestamp>1259439000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, this only applies to the Hyper-V component of Server 2008 R2. Normal people do not use Windows Server for "home use/gaming purposes" (cue a dozen replies of people talking about how cool they are because they use pirated copies for said purpose), so its not a big deal. Also, Core i5/i7 is already a Quad Core, I assume you mean Core 2 Quad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , this only applies to the Hyper-V component of Server 2008 R2 .
Normal people do not use Windows Server for " home use/gaming purposes " ( cue a dozen replies of people talking about how cool they are because they use pirated copies for said purpose ) , so its not a big deal .
Also , Core i5/i7 is already a Quad Core , I assume you mean Core 2 Quad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, this only applies to the Hyper-V component of Server 2008 R2.
Normal people do not use Windows Server for "home use/gaming purposes" (cue a dozen replies of people talking about how cool they are because they use pirated copies for said purpose), so its not a big deal.
Also, Core i5/i7 is already a Quad Core, I assume you mean Core 2 Quad.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255858</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256394</id>
	<title>Re:First Rev of New Architecture</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259399340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What benchmarks were you looking at? The Xeon 5500 CPUs are fast as hell. They no longer need slow FB-DIMMs. They use much less power and yet deliver more Performance.</p><p>A Dual-Socket, Quad Core Xeon 5500 machine can beat a quad-socket, Six Core AMD machine (c't, a Magazine also bei Heise published a test regarding this some issues ago).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What benchmarks were you looking at ?
The Xeon 5500 CPUs are fast as hell .
They no longer need slow FB-DIMMs .
They use much less power and yet deliver more Performance.A Dual-Socket , Quad Core Xeon 5500 machine can beat a quad-socket , Six Core AMD machine ( c't , a Magazine also bei Heise published a test regarding this some issues ago ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What benchmarks were you looking at?
The Xeon 5500 CPUs are fast as hell.
They no longer need slow FB-DIMMs.
They use much less power and yet deliver more Performance.A Dual-Socket, Quad Core Xeon 5500 machine can beat a quad-socket, Six Core AMD machine (c't, a Magazine also bei Heise published a test regarding this some issues ago).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256916</id>
	<title>Re:Please Explain Further</title>
	<author>Bengie</author>
	<datestamp>1259405040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>people keep saying "power savings" is disabled.</p><p>ONLY Core parking is disabled.</p><p>Turbo mode is not handled by the OS, but by the CPU itself. In order for turbo mode to kick in at least 1 core must be parked(turned off). Disabling Parking indirectly disables turbo mode.</p><p>AMD does not support core parking, so the i7 is reduced to work like any other CPU. Yes, the i7 is still much more efficient than any other CPU on the market even with core parking disabled.</p><p>(just further elaborating on what the above poster said)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>people keep saying " power savings " is disabled.ONLY Core parking is disabled.Turbo mode is not handled by the OS , but by the CPU itself .
In order for turbo mode to kick in at least 1 core must be parked ( turned off ) .
Disabling Parking indirectly disables turbo mode.AMD does not support core parking , so the i7 is reduced to work like any other CPU .
Yes , the i7 is still much more efficient than any other CPU on the market even with core parking disabled .
( just further elaborating on what the above poster said )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>people keep saying "power savings" is disabled.ONLY Core parking is disabled.Turbo mode is not handled by the OS, but by the CPU itself.
In order for turbo mode to kick in at least 1 core must be parked(turned off).
Disabling Parking indirectly disables turbo mode.AMD does not support core parking, so the i7 is reduced to work like any other CPU.
Yes, the i7 is still much more efficient than any other CPU on the market even with core parking disabled.
(just further elaborating on what the above poster said)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256030</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255780</id>
	<title>Broken processors</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259436900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The processors are clearly broken, and anyone who bought them should get a refund or an exchange. End of story.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The processors are clearly broken , and anyone who bought them should get a refund or an exchange .
End of story .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The processors are clearly broken, and anyone who bought them should get a refund or an exchange.
End of story.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256160</id>
	<title>Actual errata</title>
	<author>crow</author>
	<datestamp>1259440200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the pdf file linked from the Intel site, I think it's AAK36, as it's the only one that mentions the word "spurious."  This has to do with writing to the interrupt vector table when a local interrupt is pending.  That doesn't look terribly serious from my perspective.  If I'm mistaken and it's a different errata, please reply with the correction.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From the pdf file linked from the Intel site , I think it 's AAK36 , as it 's the only one that mentions the word " spurious .
