<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_28_2332254</id>
	<title>Google Eliminates Gizmo5 Client For Linux</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1259413800000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>cuttheredwire writes <i>"<a href="http://forum.gizmo5.com/viewtopic.php?t=10593&amp;sid=70d6e4ae6730bad6b5a383666e501e2b">Evidence on the Gizmo5 forum</a> (login required) confirms that since Google's takeover of Gizmo5, <a href="http://googlevoiceblog.blogspot.com/2009/11/google-welcomes-gizmo5.html">only the Windows, Mac, and iPhone clients are available</a> for download from the official Web page. The Linux download link no longer works. This is a potential problem for happy Linux users with paid-up credit in their Gizmo5 accounts if they need to reinstall the software. A <a href="http://download.gizmo5.com/jasmine/">back-door download</a> is still available, although it is speculated on the forums that it will go away soon. Does this mean that (as with other Google projects such as Google Talk) Linux will be the poor relation for Google Voice also?"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>cuttheredwire writes " Evidence on the Gizmo5 forum ( login required ) confirms that since Google 's takeover of Gizmo5 , only the Windows , Mac , and iPhone clients are available for download from the official Web page .
The Linux download link no longer works .
This is a potential problem for happy Linux users with paid-up credit in their Gizmo5 accounts if they need to reinstall the software .
A back-door download is still available , although it is speculated on the forums that it will go away soon .
Does this mean that ( as with other Google projects such as Google Talk ) Linux will be the poor relation for Google Voice also ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>cuttheredwire writes "Evidence on the Gizmo5 forum (login required) confirms that since Google's takeover of Gizmo5, only the Windows, Mac, and iPhone clients are available for download from the official Web page.
The Linux download link no longer works.
This is a potential problem for happy Linux users with paid-up credit in their Gizmo5 accounts if they need to reinstall the software.
A back-door download is still available, although it is speculated on the forums that it will go away soon.
Does this mean that (as with other Google projects such as Google Talk) Linux will be the poor relation for Google Voice also?
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30262646</id>
	<title>Re:Linux is a support nightmare</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259521080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Don't let the LSB people fool you. There is no single, common, standard Linux ABI set to target when developing a commercial app"</p><p>Not true.  If you build your app against X86 LSB 3.2, it'll run on any X86 Linux distro that supports LSB 3.2.<br>You have to package it twice, once as rpm and once as deb, to reach everybody, but that's not so hard.<br>And if there are libraries missing from the LSB, you have to link them statically, or hope that<br>they have the same package name and ABI on all distros.</p><p>That said, commercial ISVs really don't have much incentive to support fringe distros.   99\% of the linux desktop market is covered by ubuntu/debian, red hat/fedora, suse/opensuse, and maybe mandriva, so that's what ISVs will test against.  If you're running something else, and the ISV's app doesn't work, chances are the ISV won't even get enough problem reports to know that it needs fixing.   But since that kind of problem doesn't affect 99\% of users, that's not so bad.  And there's always the chance that the distro can fix the problem (after all, if it works on the four major distros, it's probably not the app's fault).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Do n't let the LSB people fool you .
There is no single , common , standard Linux ABI set to target when developing a commercial app " Not true .
If you build your app against X86 LSB 3.2 , it 'll run on any X86 Linux distro that supports LSB 3.2.You have to package it twice , once as rpm and once as deb , to reach everybody , but that 's not so hard.And if there are libraries missing from the LSB , you have to link them statically , or hope thatthey have the same package name and ABI on all distros.That said , commercial ISVs really do n't have much incentive to support fringe distros .
99 \ % of the linux desktop market is covered by ubuntu/debian , red hat/fedora , suse/opensuse , and maybe mandriva , so that 's what ISVs will test against .
If you 're running something else , and the ISV 's app does n't work , chances are the ISV wo n't even get enough problem reports to know that it needs fixing .
But since that kind of problem does n't affect 99 \ % of users , that 's not so bad .
And there 's always the chance that the distro can fix the problem ( after all , if it works on the four major distros , it 's probably not the app 's fault ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Don't let the LSB people fool you.
There is no single, common, standard Linux ABI set to target when developing a commercial app"Not true.
If you build your app against X86 LSB 3.2, it'll run on any X86 Linux distro that supports LSB 3.2.You have to package it twice, once as rpm and once as deb, to reach everybody, but that's not so hard.And if there are libraries missing from the LSB, you have to link them statically, or hope thatthey have the same package name and ABI on all distros.That said, commercial ISVs really don't have much incentive to support fringe distros.
99\% of the linux desktop market is covered by ubuntu/debian, red hat/fedora, suse/opensuse, and maybe mandriva, so that's what ISVs will test against.
If you're running something else, and the ISV's app doesn't work, chances are the ISV won't even get enough problem reports to know that it needs fixing.
But since that kind of problem doesn't affect 99\% of users, that's not so bad.
And there's always the chance that the distro can fix the problem (after all, if it works on the four major distros, it's probably not the app's fault).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30267934</id>
	<title>Google didn't eliminate Gizmo5 Client For Linux</title>
	<author>mrdtr</author>
	<datestamp>1259573580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know I signed up a few years ago, ended up never using it, anyway I checked the website, and sure enough, I WAS ABLE TO download the Linux version, It's old (2007) but it was there to download.<br>I see Gizmo5 being completely absorbed and integrated into Google Voice - it basically says so in the Google Voice blog.</p><p>I have no idea how such misinformation gets to be front page news.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know I signed up a few years ago , ended up never using it , anyway I checked the website , and sure enough , I WAS ABLE TO download the Linux version , It 's old ( 2007 ) but it was there to download.I see Gizmo5 being completely absorbed and integrated into Google Voice - it basically says so in the Google Voice blog.I have no idea how such misinformation gets to be front page news .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know I signed up a few years ago, ended up never using it, anyway I checked the website, and sure enough, I WAS ABLE TO download the Linux version, It's old (2007) but it was there to download.I see Gizmo5 being completely absorbed and integrated into Google Voice - it basically says so in the Google Voice blog.I have no idea how such misinformation gets to be front page news.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260922</id>
	<title>Time to learn a lesson about Linux support</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259505360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are people who believe in open systems because they believe that gives them the greatest choice in the market place. Those people promote Linux and other open applications for that reason.</p><p>Then there are those who see a business opportunity in the 'free' software which they can use in their systems, package and sell - without having to pay a penny for the privilege. Those people don't care about open systems except to take advantage of them for their own profit. They look and sound pretty much like the former group, but don't be fooled.</p><p>Politically savvy Ubuntu users are now beginning to see what that means for their adopted OS. Google supporters might be in for a shock or two too.</p><p>Many others will be oblivious to the shenanigans going on behind the scenes and get taken for mugs.</p><p>You can only count on big business supporting Linux and open systems while they believe that is where most profits will be found. The moment they see profit in shifting support to closed systems then that is what they will do.</p><p>You have to fight for what you want.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are people who believe in open systems because they believe that gives them the greatest choice in the market place .
Those people promote Linux and other open applications for that reason.Then there are those who see a business opportunity in the 'free ' software which they can use in their systems , package and sell - without having to pay a penny for the privilege .
Those people do n't care about open systems except to take advantage of them for their own profit .
They look and sound pretty much like the former group , but do n't be fooled.Politically savvy Ubuntu users are now beginning to see what that means for their adopted OS .
Google supporters might be in for a shock or two too.Many others will be oblivious to the shenanigans going on behind the scenes and get taken for mugs.You can only count on big business supporting Linux and open systems while they believe that is where most profits will be found .
The moment they see profit in shifting support to closed systems then that is what they will do.You have to fight for what you want .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are people who believe in open systems because they believe that gives them the greatest choice in the market place.
Those people promote Linux and other open applications for that reason.Then there are those who see a business opportunity in the 'free' software which they can use in their systems, package and sell - without having to pay a penny for the privilege.
Those people don't care about open systems except to take advantage of them for their own profit.
They look and sound pretty much like the former group, but don't be fooled.Politically savvy Ubuntu users are now beginning to see what that means for their adopted OS.
Google supporters might be in for a shock or two too.Many others will be oblivious to the shenanigans going on behind the scenes and get taken for mugs.You can only count on big business supporting Linux and open systems while they believe that is where most profits will be found.
The moment they see profit in shifting support to closed systems then that is what they will do.You have to fight for what you want.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261100</id>
	<title>Re:Are you sure?</title>
	<author>clang\_jangle</author>
	<datestamp>1259507340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>So are you saying that the real story here is that one Linux user decided to install it while the server was momentarily down, freaked out and wrote a panic-mode slashdot submission which was then published to the front page with zero fact checking?<br> <br>Why, that's just shocking!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D</htmltext>
<tokenext>So are you saying that the real story here is that one Linux user decided to install it while the server was momentarily down , freaked out and wrote a panic-mode slashdot submission which was then published to the front page with zero fact checking ?
Why , that 's just shocking !
: D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So are you saying that the real story here is that one Linux user decided to install it while the server was momentarily down, freaked out and wrote a panic-mode slashdot submission which was then published to the front page with zero fact checking?
Why, that's just shocking!
:D</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260994</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260912</id>
	<title>Re:really just linux?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259505240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree. If google would be planning to remove chance to download linux client why would they just make link un-workable instead of actually removing all text and links indicating that you could download it. It would look too bad.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/vote 4 bug.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree .
If google would be planning to remove chance to download linux client why would they just make link un-workable instead of actually removing all text and links indicating that you could download it .
It would look too bad .
/vote 4 bug .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree.
If google would be planning to remove chance to download linux client why would they just make link un-workable instead of actually removing all text and links indicating that you could download it.
It would look too bad.