" This has to do with writing to the interrupt vector table when a local interrupt is pending .
That does n't look terribly serious from my perspective .
If I 'm mistaken and it 's a different errata , please reply with the correction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the pdf file linked from the Intel site, I think it's AAK36, as it's the only one that mentions the word "spurious.
"  This has to do with writing to the interrupt vector table when a local interrupt is pending.
That doesn't look terribly serious from my perspective.
If I'm mistaken and it's a different errata, please reply with the correction.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30257418</id>
	<title>Re:What about for Windows 7?</title>
	<author>jonbryce</author>
	<datestamp>1259411400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does it affect the XP Mode component of Windows 7?  Obviously you aren't going to use that for gaming unless you don't mind having less than one frame per second in your games through it's internal RPD thingy, but you may well have some sort of XP program running in the background when you are playing your game, even if it is just your XP virus scanner.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does it affect the XP Mode component of Windows 7 ?
Obviously you are n't going to use that for gaming unless you do n't mind having less than one frame per second in your games through it 's internal RPD thingy , but you may well have some sort of XP program running in the background when you are playing your game , even if it is just your XP virus scanner .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does it affect the XP Mode component of Windows 7?
Obviously you aren't going to use that for gaming unless you don't mind having less than one frame per second in your games through it's internal RPD thingy, but you may well have some sort of XP program running in the background when you are playing your game, even if it is just your XP virus scanner.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256078</id>
	<title>Re:AMD is looking better and this is the type of s</title>
	<author>CAIMLAS</author>
	<datestamp>1259439600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wouldn't say "AMD is better", necessarily. I will say, however, that the Xeons seem to have been plagued from the very beginning with problems like this. They're just fringe enough to not get enough run-in testing, and the bugs don't get as quickly found as they do with the more mainstream/many users processors.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would n't say " AMD is better " , necessarily .
I will say , however , that the Xeons seem to have been plagued from the very beginning with problems like this .
They 're just fringe enough to not get enough run-in testing , and the bugs do n't get as quickly found as they do with the more mainstream/many users processors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wouldn't say "AMD is better", necessarily.
I will say, however, that the Xeons seem to have been plagued from the very beginning with problems like this.
They're just fringe enough to not get enough run-in testing, and the bugs don't get as quickly found as they do with the more mainstream/many users processors.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255796</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256222</id>
	<title>Re:Windows specific?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259440800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah baby, wintel, a proud member of the MAFIAA family.</p><p>The next chip I will be buying is a <a href="http://lemote.com/english/cpu.html" title="lemote.com" rel="nofollow">Loongson</a> [lemote.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah baby , wintel , a proud member of the MAFIAA family.The next chip I will be buying is a Loongson [ lemote.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah baby, wintel, a proud member of the MAFIAA family.The next chip I will be buying is a Loongson [lemote.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255868</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30261050</id>
	<title>Re:No evidence of problem in Xen or VMWare -MSFT b</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259506800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://downloadvideobokep-gratis.blogspot.com/" title="blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">download video bokep</a> [blogspot.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>download video bokep [ blogspot.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>download video bokep [blogspot.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256228</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30260016</id>
	<title>KB Link</title>
	<author>woan</author>
	<datestamp>1259492280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I didn't see a link to the KB article in question. I assume this is the one: <a href="http://support.microsoft.com/kb/975530" title="microsoft.com" rel="nofollow">http://support.microsoft.com/kb/975530</a> [microsoft.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't see a link to the KB article in question .
I assume this is the one : http : //support.microsoft.com/kb/975530 [ microsoft.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't see a link to the KB article in question.
I assume this is the one: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/975530 [microsoft.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256320</id>
	<title>Will this affect my upcoming server build?</title>
	<author>kamikaze2112</author>
	<datestamp>1259441760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm putting together a dual i7 xeon server for a customer in a couple weeks.  He's planning to run SBS 2008 on it.  if he's not doing any virtualization on it will he be affected?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm putting together a dual i7 xeon server for a customer in a couple weeks .
He 's planning to run SBS 2008 on it .
if he 's not doing any virtualization on it will he be affected ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm putting together a dual i7 xeon server for a customer in a couple weeks.