/vote 4 bug.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260842</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261264</id>
	<title>Re:Chrome OS?</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1259509080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And tied to it in some way, so if you run 'generic linux',  you have to switch.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And tied to it in some way , so if you run 'generic linux ' , you have to switch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And tied to it in some way, so if you run 'generic linux',  you have to switch.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260818</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30265574</id>
	<title>Re:Linux is a support nightmare</title>
	<author>Eil</author>
	<datestamp>1259508120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I don't care whether your software is open source or not, Linux is a support nightmare. It's the dozens of distributions.</p></div></blockquote><p>This is a very, very old argument, I hope you know. And it's quite wrong.</p><p>For all your ranting, you're really just demanding that the open source software ecosystem behave in the same manner as the proprietary software ecosystem that you're used to. I'm surprised that this still needs repeating (especially here on Slashdot), but here it is anyway: <b>Open source software and proprietary software are not the same thing.</b></p><p>In the proprietary software world, all players take responsibility only for their own products. (And often, not even then.) When there's a problem that looks like it might be the fault of some other company's product, the user is directed to the other company for support. Sometimes, the situation reaches a stalemate where one company blames the other and you can't get them to budge from that position. Since the code is closed, you don't even have the option of fixing the problem yourself, even if you have the skills to do so or the money to hire someone. If you want anything besides a base OS install (which generally isn't very useful), you have to go out and buy software, and then go through an often non-trivial installation process involving physical media, registration, CD keys, and reboots.</p><p>In the Linux world, the distributions try to take responsibility for the entirety of the end-user's computing experience. On Linux, the onus is on the distribution to provide a stable and usable base system, hardware drivers, desktop environment, and thousands upon thousands of free third-party programs. End-user support is largely community-based, but there are commercial support options as well. To install new software, you just open up your package manager, click a button or two, and your new software (plus any dependencies) is installed automatically. Most hardware devices are completely plug-and-play right out of the box, with no device drivers to manually install or some endless series of reboots.</p><p>"Fragmentation," as many people put it, is part of the Linux ecosystem by design. It gives the distributions the freedom to innovate, try new features, new designs, new subsystems, and so on. It gives the end user choice. If they don't like one Linux distribution for whatever reason, there are several others to download and take for a spin. If all distributions were forced into a single unyielding design or set of libraries all for the sake of a few proprietary apps, then there would no longer be any point to having multiple distributions. All distros would essentially be indistinguishable and we'd be stuck with the same interface, bugs, and security problems for decades on end. (Remind you of <a href="http://microsoft.com/" title="microsoft.com">anyone</a> [microsoft.com]?)</p><blockquote><div><p>It would be one thing if they could leave it up to the distros to port, build, and test the software. But they can't. As soon as subscription fees are involved, users expect all kinds of unreasonable levels of support. Google can't JUST support Fedora or Ubuntu. Imagine the uproar over them playing favorites.</p></div></blockquote><p>Google certainly <i>can</i> leave it up the distros to port and build, that's the way the Linux software ecosystem is meant to work. All Google has to do is release the source and the distros will do the rest. Subscription fees don't even enter into it. You can't please everyone and there will always get people who get mad at the world because they don't know how to operate their own computer, but if the software is good enough, there will be few support problems. Even in the worst-case scenario, it would even be within Google's right to say, "here's a port of our software to Linux, you're free to use it, but don't come crying to us for support." This is exactly how Skype has always handled it and they seem to be doing just fine.</p><blockquote><div><p>I'm a chip designer, and so I use Xilinx tools. When I do, I use the Windows versions. Not only are the Linux versions not very good, but you're forced into using specific versions of Red Hat Enterprise Linux. (Or CentOS, I guess.) In this case, the software costs $1500 (unless you have contacts with good reps, which I have), but in that case, if you're going to spend that money, you might as well use the less annoying Windows version.</p></div></blockquote><p>Well there you have it. You said it yourself, "the Linux versions not very good." Where do you get off blaming the open source community for Xilinx's own failure to properly support their own $1500 program on perhaps the most static Linux distro out there?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't care whether your software is open source or not , Linux is a support nightmare .
It 's the dozens of distributions.This is a very , very old argument , I hope you know .
And it 's quite wrong.For all your ranting , you 're really just demanding that the open source software ecosystem behave in the same manner as the proprietary software ecosystem that you 're used to .
I 'm surprised that this still needs repeating ( especially here on Slashdot ) , but here it is anyway : Open source software and proprietary software are not the same thing.In the proprietary software world , all players take responsibility only for their own products .
( And often , not even then .
) When there 's a problem that looks like it might be the fault of some other company 's product , the user is directed to the other company for support .
Sometimes , the situation reaches a stalemate where one company blames the other and you ca n't get them to budge from that position .
Since the code is closed , you do n't even have the option of fixing the problem yourself , even if you have the skills to do so or the money to hire someone .
If you want anything besides a base OS install ( which generally is n't very useful ) , you have to go out and buy software , and then go through an often non-trivial installation process involving physical media , registration , CD keys , and reboots.In the Linux world , the distributions try to take responsibility for the entirety of the end-user 's computing experience .
On Linux , the onus is on the distribution to provide a stable and usable base system , hardware drivers , desktop environment , and thousands upon thousands of free third-party programs .
End-user support is largely community-based , but there are commercial support options as well .
To install new software , you just open up your package manager , click a button or two , and your new software ( plus any dependencies ) is installed automatically .
Most hardware devices are completely plug-and-play right out of the box , with no device drivers to manually install or some endless series of reboots .
" Fragmentation , " as many people put it , is part of the Linux ecosystem by design .
It gives the distributions the freedom to innovate , try new features , new designs , new subsystems , and so on .
It gives the end user choice .
If they do n't like one Linux distribution for whatever reason , there are several others to download and take for a spin .
If all distributions were forced into a single unyielding design or set of libraries all for the sake of a few proprietary apps , then there would no longer be any point to having multiple distributions .
All distros would essentially be indistinguishable and we 'd be stuck with the same interface , bugs , and security problems for decades on end .
( Remind you of anyone [ microsoft.com ] ?
) It would be one thing if they could leave it up to the distros to port , build , and test the software .
But they ca n't .
As soon as subscription fees are involved , users expect all kinds of unreasonable levels of support .
Google ca n't JUST support Fedora or Ubuntu .
Imagine the uproar over them playing favorites.Google certainly can leave it up the distros to port and build , that 's the way the Linux software ecosystem is meant to work .
All Google has to do is release the source and the distros will do the rest .
Subscription fees do n't even enter into it .
You ca n't please everyone and there will always get people who get mad at the world because they do n't know how to operate their own computer , but if the software is good enough , there will be few support problems .
Even in the worst-case scenario , it would even be within Google 's right to say , " here 's a port of our software to Linux , you 're free to use it , but do n't come crying to us for support .
" This is exactly how Skype has always handled it and they seem to be doing just fine.I 'm a chip designer , and so I use Xilinx tools .
When I do , I use the Windows versions .
Not only are the Linux versions not very good , but you 're forced into using specific versions of Red Hat Enterprise Linux .
( Or CentOS , I guess .
) In this case , the software costs $ 1500 ( unless you have contacts with good reps , which I have ) , but in that case , if you 're going to spend that money , you might as well use the less annoying Windows version.Well there you have it .
You said it yourself , " the Linux versions not very good .
" Where do you get off blaming the open source community for Xilinx 's own failure to properly support their own $ 1500 program on perhaps the most static Linux distro out there ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't care whether your software is open source or not, Linux is a support nightmare.
It's the dozens of distributions.This is a very, very old argument, I hope you know.
And it's quite wrong.For all your ranting, you're really just demanding that the open source software ecosystem behave in the same manner as the proprietary software ecosystem that you're used to.
I'm surprised that this still needs repeating (especially here on Slashdot), but here it is anyway: Open source software and proprietary software are not the same thing.In the proprietary software world, all players take responsibility only for their own products.
(And often, not even then.
) When there's a problem that looks like it might be the fault of some other company's product, the user is directed to the other company for support.
Sometimes, the situation reaches a stalemate where one company blames the other and you can't get them to budge from that position.
Since the code is closed, you don't even have the option of fixing the problem yourself, even if you have the skills to do so or the money to hire someone.
If you want anything besides a base OS install (which generally isn't very useful), you have to go out and buy software, and then go through an often non-trivial installation process involving physical media, registration, CD keys, and reboots.In the Linux world, the distributions try to take responsibility for the entirety of the end-user's computing experience.
On Linux, the onus is on the distribution to provide a stable and usable base system, hardware drivers, desktop environment, and thousands upon thousands of free third-party programs.
End-user support is largely community-based, but there are commercial support options as well.
To install new software, you just open up your package manager, click a button or two, and your new software (plus any dependencies) is installed automatically.
Most hardware devices are completely plug-and-play right out of the box, with no device drivers to manually install or some endless series of reboots.
"Fragmentation," as many people put it, is part of the Linux ecosystem by design.
It gives the distributions the freedom to innovate, try new features, new designs, new subsystems, and so on.
It gives the end user choice.
If they don't like one Linux distribution for whatever reason, there are several others to download and take for a spin.
If all distributions were forced into a single unyielding design or set of libraries all for the sake of a few proprietary apps, then there would no longer be any point to having multiple distributions.
All distros would essentially be indistinguishable and we'd be stuck with the same interface, bugs, and security problems for decades on end.
(Remind you of anyone [microsoft.com]?
)It would be one thing if they could leave it up to the distros to port, build, and test the software.
But they can't.
As soon as subscription fees are involved, users expect all kinds of unreasonable levels of support.
Google can't JUST support Fedora or Ubuntu.
Imagine the uproar over them playing favorites.Google certainly can leave it up the distros to port and build, that's the way the Linux software ecosystem is meant to work.
All Google has to do is release the source and the distros will do the rest.
Subscription fees don't even enter into it.
You can't please everyone and there will always get people who get mad at the world because they don't know how to operate their own computer, but if the software is good enough, there will be few support problems.
Even in the worst-case scenario, it would even be within Google's right to say, "here's a port of our software to Linux, you're free to use it, but don't come crying to us for support.
" This is exactly how Skype has always handled it and they seem to be doing just fine.I'm a chip designer, and so I use Xilinx tools.
When I do, I use the Windows versions.
Not only are the Linux versions not very good, but you're forced into using specific versions of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
(Or CentOS, I guess.