He's planning to run SBS 2008 on it.
if he's not doing any virtualization on it will he be affected?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256010</id>
	<title>Re:What about for Windows 7?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259439060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This story is interesting and timely because I plan on buying a new desktop in the next 2 weeks, just waiting for the right deal to come out, hopefully on Cyber Monday.  While not getting a server, I will be getting Windows 7.  I had been planning on an i7, but now am hesitant.  Is there a problem with these processors for home use/gaming purposes under Windows 7?  Or would I better off going with a Quad Core?</p></div><p>No problems at all.  I'm running an i7 920 with 12 GB of RAM and Windows 7 64-Bit Ultimate.  I've been playing BF2, GTA4, COD:MW/MW2, Batman: AA and others without any problem.  Not to mention running 2 or 3 VMWare sessions, putty sessions, winscp, IE8, pidgin and streaming TV through Windows Media Center all at the same time.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This story is interesting and timely because I plan on buying a new desktop in the next 2 weeks , just waiting for the right deal to come out , hopefully on Cyber Monday .
While not getting a server , I will be getting Windows 7 .
I had been planning on an i7 , but now am hesitant .
Is there a problem with these processors for home use/gaming purposes under Windows 7 ?
Or would I better off going with a Quad Core ? No problems at all .
I 'm running an i7 920 with 12 GB of RAM and Windows 7 64-Bit Ultimate .
I 've been playing BF2 , GTA4 , COD : MW/MW2 , Batman : AA and others without any problem .
Not to mention running 2 or 3 VMWare sessions , putty sessions , winscp , IE8 , pidgin and streaming TV through Windows Media Center all at the same time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This story is interesting and timely because I plan on buying a new desktop in the next 2 weeks, just waiting for the right deal to come out, hopefully on Cyber Monday.
While not getting a server, I will be getting Windows 7.
I had been planning on an i7, but now am hesitant.
Is there a problem with these processors for home use/gaming purposes under Windows 7?
Or would I better off going with a Quad Core?No problems at all.
I'm running an i7 920 with 12 GB of RAM and Windows 7 64-Bit Ultimate.
I've been playing BF2, GTA4, COD:MW/MW2, Batman: AA and others without any problem.
Not to mention running 2 or 3 VMWare sessions, putty sessions, winscp, IE8, pidgin and streaming TV through Windows Media Center all at the same time.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255858</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30257588</id>
	<title>Re:First Rev of New Architecture</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259413080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>What benchmarks were you looking at? The Xeon 5500 CPUs are fast as hell. They no longer need slow FB-DIMMs. They use much less power and yet deliver more Performance.</i></p><p>I don't have a handy link to give you, but the focus was on the cache, IIRC.  They performed slower than the previous Xeons for certain workloads.  The focus was work/cycle - agreed they're much better in work/Watt.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What benchmarks were you looking at ?
The Xeon 5500 CPUs are fast as hell .
They no longer need slow FB-DIMMs .
They use much less power and yet deliver more Performance.I do n't have a handy link to give you , but the focus was on the cache , IIRC .
They performed slower than the previous Xeons for certain workloads .
The focus was work/cycle - agreed they 're much better in work/Watt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What benchmarks were you looking at?
The Xeon 5500 CPUs are fast as hell.
They no longer need slow FB-DIMMs.
They use much less power and yet deliver more Performance.I don't have a handy link to give you, but the focus was on the cache, IIRC.
They performed slower than the previous Xeons for certain workloads.
The focus was work/cycle - agreed they're much better in work/Watt.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256394</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30259828</id>
	<title>MS KB DOES NOT say hotfix breaks power save</title>
	<author>George\_Ou</author>
	<datestamp>1259486760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Folks, this is a very irresponsible headline at slashdot.  The Microsoft articles does NOT say hotfix breaks power save and it doesn't even mention turbo, but that it is an either or solution.  Microsoft always offers workarounds as an ALTERNATIVE to the hotfix for people who don't want to apply hotfixes.  The Microsoft KB article even tells you if you want to keep using those power states, then run the hotfix and make a certain modification to the registry.
<br> <br>
This post makes it sound like some kind of cover up and that the fix causes major CPU slowdowns, and that it's on the level of the AMD Barcelona TLB bug where the fix actually did cause a significant performance drop.  This does not appear to be true.  The real story is that all CPUs have hundreds of errata, and it's the job of the software maker to work around it, and that is what Microsoft is doing with their hotfix and registry hack.  They're also telling you if you aren't experiencing any problems, don't bother applying the hotfix.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Folks , this is a very irresponsible headline at slashdot .
The Microsoft articles does NOT say hotfix breaks power save and it does n't even mention turbo , but that it is an either or solution .
Microsoft always offers workarounds as an ALTERNATIVE to the hotfix for people who do n't want to apply hotfixes .
The Microsoft KB article even tells you if you want to keep using those power states , then run the hotfix and make a certain modification to the registry .
This post makes it sound like some kind of cover up and that the fix causes major CPU slowdowns , and that it 's on the level of the AMD Barcelona TLB bug where the fix actually did cause a significant performance drop .
This does not appear to be true .
The real story is that all CPUs have hundreds of errata , and it 's the job of the software maker to work around it , and that is what Microsoft is doing with their hotfix and registry hack .
They 're also telling you if you are n't experiencing any problems , do n't bother applying the hotfix .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Folks, this is a very irresponsible headline at slashdot.
The Microsoft articles does NOT say hotfix breaks power save and it doesn't even mention turbo, but that it is an either or solution.
Microsoft always offers workarounds as an ALTERNATIVE to the hotfix for people who don't want to apply hotfixes.
The Microsoft KB article even tells you if you want to keep using those power states, then run the hotfix and make a certain modification to the registry.
This post makes it sound like some kind of cover up and that the fix causes major CPU slowdowns, and that it's on the level of the AMD Barcelona TLB bug where the fix actually did cause a significant performance drop.
This does not appear to be true.
The real story is that all CPUs have hundreds of errata, and it's the job of the software maker to work around it, and that is what Microsoft is doing with their hotfix and registry hack.
They're also telling you if you aren't experiencing any problems, don't bother applying the hotfix.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30257232</id>
	<title>Re:No evidence of problem in Xen or VMWare -MSFT b</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259409180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Xen need not use the hardware virtualization, and in fact performs far better in "para-virtualization". So would any system that avoided so much of the hardware virtualization and used a customized kernel, more suited to use in a virtualized OS by speaking more gracefully with the virtual server's system. I find it wonderful, and dearly with that VMWare could be convinced to support that kind of guest environment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Xen need not use the hardware virtualization , and in fact performs far better in " para-virtualization " .
So would any system that avoided so much of the hardware virtualization and used a customized kernel , more suited to use in a virtualized OS by speaking more gracefully with the virtual server 's system .
I find it wonderful , and dearly with that VMWare could be convinced to support that kind of guest environment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Xen need not use the hardware virtualization, and in fact performs far better in "para-virtualization".
So would any system that avoided so much of the hardware virtualization and used a customized kernel, more suited to use in a virtualized OS by speaking more gracefully with the virtual server's system.
I find it wonderful, and dearly with that VMWare could be convinced to support that kind of guest environment.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256228</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30261490</id>
	<title>Re:No evidence of problem in Xen or VMWare -MSFT b</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1259511180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Xen now tries to use a hybrid system if the hardware is available; they use the host CPU's virtualisation capabilities where available and PV code where it's faster.  System call delivery is a good example of this.  On an old CPU, the kernel will install an interrupt 80h handler using the Xen Hypercall.  Any syscall instructions will be bounced slowly back from the hypervisor and any int 80h instructions will jump straight to the system call handler in the kernel.  With a new CPU, the kernel will just set a syscall / sysenter handler as normal and these instructions will Just Work and it will use VT-x or AMD-V instructions for hypercalls.  These are faster than the PV approach.  Memory mapping, similarly, will be implemented using the host CPU's shadow or nested page tables if available, but a PV-aware guest it may also use some Xen-specific features for avoiding extra context switches while doing this.  In contrast, device drivers will always use the PV features if available because they are much faster.  The emulated drivers will be installed and work for booting non-PV-aware guests but they will be replaced by the PV versions as soon as they are available.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Xen now tries to use a hybrid system if the hardware is available ; they use the host CPU 's virtualisation capabilities where available and PV code where it 's faster .
System call delivery is a good example of this .
On an old CPU , the kernel will install an interrupt 80h handler using the Xen Hypercall .
Any syscall instructions will be bounced slowly back from the hypervisor and any int 80h instructions will jump straight to the system call handler in the kernel .