) In this case, the software costs $1500 (unless you have contacts with good reps, which I have), but in that case, if you're going to spend that money, you might as well use the less annoying Windows version.Well there you have it.
You said it yourself, "the Linux versions not very good.
" Where do you get off blaming the open source community for Xilinx's own failure to properly support their own $1500 program on perhaps the most static Linux distro out there?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261046</id>
	<title>Re:Chrome OS?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259506800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Exactly. As paradoxical as this may sound, Google will in the long run try to kill other Linux/GNU OSes for mobile applications in favor of pushing Chrome OS onto the market. They don't want Chrome OS to be recognized as just another Linux/GNU OS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly .
As paradoxical as this may sound , Google will in the long run try to kill other Linux/GNU OSes for mobile applications in favor of pushing Chrome OS onto the market .
They do n't want Chrome OS to be recognized as just another Linux/GNU OS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly.
As paradoxical as this may sound, Google will in the long run try to kill other Linux/GNU OSes for mobile applications in favor of pushing Chrome OS onto the market.
They don't want Chrome OS to be recognized as just another Linux/GNU OS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260818</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30263008</id>
	<title>Since the Linux client is abysmal...</title>
	<author>MontytheMooch</author>
	<datestamp>1259524620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They could have taken it down with the intent of replacing it with one that ACTUALLY works. I've found that if you choose the wrong audio setting you're completely locked out of the program with no hope of getting back in.</p><p>Don't bother trying to contact the Gizmo support guys since when you submit the trouble ticket you have to indicate that you're willing to pay for them to pay attention to you. "Gizmo5 Support is reserved for all paid users. To receive one-on-one support, you can purchase callout credit at: www.gizmo5.com/buy "</p><p>I'm REALLY hoping that Google replaces the entire staff with people that have a clue about supporting the product.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They could have taken it down with the intent of replacing it with one that ACTUALLY works .
I 've found that if you choose the wrong audio setting you 're completely locked out of the program with no hope of getting back in.Do n't bother trying to contact the Gizmo support guys since when you submit the trouble ticket you have to indicate that you 're willing to pay for them to pay attention to you .
" Gizmo5 Support is reserved for all paid users .
To receive one-on-one support , you can purchase callout credit at : www.gizmo5.com/buy " I 'm REALLY hoping that Google replaces the entire staff with people that have a clue about supporting the product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They could have taken it down with the intent of replacing it with one that ACTUALLY works.
I've found that if you choose the wrong audio setting you're completely locked out of the program with no hope of getting back in.Don't bother trying to contact the Gizmo support guys since when you submit the trouble ticket you have to indicate that you're willing to pay for them to pay attention to you.
"Gizmo5 Support is reserved for all paid users.
To receive one-on-one support, you can purchase callout credit at: www.gizmo5.com/buy "I'm REALLY hoping that Google replaces the entire staff with people that have a clue about supporting the product.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261240</id>
	<title>it's standard</title>
	<author>pydev</author>
	<datestamp>1259508960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is no need for a special Gizmo5 client.  Unlike Skype, Gizmo5 is standards compliant; you can use it with any Linux SIP client.    Both Gnome and KDE have several.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no need for a special Gizmo5 client .
Unlike Skype , Gizmo5 is standards compliant ; you can use it with any Linux SIP client .
Both Gnome and KDE have several .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no need for a special Gizmo5 client.
Unlike Skype, Gizmo5 is standards compliant; you can use it with any Linux SIP client.
Both Gnome and KDE have several.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261948</id>
	<title>Better yet</title>
	<author>WindBourne</author>
	<datestamp>1259515680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Get the distros to encourage it. I am thinking of the strides that Apple made with Safari by encouraging users to tell them when a website failed, and then QUIETLY called the businesses to work with them to do the right things. It has helped Safari have better penetration through the market @ a relatively quick clip.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Get the distros to encourage it .
I am thinking of the strides that Apple made with Safari by encouraging users to tell them when a website failed , and then QUIETLY called the businesses to work with them to do the right things .
It has helped Safari have better penetration through the market @ a relatively quick clip .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Get the distros to encourage it.
I am thinking of the strides that Apple made with Safari by encouraging users to tell them when a website failed, and then QUIETLY called the businesses to work with them to do the right things.
It has helped Safari have better penetration through the market @ a relatively quick clip.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260804</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30262538</id>
	<title>Google OS biggest competitor is Linux</title>
	<author>erik.martino</author>
	<datestamp>1259520180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If all the Google OS goodies also exists for Linux, then why should you use Google OS on your smartbook and not Ubuntu Net Remix for example?</htmltext>
<tokenext>If all the Google OS goodies also exists for Linux , then why should you use Google OS on your smartbook and not Ubuntu Net Remix for example ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If all the Google OS goodies also exists for Linux, then why should you use Google OS on your smartbook and not Ubuntu Net Remix for example?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261450</id>
	<title>Non-story</title>
	<author>dlgeek</author>
	<datestamp>1259510700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>If at their download page(<a href="http://www.gizmo5.com/download.php" title="gizmo5.com">http://www.gizmo5.com/download.php</a> [gizmo5.com]) it lists Linux perfectly prominently, the link is just broken (pointing at a page which seems to have vanished). As the summary pointed out, the files are still there. Since gizmo5.com redirects to a page on google.com, I think a much better summary would be "Google accidentally breaks link while moving website of recently acquired company"</htmltext>
<tokenext>If at their download page ( http : //www.gizmo5.com/download.php [ gizmo5.com ] ) it lists Linux perfectly prominently , the link is just broken ( pointing at a page which seems to have vanished ) .
As the summary pointed out , the files are still there .
Since gizmo5.com redirects to a page on google.com , I think a much better summary would be " Google accidentally breaks link while moving website of recently acquired company "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If at their download page(http://www.gizmo5.com/download.php [gizmo5.com]) it lists Linux perfectly prominently, the link is just broken (pointing at a page which seems to have vanished).
As the summary pointed out, the files are still there.
Since gizmo5.com redirects to a page on google.com, I think a much better summary would be "Google accidentally breaks link while moving website of recently acquired company"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260842</id>
	<title>really just linux?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259504460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't know about you, but I can't seem to find any downloads unless I go to the specific site where they have it, you can't even get new membership it seems... Seems to me that google has packed up the product and is looking to move it elsewhere, maybe incorporate it in their own software perhaps? and the fact that you can't download linux version  from <a href="http://www.gizmo5.com/download.php" title="gizmo5.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.gizmo5.com/download.php</a> [gizmo5.com] , seems to me to be more of a bug then a "kill the penguins" act, although I guess most of the posts here is going to assume so...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know about you , but I ca n't seem to find any downloads unless I go to the specific site where they have it , you ca n't even get new membership it seems... Seems to me that google has packed up the product and is looking to move it elsewhere , maybe incorporate it in their own software perhaps ?
and the fact that you ca n't download linux version from http : //www.gizmo5.com/download.php [ gizmo5.com ] , seems to me to be more of a bug then a " kill the penguins " act , although I guess most of the posts here is going to assume so.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know about you, but I can't seem to find any downloads unless I go to the specific site where they have it, you can't even get new membership it seems... Seems to me that google has packed up the product and is looking to move it elsewhere, maybe incorporate it in their own software perhaps?
and the fact that you can't download linux version  from http://www.gizmo5.com/download.php [gizmo5.com] , seems to me to be more of a bug then a "kill the penguins" act, although I guess most of the posts here is going to assume so...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30270376</id>
	<title>Re:Linux is a support nightmare</title>
	<author>Kjella</author>
	<datestamp>1259599260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In the Linux world, the distributions try to take responsibility for the entirety of the end-user's computing experience.</p></div><p>They deliver it. Take responsibility for it? They're the first to outsource it to "upstream" like no other than open source distros would get away with. They do an important job yes, but this holistic layer is razor thin.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In the Linux world , the distributions try to take responsibility for the entirety of the end-user 's computing experience.They deliver it .
Take responsibility for it ?
They 're the first to outsource it to " upstream " like no other than open source distros would get away with .
They do an important job yes , but this holistic layer is razor thin .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the Linux world, the distributions try to take responsibility for the entirety of the end-user's computing experience.They deliver it.
Take responsibility for it?
They're the first to outsource it to "upstream" like no other than open source distros would get away with.
They do an important job yes, but this holistic layer is razor thin.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30265574</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261002</id>
	<title>Sound on Linux Sucks</title>
	<author>johnsie</author>
	<datestamp>1259506260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm not surprised that companies are avoiding wrting audio software for Linux. Audio on Linux is terrible. It's the worst major operating system for sound engineering.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not surprised that companies are avoiding wrting audio software for Linux .
Audio on Linux is terrible .
It 's the worst major operating system for sound engineering .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not surprised that companies are avoiding wrting audio software for Linux.
Audio on Linux is terrible.
It's the worst major operating system for sound engineering.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30262122</id>
	<title>Re:Chrome OS?</title>
	<author>zach\_the\_lizard</author>
	<datestamp>1259517120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've been using it, and it suites my needs just fine. I haven't had much trouble out of it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been using it , and it suites my needs just fine .
I have n't had much trouble out of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been using it, and it suites my needs just fine.
I haven't had much trouble out of it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261168</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260864</id>
	<title>Re:ok now more seriously--</title>
	<author>natehoy</author>
	<datestamp>1259504700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have Gizmo5 working just fine with my Linksys ATA.  There are even instructions on the Gizmo home page on how to set it up.</p><p>Gizmo5 + my ATA + Google Voice means I now have a spare phone line that allows me free unlimited calling on a normal telephone (though I do have to initiate calls from my web browser).  My primary phone is my Blackberry, but it's nice having a spare line with unlimited minutes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have Gizmo5 working just fine with my Linksys ATA .
There are even instructions on the Gizmo home page on how to set it up.Gizmo5 + my ATA + Google Voice means I now have a spare phone line that allows me free unlimited calling on a normal telephone ( though I do have to initiate calls from my web browser ) .