With a new CPU , the kernel will just set a syscall / sysenter handler as normal and these instructions will Just Work and it will use VT-x or AMD-V instructions for hypercalls .
These are faster than the PV approach .
Memory mapping , similarly , will be implemented using the host CPU 's shadow or nested page tables if available , but a PV-aware guest it may also use some Xen-specific features for avoiding extra context switches while doing this .
In contrast , device drivers will always use the PV features if available because they are much faster .
The emulated drivers will be installed and work for booting non-PV-aware guests but they will be replaced by the PV versions as soon as they are available .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Xen now tries to use a hybrid system if the hardware is available; they use the host CPU's virtualisation capabilities where available and PV code where it's faster.
System call delivery is a good example of this.
On an old CPU, the kernel will install an interrupt 80h handler using the Xen Hypercall.
Any syscall instructions will be bounced slowly back from the hypervisor and any int 80h instructions will jump straight to the system call handler in the kernel.
With a new CPU, the kernel will just set a syscall / sysenter handler as normal and these instructions will Just Work and it will use VT-x or AMD-V instructions for hypercalls.
These are faster than the PV approach.
Memory mapping, similarly, will be implemented using the host CPU's shadow or nested page tables if available, but a PV-aware guest it may also use some Xen-specific features for avoiding extra context switches while doing this.
In contrast, device drivers will always use the PV features if available because they are much faster.
The emulated drivers will be installed and work for booting non-PV-aware guests but they will be replaced by the PV versions as soon as they are available.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30257232</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256996</id>
	<title>hrm, how times have changed</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259406420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How times have changed.  I remember when Intel used to be the bitch in the relationship.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How times have changed .
I remember when Intel used to be the bitch in the relationship .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How times have changed.
I remember when Intel used to be the bitch in the relationship.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30261734</id>
	<title>Re:AMD is looking better and this is the type of s</title>
	<author>lorenzo.boccaccia</author>
	<datestamp>1259513820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...just look at the phenom TLB problems.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...just look at the phenom TLB problems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...just look at the phenom TLB problems.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256266</id>
	<title>Re:Windows specific?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259441340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Been running Linux on a Corei7-920 for nearly a year now (ok, only 11.5 months).  Not even the slightest sniff of trouble.  One of the hard drives is giving a lot of bad/relocated sectors, but thats another story (and it was new in January too).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Been running Linux on a Corei7-920 for nearly a year now ( ok , only 11.5 months ) .
Not even the slightest sniff of trouble .
One of the hard drives is giving a lot of bad/relocated sectors , but thats another story ( and it was new in January too ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Been running Linux on a Corei7-920 for nearly a year now (ok, only 11.5 months).
Not even the slightest sniff of trouble.
One of the hard drives is giving a lot of bad/relocated sectors, but thats another story (and it was new in January too).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255868</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256800</id>
	<title>Re:Broken processors</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259403480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>These are the same ones in the new Joint Strike Fighter</p><p>Quite costly if one crashes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>These are the same ones in the new Joint Strike FighterQuite costly if one crashes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These are the same ones in the new Joint Strike FighterQuite costly if one crashes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255780</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256946</id>
	<title>Re:Broken processors</title>
	<author>gone.fishing</author>
	<datestamp>1259405580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Excuse me?  I am not a 'Microsoft Hater' as many people are here on Slashdot but that does not mean that I will take their word as gosple either!  If Microsoft felt so strongly that this processor bug was terrible they should have never yeilded to Intel after all it is their reputation on the line too.</p><p>While the bug does sound serious it has been dealt with in a hot fix; a fix that may not be perfect but it works.  I'm not a server engineer but if you disable power mgmt and lock the hypervisor into turbo does it hurt the performance much?  I seriously don't know the implications but have always thought that most servers are tweaked for performance and not really for power saving.</p><p>I am willing to bet that there have been many, many give and take sessions between Microsoft and Intel and probably other entities where issues like this are sorted out for the benifit of the industry (or at least for all parties involved in the discussions).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Excuse me ?
I am not a 'Microsoft Hater ' as many people are here on Slashdot but that does not mean that I will take their word as gosple either !
If Microsoft felt so strongly that this processor bug was terrible they should have never yeilded to Intel after all it is their reputation on the line too.While the bug does sound serious it has been dealt with in a hot fix ; a fix that may not be perfect but it works .