My primary phone is my Blackberry , but it 's nice having a spare line with unlimited minutes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have Gizmo5 working just fine with my Linksys ATA.
There are even instructions on the Gizmo home page on how to set it up.Gizmo5 + my ATA + Google Voice means I now have a spare phone line that allows me free unlimited calling on a normal telephone (though I do have to initiate calls from my web browser).
My primary phone is my Blackberry, but it's nice having a spare line with unlimited minutes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30262298</id>
	<title>Re:Google: Community Taker, Not So Much Giver</title>
	<author>RAMMS+EIN</author>
	<datestamp>1259518620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>``It's evil to build your huge business on a technology made from community contributions, then take more than you give back while shutting down some community projects.''</p><p>I don't agree. If the license allows it, it's fair game. If you didn't want that to happen to your software, you shouldn't have released it under a license that allows it.</p><p>If you want licensees to have to make available improvements they make to your code, you may want to take a look at the Affero General Public License. This license requires modifications to be made available not only to receivers of the software, but also to people who use hosted software over a network.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>` ` It 's evil to build your huge business on a technology made from community contributions , then take more than you give back while shutting down some community projects .
''I do n't agree .
If the license allows it , it 's fair game .
If you did n't want that to happen to your software , you should n't have released it under a license that allows it.If you want licensees to have to make available improvements they make to your code , you may want to take a look at the Affero General Public License .
This license requires modifications to be made available not only to receivers of the software , but also to people who use hosted software over a network .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>``It's evil to build your huge business on a technology made from community contributions, then take more than you give back while shutting down some community projects.
''I don't agree.
If the license allows it, it's fair game.
If you didn't want that to happen to your software, you shouldn't have released it under a license that allows it.If you want licensees to have to make available improvements they make to your code, you may want to take a look at the Affero General Public License.
This license requires modifications to be made available not only to receivers of the software, but also to people who use hosted software over a network.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261306</id>
	<title>put up or shut up</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259509440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did you just write all that bullshit anew, or do you just copy and paste it whenever anything about Linux comes up?</p><p>And what makes you think anybody cares what "you have always said".  Have you ever produced anything of use to other people?</p><p>If you want to help, roll up your sleeves and produce something useful for other people.  Otherwise, just shut up.  OK?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did you just write all that bullshit anew , or do you just copy and paste it whenever anything about Linux comes up ? And what makes you think anybody cares what " you have always said " .
Have you ever produced anything of use to other people ? If you want to help , roll up your sleeves and produce something useful for other people .
Otherwise , just shut up .
OK ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did you just write all that bullshit anew, or do you just copy and paste it whenever anything about Linux comes up?And what makes you think anybody cares what "you have always said".
Have you ever produced anything of use to other people?If you want to help, roll up your sleeves and produce something useful for other people.
Otherwise, just shut up.
OK?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261182</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260900</id>
	<title>Apparently you don't know how slashdot works. We j</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259505120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Apparently you don't know how slashdot works.
We just comment without knowing shit!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apparently you do n't know how slashdot works .
We just comment without knowing shit !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apparently you don't know how slashdot works.
We just comment without knowing shit!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30264618</id>
	<title>Re:Chrome OS?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259497080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>maybe they're going to make a web app for it wich will run on all os and browsers,</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>maybe they 're going to make a web app for it wich will run on all os and browsers,</tokentext>
<sentencetext>maybe they're going to make a web app for it wich will run on all os and browsers,</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260818</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30265516</id>
	<title>Re:Chrome OS?</title>
	<author>Nazlfrag</author>
	<datestamp>1259507580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ah, another good old Stallmanite with his 'Everything must be FREE! Well except what you choose to name your independantly developed operating system just because its taken us over twenty years to completley fail to do the same so can we hitch our wagon onto yours?' attitude.</p><p>Keep up the really worthwhile fight that isn't a complete waste of time and energy to wank off over the naming of something somebody said he was giving away to anyone who wanted to use it until he made dozens of arbitary 'guidelines' like some fascist thinking he can rename someones derivative work or do anything other than what is stipulated in the license and the law.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah , another good old Stallmanite with his 'Everything must be FREE !
Well except what you choose to name your independantly developed operating system just because its taken us over twenty years to completley fail to do the same so can we hitch our wagon onto yours ?
' attitude.Keep up the really worthwhile fight that is n't a complete waste of time and energy to wank off over the naming of something somebody said he was giving away to anyone who wanted to use it until he made dozens of arbitary 'guidelines ' like some fascist thinking he can rename someones derivative work or do anything other than what is stipulated in the license and the law .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah, another good old Stallmanite with his 'Everything must be FREE!
Well except what you choose to name your independantly developed operating system just because its taken us over twenty years to completley fail to do the same so can we hitch our wagon onto yours?
' attitude.Keep up the really worthwhile fight that isn't a complete waste of time and energy to wank off over the naming of something somebody said he was giving away to anyone who wanted to use it until he made dozens of arbitary 'guidelines' like some fascist thinking he can rename someones derivative work or do anything other than what is stipulated in the license and the law.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261046</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261562</id>
	<title>Linux is a support nightmare</title>
	<author>Theovon</author>
	<datestamp>1259511840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't care whether your software is open source or not, Linux is a support nightmare.  It's the dozens of distributions.  What works on Red Hat won't necessarily work on Debian, Ubuntu, Gentoo, Arch, OpenSuSE, Mandriva, etc.  In each case, due to minor differences in libraries, where libraries are stored, customizations of KDE and GNOME, other window managers, different xlib versions, and countless other things, apps often have to be PORTED from one Linux distro to another.  And you certainly can't make a binary distribution (even if just for convenience), because those are even more brittle.</p><p>Don't let the LSB people fool you.  There is no single, common, standard Linux ABI set to target when developing a commercial app.  Even if you release it with source, you still have customer support problem to deal with.  Right there, your profit is eliminated.</p><p>Google would spend more on support than they would make from subscription fees.</p><p>It would be one thing if they could leave it up to the distros to port, build, and test the software.  But they can't.  As soon as subscription fees are involved, users expect all kinds of unreasonable levels of support.  Google can't JUST support Fedora or Ubuntu.  Imagine the uproar over them playing favorites.</p><p>The fact is, they're better off taking some grief over not supporting Linux at all than inadvertently screwing countless of poorly supported Linux customers who will then come back and cause them some serious legal problems.  If you can't do it right, you can't do it at all.  And there's no way to do it right.</p><p>I'm a chip designer, and so I use Xilinx tools.  When I do, I use the Windows versions.  Not only are the Linux versions not very good, but you're forced into using specific versions of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.  (Or CentOS, I guess.)  In this case, the software costs $1500 (unless you have contacts with good reps, which I have), but in that case, if you're going to spend that money, you might as well use the less annoying Windows version.</p><p>Now, here's what's really going to happen with this, and Google employees may be fully aware of this:  The total lack of support for Linux itself will cause an uproar.  Meanwhile, only a few existing customers are having any trouble, meaning that no NEW customers are getting screwed.  The uproar will turn into pleading from the community, which Google will respond to with a list of support concerns, mostly involving distro support.  The community, being blind to these issues, will deny them.  Back and forth for a while.  Then finally, community members will volunteer to help support Gizmo on various Linux distros.  Google will then enlist their help, with the disclaimer that they only support Linux distros that have maintainers for Gizmo, and that certain kinds of support must come through the distro maintainers.  At that point, it becomes potentially profitable for Google, because by then it'll be all out in the open that Google made a compromise and that Linux users can't get certain kinds of support directly from Google.  With that community concensus in place, maybe everyone will be (mostly) happy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't care whether your software is open source or not , Linux is a support nightmare .
It 's the dozens of distributions .
What works on Red Hat wo n't necessarily work on Debian , Ubuntu , Gentoo , Arch , OpenSuSE , Mandriva , etc .
In each case , due to minor differences in libraries , where libraries are stored , customizations of KDE and GNOME , other window managers , different xlib versions , and countless other things , apps often have to be PORTED from one Linux distro to another .
And you certainly ca n't make a binary distribution ( even if just for convenience ) , because those are even more brittle.Do n't let the LSB people fool you .
There is no single , common , standard Linux ABI set to target when developing a commercial app .
Even if you release it with source , you still have customer support problem to deal with .
Right there , your profit is eliminated.Google would spend more on support than they would make from subscription fees.It would be one thing if they could leave it up to the distros to port , build , and test the software .
But they ca n't .
As soon as subscription fees are involved , users expect all kinds of unreasonable levels of support .
Google ca n't JUST support Fedora or Ubuntu .
Imagine the uproar over them playing favorites.The fact is , they 're better off taking some grief over not supporting Linux at all than inadvertently screwing countless of poorly supported Linux customers who will then come back and cause them some serious legal problems .
If you ca n't do it right , you ca n't do it at all .
And there 's no way to do it right.I 'm a chip designer , and so I use Xilinx tools .
When I do , I use the Windows versions .
Not only are the Linux versions not very good , but you 're forced into using specific versions of Red Hat Enterprise Linux .
( Or CentOS , I guess .
) In this case , the software costs $ 1500 ( unless you have contacts with good reps , which I have ) , but in that case , if you 're going to spend that money , you might as well use the less annoying Windows version.Now , here 's what 's really going to happen with this , and Google employees may be fully aware of this : The total lack of support for Linux itself will cause an uproar .
Meanwhile , only a few existing customers are having any trouble , meaning that no NEW customers are getting screwed .
The uproar will turn into pleading from the community , which Google will respond to with a list of support concerns , mostly involving distro support .
The community , being blind to these issues , will deny them .
Back and forth for a while .
Then finally , community members will volunteer to help support Gizmo on various Linux distros .
Google will then enlist their help , with the disclaimer that they only support Linux distros that have maintainers for Gizmo , and that certain kinds of support must come through the distro maintainers .
At that point , it becomes potentially profitable for Google , because by then it 'll be all out in the open that Google made a compromise and that Linux users ca n't get certain kinds of support directly from Google .
With that community concensus in place , maybe everyone will be ( mostly ) happy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't care whether your software is open source or not, Linux is a support nightmare.
It's the dozens of distributions.
What works on Red Hat won't necessarily work on Debian, Ubuntu, Gentoo, Arch, OpenSuSE, Mandriva, etc.
In each case, due to minor differences in libraries, where libraries are stored, customizations of KDE and GNOME, other window managers, different xlib versions, and countless other things, apps often have to be PORTED from one Linux distro to another.
And you certainly can't make a binary distribution (even if just for convenience), because those are even more brittle.Don't let the LSB people fool you.
There is no single, common, standard Linux ABI set to target when developing a commercial app.
Even if you release it with source, you still have customer support problem to deal with.
Right there, your profit is eliminated.Google would spend more on support than they would make from subscription fees.It would be one thing if they could leave it up to the distros to port, build, and test the software.
But they can't.
As soon as subscription fees are involved, users expect all kinds of unreasonable levels of support.
Google can't JUST support Fedora or Ubuntu.
Imagine the uproar over them playing favorites.The fact is, they're better off taking some grief over not supporting Linux at all than inadvertently screwing countless of poorly supported Linux customers who will then come back and cause them some serious legal problems.
If you can't do it right, you can't do it at all.
And there's no way to do it right.I'm a chip designer, and so I use Xilinx tools.
When I do, I use the Windows versions.
Not only are the Linux versions not very good, but you're forced into using specific versions of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
(Or CentOS, I guess.
)  In this case, the software costs $1500 (unless you have contacts with good reps, which I have), but in that case, if you're going to spend that money, you might as well use the less annoying Windows version.Now, here's what's really going to happen with this, and Google employees may be fully aware of this:  The total lack of support for Linux itself will cause an uproar.
Meanwhile, only a few existing customers are having any trouble, meaning that no NEW customers are getting screwed.
The uproar will turn into pleading from the community, which Google will respond to with a list of support concerns, mostly involving distro support.
The community, being blind to these issues, will deny them.
Back and forth for a while.
Then finally, community members will volunteer to help support Gizmo on various Linux distros.
Google will then enlist their help, with the disclaimer that they only support Linux distros that have maintainers for Gizmo, and that certain kinds of support must come through the distro maintainers.
At that point, it becomes potentially profitable for Google, because by then it'll be all out in the open that Google made a compromise and that Linux users can't get certain kinds of support directly from Google.
With that community concensus in place, maybe everyone will be (mostly) happy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261378</id>
	<title>Re:Chrome OS?</title>
	<author>chabotc</author>
	<datestamp>1259510100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Heh your comment reads like a FOX headline.</p><p>Sure there's no stable release of Chrome for Linux yet, however you can download the current dev version from <a href="http://dev.chromium.org/getting-involved/dev-channel" title="chromium.org">http://dev.chromium.org/getting-involved/dev-channel</a> [chromium.org]</p><p>It's being worked on, and if anything ChromeOS (which is linux+chrome) should tell you they're taking it quite seriously</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Heh your comment reads like a FOX headline.Sure there 's no stable release of Chrome for Linux yet , however you can download the current dev version from http : //dev.chromium.org/getting-involved/dev-channel [ chromium.org ] It 's being worked on , and if anything ChromeOS ( which is linux + chrome ) should tell you they 're taking it quite seriously</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Heh your comment reads like a FOX headline.Sure there's no stable release of Chrome for Linux yet, however you can download the current dev version from http://dev.chromium.org/getting-involved/dev-channel [chromium.org]It's being worked on, and if anything ChromeOS (which is linux+chrome) should tell you they're taking it quite seriously</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261168</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30262166</id>
	<title>Happy pappy?</title>
	<author>Korbeau</author>
	<datestamp>1259517540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is a potential problem for happy Linux users</p></div><p>Are they happy from using Linux or from using Gizmo5 on Linux?</p><p>Are they happy and satisfied using the current version of the software(i.e. Google still distributes and maintains it but no longer develops it), or are they dying to get new features?</p><p>Are they just overall optimistic and enthusiasts in life?</p><p>Are they mixing up in their mind the state of true happiness and that of being dumbly entertained?</p><p>And most importantly, are they genuinely happy, or is deep down in their heart some old dreams of passion &amp; revenge getting colder and colder<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a potential problem for happy Linux usersAre they happy from using Linux or from using Gizmo5 on Linux ? Are they happy and satisfied using the current version of the software ( i.e .
Google still distributes and maintains it but no longer develops it ) , or are they dying to get new features ? Are they just overall optimistic and enthusiasts in life ? Are they mixing up in their mind the state of true happiness and that of being dumbly entertained ? And most importantly , are they genuinely happy , or is deep down in their heart some old dreams of passion &amp; revenge getting colder and colder .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a potential problem for happy Linux usersAre they happy from using Linux or from using Gizmo5 on Linux?Are they happy and satisfied using the current version of the software(i.e.
Google still distributes and maintains it but no longer develops it), or are they dying to get new features?Are they just overall optimistic and enthusiasts in life?Are they mixing up in their mind the state of true happiness and that of being dumbly entertained?And most importantly, are they genuinely happy, or is deep down in their heart some old dreams of passion &amp; revenge getting colder and colder ...
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30264896</id>
	<title>I don't see a problem...</title>
	<author>timothyb89</author>
	<datestamp>1259499780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I just checked the Gizmo5 size, and I can't say that I see what everybody is complaining about. The Linux client is still prominently displayed on the download page, although I imagine it wasn't there when the article was published. Even so, looking at the release date, I think I can see why they've been considering removing it- its still at version 3 which was released in 2007.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I just checked the Gizmo5 size , and I ca n't say that I see what everybody is complaining about .
The Linux client is still prominently displayed on the download page , although I imagine it was n't there when the article was published .
Even so , looking at the release date , I think I can see why they 've been considering removing it- its still at version 3 which was released in 2007 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just checked the Gizmo5 size, and I can't say that I see what everybody is complaining about.
The Linux client is still prominently displayed on the download page, although I imagine it wasn't there when the article was published.
Even so, looking at the release date, I think I can see why they've been considering removing it- its still at version 3 which was released in 2007.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30268060</id>
	<title>Re:You want ReactOS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259575260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why ever would I want Windows drivers?  They are poorly debugged, poorly maintained, and a pita to install.</p><p>Linux drivers just work.  If hardware doesn't work on Linux, it's usually not worth using at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why ever would I want Windows drivers ?
They are poorly debugged , poorly maintained , and a pita to install.Linux drivers just work .
If hardware does n't work on Linux , it 's usually not worth using at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why ever would I want Windows drivers?
They are poorly debugged, poorly maintained, and a pita to install.Linux drivers just work.
If hardware doesn't work on Linux, it's usually not worth using at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30263392</id>
	<title>Re:Linux is a support nightmare</title>
	<author>unix1</author>
	<datestamp>1259528340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use Linux on pretty much all of my computers, and I guess I don't fall in with your stereotype that they can't make money off of me, because I pay for:</p><p>- Gizmo5 (have done so since pretty much their launch when were called sipphone.com) x 2 accounts<br>- Google Voice x 2 accounts<br>- a couple of other SIP service providers</p><p>There is one good solution - make your source available, and given that your program is of some minimal usefulness to their users, the distros will package it for you. Not only that, many times they will provide you with free computing resources to [re]compile your program if there is a change in one of the libraries it uses; for not just one, but as many architectures as they support; free bandwidth to distribute it; free bandwidth and support to push out its updates (security, version, etc.) to as many users as you have. Sometimes, they'll even give you feedback, patches, suggestions, AND thank you for it. If you have a subscription model like Google, there is no need to keep the client secret and charge for it.</p><p>While reading your post, I noticed that if you substitute Linux with Windows in your rant, you pretty much have the same point, but with none of the above available. There is no single ABI for Windows either. There are multiplicity of DLLs and components that are going to be different versions on different versions of the OS, different service pack levels, different versions of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.net or some other random programs installed. Windows XP is different from Vista and 7. Same for Windows 2K[X], unless you have program XYZ already installed, unless it's below version X, unless, unless... Which means you provide all libraries with your app, or it potentially breaks for a lot of users. And no, it's not practical to test every single configuration either. Oh, and this before you get to Windows CE, Tablet PC, or, heaven forbid, Windows Mobile. They look <i>nothing</i> like a single product.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use Linux on pretty much all of my computers , and I guess I do n't fall in with your stereotype that they ca n't make money off of me , because I pay for : - Gizmo5 ( have done so since pretty much their launch when were called sipphone.com ) x 2 accounts- Google Voice x 2 accounts- a couple of other SIP service providersThere is one good solution - make your source available , and given that your program is of some minimal usefulness to their users , the distros will package it for you .
Not only that , many times they will provide you with free computing resources to [ re ] compile your program if there is a change in one of the libraries it uses ; for not just one , but as many architectures as they support ; free bandwidth to distribute it ; free bandwidth and support to push out its updates ( security , version , etc .
) to as many users as you have .
Sometimes , they 'll even give you feedback , patches , suggestions , AND thank you for it .
If you have a subscription model like Google , there is no need to keep the client secret and charge for it.While reading your post , I noticed that if you substitute Linux with Windows in your rant , you pretty much have the same point , but with none of the above available .
There is no single ABI for Windows either .
There are multiplicity of DLLs and components that are going to be different versions on different versions of the OS , different service pack levels , different versions of .net or some other random programs installed .
Windows XP is different from Vista and 7 .
Same for Windows 2K [ X ] , unless you have program XYZ already installed , unless it 's below version X , unless , unless... Which means you provide all libraries with your app , or it potentially breaks for a lot of users .
And no , it 's not practical to test every single configuration either .
Oh , and this before you get to Windows CE , Tablet PC , or , heaven forbid , Windows Mobile .
They look nothing like a single product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use Linux on pretty much all of my computers, and I guess I don't fall in with your stereotype that they can't make money off of me, because I pay for:- Gizmo5 (have done so since pretty much their launch when were called sipphone.com) x 2 accounts- Google Voice x 2 accounts- a couple of other SIP service providersThere is one good solution - make your source available, and given that your program is of some minimal usefulness to their users, the distros will package it for you.