I 'm not a server engineer but if you disable power mgmt and lock the hypervisor into turbo does it hurt the performance much ?
I seriously do n't know the implications but have always thought that most servers are tweaked for performance and not really for power saving.I am willing to bet that there have been many , many give and take sessions between Microsoft and Intel and probably other entities where issues like this are sorted out for the benifit of the industry ( or at least for all parties involved in the discussions ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Excuse me?
I am not a 'Microsoft Hater' as many people are here on Slashdot but that does not mean that I will take their word as gosple either!
If Microsoft felt so strongly that this processor bug was terrible they should have never yeilded to Intel after all it is their reputation on the line too.While the bug does sound serious it has been dealt with in a hot fix; a fix that may not be perfect but it works.
I'm not a server engineer but if you disable power mgmt and lock the hypervisor into turbo does it hurt the performance much?
I seriously don't know the implications but have always thought that most servers are tweaked for performance and not really for power saving.I am willing to bet that there have been many, many give and take sessions between Microsoft and Intel and probably other entities where issues like this are sorted out for the benifit of the industry (or at least for all parties involved in the discussions).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255780</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256936</id>
	<title>Re:Broken processors</title>
	<author>Waynelson</author>
	<datestamp>1259405340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't know if anyone actually read the kb article on the Microsoft website, but it appears that you don't lose the power saving features and what not with the hot fix installation, the loss of those features only occurs when you directly modify the registry to disable some of the c-states in the apci system as a quick fix. Either that or i'm reading the kb article wrong.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know if anyone actually read the kb article on the Microsoft website , but it appears that you do n't lose the power saving features and what not with the hot fix installation , the loss of those features only occurs when you directly modify the registry to disable some of the c-states in the apci system as a quick fix .
Either that or i 'm reading the kb article wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know if anyone actually read the kb article on the Microsoft website, but it appears that you don't lose the power saving features and what not with the hot fix installation, the loss of those features only occurs when you directly modify the registry to disable some of the c-states in the apci system as a quick fix.
Either that or i'm reading the kb article wrong.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255780</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255882</id>
	<title>VMWare may also be a problem</title>
	<author>Virtucon</author>
	<datestamp>1259437860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been experiencing problems with intermittent lockups under VMWare as well.  DL370-G6 boxes.  HP has given us BIOS fixes and is even shipping new boxes, but if there's a suspect problem<br>with working with MS' hypervisor, I wonder if this is the same issue?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been experiencing problems with intermittent lockups under VMWare as well .
DL370-G6 boxes .
HP has given us BIOS fixes and is even shipping new boxes , but if there 's a suspect problemwith working with MS ' hypervisor , I wonder if this is the same issue ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been experiencing problems with intermittent lockups under VMWare as well.
DL370-G6 boxes.
HP has given us BIOS fixes and is even shipping new boxes, but if there's a suspect problemwith working with MS' hypervisor, I wonder if this is the same issue?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256596
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255868
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30260510
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256156
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256030
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30257588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256394
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255862
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256078
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255796
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30284404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256010
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255858
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256030
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256894
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30257036
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255796
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30258920
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255858
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30261652
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30257156
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30261734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255796
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255796
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256524
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256160
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255858
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256010
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255858
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256680
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30257418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255858
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30263952
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30259394
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255858
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30261050
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256228
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30263156
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30259200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255882
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255868
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30261490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30257232
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256228
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256096
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256266
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255868
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255898
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256010
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255858
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_1723257_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255796
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_1723257.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256160
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256524
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_1723257.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255824
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_1723257.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255904
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_1723257.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255858
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256002
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30257418
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256004
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256010
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30284404
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256708
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256200
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30259394
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30258920
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_1723257.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255862
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256394
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30257588
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_1723257.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255868
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256266
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256222
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256082
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_1723257.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255882
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30259200
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30263156
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_1723257.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256030
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256156
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256916
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_1723257.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255780
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30263952
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30260510
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256680
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256596
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256800
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256946
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256096
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256936
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256894
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_1723257.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256228
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30261050
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30257232
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30261490
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_1723257.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30257156
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30261652
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_1723257.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255796
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30257036
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256594
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256086
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30261734
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256078
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256608
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_1723257.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30255898
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256272
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_1723257.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_1723257.30256320
</commentlist>
</conversation>