Not only that, many times they will provide you with free computing resources to [re]compile your program if there is a change in one of the libraries it uses; for not just one, but as many architectures as they support; free bandwidth to distribute it; free bandwidth and support to push out its updates (security, version, etc.
) to as many users as you have.
Sometimes, they'll even give you feedback, patches, suggestions, AND thank you for it.
If you have a subscription model like Google, there is no need to keep the client secret and charge for it.While reading your post, I noticed that if you substitute Linux with Windows in your rant, you pretty much have the same point, but with none of the above available.
There is no single ABI for Windows either.
There are multiplicity of DLLs and components that are going to be different versions on different versions of the OS, different service pack levels, different versions of .net or some other random programs installed.
Windows XP is different from Vista and 7.
Same for Windows 2K[X], unless you have program XYZ already installed, unless it's below version X, unless, unless... Which means you provide all libraries with your app, or it potentially breaks for a lot of users.
And no, it's not practical to test every single configuration either.
Oh, and this before you get to Windows CE, Tablet PC, or, heaven forbid, Windows Mobile.
They look nothing like a single product.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261098</id>
	<title>Use Ekiga</title>
	<author>Pecisk</author>
	<datestamp>1259507340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It has issues, but is has serious development team behind. It supports lot of codecs, including industrial standards and commercial ones.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It has issues , but is has serious development team behind .
It supports lot of codecs , including industrial standards and commercial ones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It has issues, but is has serious development team behind.
It supports lot of codecs, including industrial standards and commercial ones.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30267692</id>
	<title>Android</title>
	<author>s1lverl0rd</author>
	<datestamp>1259613780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is there a Gizmo client for Android? Will there be? Would'nt that client be easy to port to desktop Linux?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is there a Gizmo client for Android ?
Will there be ?
Would'nt that client be easy to port to desktop Linux ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is there a Gizmo client for Android?
Will there be?
Would'nt that client be easy to port to desktop Linux?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261238</id>
	<title>Google: Community Taker, Not So Much Giver</title>
	<author>Doc Ruby</author>
	<datestamp>1259508900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google gets lots of free value from the Linux community. Its whole $BILLION server system runs on a version of Linux that it doesn't have to pay for (except its own in-house improvements), nor depend on a vendor that might compete with it. It's moving heavily into the telephone biz with a mobile Linux that's competing with the iPhone by capturing lots of Linux developers already cultivated into productive position by the community.</p><p>Google has released some SW into the community, but it's getting notorious for bundling proprietary apps with its distros (like the apps in Android). And while producing new distros and variants like Android is giving back to the community, Google benefits more than the community does, $BILLIONS more.</p><p>Google's got the resources, both financial and personnel, to maintain Linux versions of SW Google produces (or acquires and continues to produce). But Gizmo5 isn't the only extinct Linux species Google could instead be injecting new life into. Google's main content production suite is SketchUp, the 3D modeling app and related integrated tools. But no Linux version, though the app is well into version 7. It runs unevenly at best under Wine, and cannot integrate with Google Earth in that mode.</p><p>It's evil to build your huge business on a technology made from community contributions, then take more than you give back while shutting down some community projects. It looks like the "Don't Be Evil" days are long gone at Google. Pretty scary considering the power it has, with its money, info and essential role every microsecond.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google gets lots of free value from the Linux community .
Its whole $ BILLION server system runs on a version of Linux that it does n't have to pay for ( except its own in-house improvements ) , nor depend on a vendor that might compete with it .
It 's moving heavily into the telephone biz with a mobile Linux that 's competing with the iPhone by capturing lots of Linux developers already cultivated into productive position by the community.Google has released some SW into the community , but it 's getting notorious for bundling proprietary apps with its distros ( like the apps in Android ) .
And while producing new distros and variants like Android is giving back to the community , Google benefits more than the community does , $ BILLIONS more.Google 's got the resources , both financial and personnel , to maintain Linux versions of SW Google produces ( or acquires and continues to produce ) .
But Gizmo5 is n't the only extinct Linux species Google could instead be injecting new life into .
Google 's main content production suite is SketchUp , the 3D modeling app and related integrated tools .
But no Linux version , though the app is well into version 7 .
It runs unevenly at best under Wine , and can not integrate with Google Earth in that mode.It 's evil to build your huge business on a technology made from community contributions , then take more than you give back while shutting down some community projects .
It looks like the " Do n't Be Evil " days are long gone at Google .
Pretty scary considering the power it has , with its money , info and essential role every microsecond .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google gets lots of free value from the Linux community.
Its whole $BILLION server system runs on a version of Linux that it doesn't have to pay for (except its own in-house improvements), nor depend on a vendor that might compete with it.
It's moving heavily into the telephone biz with a mobile Linux that's competing with the iPhone by capturing lots of Linux developers already cultivated into productive position by the community.Google has released some SW into the community, but it's getting notorious for bundling proprietary apps with its distros (like the apps in Android).
And while producing new distros and variants like Android is giving back to the community, Google benefits more than the community does, $BILLIONS more.Google's got the resources, both financial and personnel, to maintain Linux versions of SW Google produces (or acquires and continues to produce).
But Gizmo5 isn't the only extinct Linux species Google could instead be injecting new life into.
Google's main content production suite is SketchUp, the 3D modeling app and related integrated tools.
But no Linux version, though the app is well into version 7.
It runs unevenly at best under Wine, and cannot integrate with Google Earth in that mode.It's evil to build your huge business on a technology made from community contributions, then take more than you give back while shutting down some community projects.
It looks like the "Don't Be Evil" days are long gone at Google.
Pretty scary considering the power it has, with its money, info and essential role every microsecond.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261396</id>
	<title>Re:Are you sure?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259510400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ya, more kdawson trolling.  The whole thing is a knee-jerk reaction to a non-issue.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ya , more kdawson trolling .
The whole thing is a knee-jerk reaction to a non-issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ya, more kdawson trolling.
The whole thing is a knee-jerk reaction to a non-issue.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260994</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261922</id>
	<title>Don't confuse "support" with "capability"</title>
	<author>mtippett</author>
	<datestamp>1259515560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The economics are fairly simple.</p><p>Your support, validation and sustaining costs don't contribute to the bottom line of your business.  If you have a part of the product that takes a unnecessarily large proportion of the bottom line, you look at the value proposition.  You do something as simple as removing the client for a platform, you save money.</p><p>BUT, if the product is based around open standards, the Linux community has a high probability of making something that will work anyway.  For FREE.  No support costs for a client, no development and validation costs either.  Linux, with it's "Freedom" has an extremely high cost to be an ISV on, you have kernels, X versions, distributions.. All subtley different and all having precious consideration for the cost of operating in that ecosystem.</p><p>Google has many examples of killing/not creating a client, but fostering the capability.  Google talk is a great example.  Google still gets the branding value of the service, but doesn't need to have a client, I have *NEVER* heard anyone talk about "Google's JMPP or Jabber Service".   I would expect that this is the same, but for google voice. The people carrying credit will probably be handled.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The economics are fairly simple.Your support , validation and sustaining costs do n't contribute to the bottom line of your business .
If you have a part of the product that takes a unnecessarily large proportion of the bottom line , you look at the value proposition .
You do something as simple as removing the client for a platform , you save money.BUT , if the product is based around open standards , the Linux community has a high probability of making something that will work anyway .
For FREE .
No support costs for a client , no development and validation costs either .
Linux , with it 's " Freedom " has an extremely high cost to be an ISV on , you have kernels , X versions , distributions.. All subtley different and all having precious consideration for the cost of operating in that ecosystem.Google has many examples of killing/not creating a client , but fostering the capability .
Google talk is a great example .
Google still gets the branding value of the service , but does n't need to have a client , I have * NEVER * heard anyone talk about " Google 's JMPP or Jabber Service " .
I would expect that this is the same , but for google voice .
The people carrying credit will probably be handled .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The economics are fairly simple.Your support, validation and sustaining costs don't contribute to the bottom line of your business.
If you have a part of the product that takes a unnecessarily large proportion of the bottom line, you look at the value proposition.
You do something as simple as removing the client for a platform, you save money.BUT, if the product is based around open standards, the Linux community has a high probability of making something that will work anyway.
For FREE.
No support costs for a client, no development and validation costs either.
Linux, with it's "Freedom" has an extremely high cost to be an ISV on, you have kernels, X versions, distributions.. All subtley different and all having precious consideration for the cost of operating in that ecosystem.Google has many examples of killing/not creating a client, but fostering the capability.
Google talk is a great example.
Google still gets the branding value of the service, but doesn't need to have a client, I have *NEVER* heard anyone talk about "Google's JMPP or Jabber Service".
I would expect that this is the same, but for google voice.
The people carrying credit will probably be handled.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261168</id>
	<title>Re:Chrome OS?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259508120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Like the kickass version of Chrome for Linux? Oh, right, there isn't one...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Like the kickass version of Chrome for Linux ?
Oh , right , there is n't one.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like the kickass version of Chrome for Linux?
Oh, right, there isn't one...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260818</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260826</id>
	<title>ok now more seriously--</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259504220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Personally, i am no interested in any voip solution that isn't a standard (sip etc.).
If i can't connect my ATA up to it, im not interested.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Personally , i am no interested in any voip solution that is n't a standard ( sip etc. ) .
If i ca n't connect my ATA up to it , im not interested .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Personally, i am no interested in any voip solution that isn't a standard (sip etc.).
If i can't connect my ATA up to it, im not interested.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261770</id>
	<title>Re:Google: Community Taker, Not So Much Giver</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259514180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>they only made those billions of dollars because they use linux on their servers?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>they only made those billions of dollars because they use linux on their servers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they only made those billions of dollars because they use linux on their servers?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260802</id>
	<title>first!</title>
	<author>daveb1</author>
	<datestamp>1259503920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>first!</htmltext>
<tokenext>first !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>first!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260988</id>
	<title>Re:Time to learn a lesson about Linux support</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259506140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or you know, maybe Google just feels that there is no pressing need for them to provide their own client merely to use a service which employs an open protocol to which any *nix user already has <a href="http://voipguides.blogspot.com/2009/07/best-sip-softphones-for-voip-on-linux.html" title="blogspot.com">easy access</a> [blogspot.com].</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or you know , maybe Google just feels that there is no pressing need for them to provide their own client merely to use a service which employs an open protocol to which any * nix user already has easy access [ blogspot.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or you know, maybe Google just feels that there is no pressing need for them to provide their own client merely to use a service which employs an open protocol to which any *nix user already has easy access [blogspot.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260922</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260964</id>
	<title>Chicken little ?</title>
	<author>smoker2</author>
	<datestamp>1259505840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It strikes me that any Linux user is the least likely to delete an install file after running it. So what's the problem ? Certainly not availability of the app to the users quoted as being vulnerable, those with existing credit. It may show a lack of desire to allow linux users in the future, but until that comes about, it's all hot air.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It strikes me that any Linux user is the least likely to delete an install file after running it .
So what 's the problem ?
Certainly not availability of the app to the users quoted as being vulnerable , those with existing credit .
It may show a lack of desire to allow linux users in the future , but until that comes about , it 's all hot air .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It strikes me that any Linux user is the least likely to delete an install file after running it.
So what's the problem ?
Certainly not availability of the app to the users quoted as being vulnerable, those with existing credit.
It may show a lack of desire to allow linux users in the future, but until that comes about, it's all hot air.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30262304</id>
	<title>Re:Google: Community Taker, Not So Much Giver</title>
	<author>Pecisk</author>
	<datestamp>1259518680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Google has released some SW into the community, but it's getting notorious for bundling proprietary apps with its distros (like the apps in Android). And while producing new distros and variants like Android is giving back to the community, Google benefits more than the community does, $BILLIONS more."</p><p>Yeah, and SoC every year is something a afterthough, a mistake. Ups, it's not. Also about hundred of hours devoted by google engineers to extend such projects as django, hibernate, apache, tomcat, etc. is something imaginary, it doesn't exist.</p><p>I think Google as coorporation has found very good ways to contribute back to community - support new developers trough SoC (therefore introducing new people in community), extending stuff they use so functionality gets richer, providing rich APIs for their services, etc.</p><p>"Google benefits more than the community does, $BILLIONS more."</p><p>Wouldn't like to be more precise? How much more? How do you measure that?</p><p>"Google's got the resources, both financial and personnel, to maintain Linux versions of SW Google produces (or acquires and continues to produce). But Gizmo5 isn't the only extinct Linux species Google could instead be injecting new life into. Google's main content production suite is SketchUp, the 3D modeling app and related integrated tools. But no Linux version, though the app is well into version 7. It runs unevenly at best under Wine, and cannot integrate with Google Earth in that mode."</p><p>Yes, but they are not willing to duplicate efforts. Gizmo5 is SIP application. There are numerous SIP applications in Linux (like KPhone, Ekiga), which are more popular and more supported. It is easier to test them and provide patches if needed to them that trying to support another application which not everyone will use. SketchUp is another story which I can't fully explain. Maybe problem to support it fully in Wine.</p><p>Anyway, I think you color Google too dark, as they are only corporation who tries it's best to be good community citizen. They have issues, they have flaws, but that's it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Google has released some SW into the community , but it 's getting notorious for bundling proprietary apps with its distros ( like the apps in Android ) .
And while producing new distros and variants like Android is giving back to the community , Google benefits more than the community does , $ BILLIONS more .
" Yeah , and SoC every year is something a afterthough , a mistake .
Ups , it 's not .
Also about hundred of hours devoted by google engineers to extend such projects as django , hibernate , apache , tomcat , etc .
is something imaginary , it does n't exist.I think Google as coorporation has found very good ways to contribute back to community - support new developers trough SoC ( therefore introducing new people in community ) , extending stuff they use so functionality gets richer , providing rich APIs for their services , etc .
" Google benefits more than the community does , $ BILLIONS more .
" Would n't like to be more precise ?
How much more ?
How do you measure that ?
" Google 's got the resources , both financial and personnel , to maintain Linux versions of SW Google produces ( or acquires and continues to produce ) .
But Gizmo5 is n't the only extinct Linux species Google could instead be injecting new life into .
Google 's main content production suite is SketchUp , the 3D modeling app and related integrated tools .
But no Linux version , though the app is well into version 7 .
It runs unevenly at best under Wine , and can not integrate with Google Earth in that mode .
" Yes , but they are not willing to duplicate efforts .
Gizmo5 is SIP application .
There are numerous SIP applications in Linux ( like KPhone , Ekiga ) , which are more popular and more supported .
It is easier to test them and provide patches if needed to them that trying to support another application which not everyone will use .
SketchUp is another story which I ca n't fully explain .
Maybe problem to support it fully in Wine.Anyway , I think you color Google too dark , as they are only corporation who tries it 's best to be good community citizen .
They have issues , they have flaws , but that 's it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Google has released some SW into the community, but it's getting notorious for bundling proprietary apps with its distros (like the apps in Android).
And while producing new distros and variants like Android is giving back to the community, Google benefits more than the community does, $BILLIONS more.
"Yeah, and SoC every year is something a afterthough, a mistake.
Ups, it's not.
Also about hundred of hours devoted by google engineers to extend such projects as django, hibernate, apache, tomcat, etc.
is something imaginary, it doesn't exist.I think Google as coorporation has found very good ways to contribute back to community - support new developers trough SoC (therefore introducing new people in community), extending stuff they use so functionality gets richer, providing rich APIs for their services, etc.
"Google benefits more than the community does, $BILLIONS more.
"Wouldn't like to be more precise?
How much more?
How do you measure that?
"Google's got the resources, both financial and personnel, to maintain Linux versions of SW Google produces (or acquires and continues to produce).
But Gizmo5 isn't the only extinct Linux species Google could instead be injecting new life into.
Google's main content production suite is SketchUp, the 3D modeling app and related integrated tools.
But no Linux version, though the app is well into version 7.
It runs unevenly at best under Wine, and cannot integrate with Google Earth in that mode.
"Yes, but they are not willing to duplicate efforts.
Gizmo5 is SIP application.
There are numerous SIP applications in Linux (like KPhone, Ekiga), which are more popular and more supported.
It is easier to test them and provide patches if needed to them that trying to support another application which not everyone will use.
SketchUp is another story which I can't fully explain.
Maybe problem to support it fully in Wine.Anyway, I think you color Google too dark, as they are only corporation who tries it's best to be good community citizen.
They have issues, they have flaws, but that's it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30262826</id>
	<title>OS and Linux friendly. Right.</title>
	<author>geekymachoman</author>
	<datestamp>1259523000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To all who says 'well it's an open protocol':<br>So, why did they keep windows/macosx client then ? Dropping (already existing) linux client, implies something specific. Implies 'priorities'. Obviously, there's no room for Linux desktop users.</p><p>Google contributes to OS, but not as much as would be nice to do, especially because the amount of staff and money they have, and their whole business is based on OS and Linux. How much they have, million servers ? I presume all on Open Source (Linux). How many of their apps run on Linux ? One (afaik).. Google Earth.<br>How much would they pay to run Windows on that amount of servers ? Or Solaris.. or whatever ?</p><p>They can't spare $200(even a million would be a small amount)K a year to support a platform that enabled them to earn as much as they do ?<br>It's not just "well the userbase of linux is to small" it's about giving support to Linux... and even if the userbase is small... so what ? If Mozilla, iTunes, Opera, nvidia, ati, can make apps for linux, why can't google then ? Especially because this platform enabled them to earn money for 11 years for free.</p><p>It's not a requirement, as someone above said.. it doesn't state in GPL licence that you need to contribute, but look at it this way. In law, there's isnt a statement that you need to say "thanks" if someone do something nice to you, but you do anyway. Because it's nice thing to do, and it's (according to my moral/ethical/whatever values) right thing to do.<br>And based on that value system of mine, i build an opinion about people who just take, and don't show any gratitude.<br>Greed.</p><p>[possible flame part of the post]<br>Google can at least make a freakin' linux client for their apps. But you know what ? If there was a lot of money in that course of action, they would. Because google, as everyone else is doing all they do because of money. It ain't because they love Open Source, Linux or you. That's how those PR, Marketing, CEOs and other thinks. It's their money in your pocket, and they will provide you with enough to keep you satisfied. Since Linux userbase is small... they don't give a shit about your satisfaction.<br>[/possible flame part of the post]</p><p>Yeah they give back, with Goo and python and whatever, but the ratio of giving:taking is disgraceful for a company such as google.</p><p>The difference between MS business model and Googles business model is only different by the ability of google to mask theirs motivation. MS tells openly.. we care only about money and thats it. Google says, we care about open source, and you.. and you all think that's true, because they said so.</p><p>And you'll probably mutilate this post, and turn all of this text against me, and I don't care what you do. You can protect google as long as you like, I see them as another business who is interested only in money and expanding their empire. Like Carlin said. The power is only interested in expanding its power.</p><p>(And for you pathetic people who'll look at they way I speak english, and try to bash me personally, I'm not english and it aint my native language, so spare me of your insightful comments about how dumb I am, I read it once before already.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To all who says 'well it 's an open protocol ' : So , why did they keep windows/macosx client then ?
Dropping ( already existing ) linux client , implies something specific .
Implies 'priorities' .
Obviously , there 's no room for Linux desktop users.Google contributes to OS , but not as much as would be nice to do , especially because the amount of staff and money they have , and their whole business is based on OS and Linux .
How much they have , million servers ?
I presume all on Open Source ( Linux ) .
How many of their apps run on Linux ?
One ( afaik ) .. Google Earth.How much would they pay to run Windows on that amount of servers ?
Or Solaris.. or whatever ? They ca n't spare $ 200 ( even a million would be a small amount ) K a year to support a platform that enabled them to earn as much as they do ? It 's not just " well the userbase of linux is to small " it 's about giving support to Linux... and even if the userbase is small... so what ?
If Mozilla , iTunes , Opera , nvidia , ati , can make apps for linux , why ca n't google then ?
Especially because this platform enabled them to earn money for 11 years for free.It 's not a requirement , as someone above said.. it does n't state in GPL licence that you need to contribute , but look at it this way .
In law , there 's isnt a statement that you need to say " thanks " if someone do something nice to you , but you do anyway .
Because it 's nice thing to do , and it 's ( according to my moral/ethical/whatever values ) right thing to do.And based on that value system of mine , i build an opinion about people who just take , and do n't show any gratitude.Greed .
[ possible flame part of the post ] Google can at least make a freakin ' linux client for their apps .
But you know what ?
If there was a lot of money in that course of action , they would .
Because google , as everyone else is doing all they do because of money .
It ai n't because they love Open Source , Linux or you .
That 's how those PR , Marketing , CEOs and other thinks .
It 's their money in your pocket , and they will provide you with enough to keep you satisfied .
Since Linux userbase is small... they do n't give a shit about your satisfaction .
[ /possible flame part of the post ] Yeah they give back , with Goo and python and whatever , but the ratio of giving : taking is disgraceful for a company such as google.The difference between MS business model and Googles business model is only different by the ability of google to mask theirs motivation .
MS tells openly.. we care only about money and thats it .
Google says , we care about open source , and you.. and you all think that 's true , because they said so.And you 'll probably mutilate this post , and turn all of this text against me , and I do n't care what you do .
You can protect google as long as you like , I see them as another business who is interested only in money and expanding their empire .
Like Carlin said .
The power is only interested in expanding its power .
( And for you pathetic people who 'll look at they way I speak english , and try to bash me personally , I 'm not english and it aint my native language , so spare me of your insightful comments about how dumb I am , I read it once before already .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To all who says 'well it's an open protocol':So, why did they keep windows/macosx client then ?
Dropping (already existing) linux client, implies something specific.
Implies 'priorities'.
Obviously, there's no room for Linux desktop users.Google contributes to OS, but not as much as would be nice to do, especially because the amount of staff and money they have, and their whole business is based on OS and Linux.
How much they have, million servers ?
I presume all on Open Source (Linux).
How many of their apps run on Linux ?
One (afaik).. Google Earth.How much would they pay to run Windows on that amount of servers ?
Or Solaris.. or whatever ?They can't spare $200(even a million would be a small amount)K a year to support a platform that enabled them to earn as much as they do ?It's not just "well the userbase of linux is to small" it's about giving support to Linux... and even if the userbase is small... so what ?
If Mozilla, iTunes, Opera, nvidia, ati, can make apps for linux, why can't google then ?
Especially because this platform enabled them to earn money for 11 years for free.It's not a requirement, as someone above said.. it doesn't state in GPL licence that you need to contribute, but look at it this way.
In law, there's isnt a statement that you need to say "thanks" if someone do something nice to you, but you do anyway.
Because it's nice thing to do, and it's (according to my moral/ethical/whatever values) right thing to do.And based on that value system of mine, i build an opinion about people who just take, and don't show any gratitude.Greed.
[possible flame part of the post]Google can at least make a freakin' linux client for their apps.
But you know what ?
If there was a lot of money in that course of action, they would.
Because google, as everyone else is doing all they do because of money.
It ain't because they love Open Source, Linux or you.
That's how those PR, Marketing, CEOs and other thinks.
It's their money in your pocket, and they will provide you with enough to keep you satisfied.
Since Linux userbase is small... they don't give a shit about your satisfaction.
[/possible flame part of the post]Yeah they give back, with Goo and python and whatever, but the ratio of giving:taking is disgraceful for a company such as google.The difference between MS business model and Googles business model is only different by the ability of google to mask theirs motivation.
MS tells openly.. we care only about money and thats it.
Google says, we care about open source, and you.. and you all think that's true, because they said so.And you'll probably mutilate this post, and turn all of this text against me, and I don't care what you do.
You can protect google as long as you like, I see them as another business who is interested only in money and expanding their empire.
Like Carlin said.
The power is only interested in expanding its power.
(And for you pathetic people who'll look at they way I speak english, and try to bash me personally, I'm not english and it aint my native language, so spare me of your insightful comments about how dumb I am, I read it once before already.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30263560</id>
	<title>Put DOWN the pitchfork</title>
	<author>tyler\_larson</author>
	<datestamp>1259486880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Gizmo uses SIP, and there's no shortage of SIP clients for Linux that are better maintained and more consistently compatible with Linux's ever-changing audio interface.

Don't be silenced, but don't riot either.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Gizmo uses SIP , and there 's no shortage of SIP clients for Linux that are better maintained and more consistently compatible with Linux 's ever-changing audio interface .
Do n't be silenced , but do n't riot either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gizmo uses SIP, and there's no shortage of SIP clients for Linux that are better maintained and more consistently compatible with Linux's ever-changing audio interface.
Don't be silenced, but don't riot either.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260804</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260908</id>
	<title>Christmas sale, free shipping discounts</title>
	<author>coolforsale133</author>
	<datestamp>1259505240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.coolforsale.com/" title="coolforsale.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.coolforsale.com/</a> [coolforsale.com] Dear ladies and gentlemen Hello, In order to meet Christmas, Site launched Christmas spree, welcome new and old customers come to participate in the there are unexpected surprises, look forward to your arrival. Only this site have this treatmentOur goal is "Best quality, Best reputation , Best services". Your satisfaction is our main pursue. You can find the best products from us, meeting your different needs. Ladies and Gentlemen weicome to my coolforsale.com.Here,there are the most fashion products . Pass by but don't miss it.Select your favorite clothing! Welcome to come next time ! Thank you! <a href="http://www.coolforsale.com/productlist.asp?id=s76" title="coolforsale.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.coolforsale.com/productlist.asp?id=s76</a> [coolforsale.com]   (Tracksuit w) ugg boot,POLO hoody,Jacket, Air jordan(1-24)shoes $33 Nike shox(R4,NZ,OZ,TL1,TL2,TL3) $35 Handbags(Coach lv fendi d&amp;g) $35 Tshirts (Polo<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,ed hardy,lacoste) $16 free shipping Thanks!!! Advance wish you a merry Christmas.</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.coolforsale.com/ [ coolforsale.com ] Dear ladies and gentlemen Hello , In order to meet Christmas , Site launched Christmas spree , welcome new and old customers come to participate in the there are unexpected surprises , look forward to your arrival .
Only this site have this treatmentOur goal is " Best quality , Best reputation , Best services " .
Your satisfaction is our main pursue .
You can find the best products from us , meeting your different needs .
Ladies and Gentlemen weicome to my coolforsale.com.Here,there are the most fashion products .
Pass by but do n't miss it.Select your favorite clothing !
Welcome to come next time !
Thank you !
http : //www.coolforsale.com/productlist.asp ? id = s76 [ coolforsale.com ] ( Tracksuit w ) ugg boot,POLO hoody,Jacket , Air jordan ( 1-24 ) shoes $ 33 Nike shox ( R4,NZ,OZ,TL1,TL2,TL3 ) $ 35 Handbags ( Coach lv fendi d&amp;g ) $ 35 Tshirts ( Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste ) $ 16 free shipping Thanks ! ! !
Advance wish you a merry Christmas .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.coolforsale.com/ [coolforsale.com] Dear ladies and gentlemen Hello, In order to meet Christmas, Site launched Christmas spree, welcome new and old customers come to participate in the there are unexpected surprises, look forward to your arrival.
Only this site have this treatmentOur goal is "Best quality, Best reputation , Best services".
Your satisfaction is our main pursue.
You can find the best products from us, meeting your different needs.
Ladies and Gentlemen weicome to my coolforsale.com.Here,there are the most fashion products .
Pass by but don't miss it.Select your favorite clothing!
Welcome to come next time !
Thank you!
http://www.coolforsale.com/productlist.asp?id=s76 [coolforsale.com]   (Tracksuit w) ugg boot,POLO hoody,Jacket, Air jordan(1-24)shoes $33 Nike shox(R4,NZ,OZ,TL1,TL2,TL3) $35 Handbags(Coach lv fendi d&amp;g) $35 Tshirts (Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste) $16 free shipping Thanks!!!
Advance wish you a merry Christmas.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30263600</id>
	<title>Re:Chrome OS?</title>
	<author>egosum</author>
	<datestamp>1259487600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dropped support for the Linux version of Picasa? What's this then:
<a href="http://picasa.google.com/linux/download.html" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">http://picasa.google.com/linux/download.html</a> [google.com] ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dropped support for the Linux version of Picasa ?
What 's this then : http : //picasa.google.com/linux/download.html [ google.com ] ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dropped support for the Linux version of Picasa?
What's this then:
http://picasa.google.com/linux/download.html [google.com] ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261394</id>
	<title>Re:Chrome OS?</title>
	<author>chabotc</author>
	<datestamp>1259510340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The whole goal of ChromeOS is to have *no native apps*, it's all web baby, so a conspiracy theories about native ChromeOS Gizmo5 app might have to be re-thought.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The whole goal of ChromeOS is to have * no native apps * , it 's all web baby , so a conspiracy theories about native ChromeOS Gizmo5 app might have to be re-thought .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The whole goal of ChromeOS is to have *no native apps*, it's all web baby, so a conspiracy theories about native ChromeOS Gizmo5 app might have to be re-thought.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260818</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30263772</id>
	<title>Linux Clients</title>
	<author>omb</author>
	<datestamp>1259489580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are lots of them, this is not a Google issue, they don't need to provide, but you can google for a SIP clients and pick one of six/seven. So this is all nonsense and FUD.<br><br>To make it clearer, there is NO lock in, you pick your Client, then use any SIP server of your choice.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are lots of them , this is not a Google issue , they do n't need to provide , but you can google for a SIP clients and pick one of six/seven .
So this is all nonsense and FUD.To make it clearer , there is NO lock in , you pick your Client , then use any SIP server of your choice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are lots of them, this is not a Google issue, they don't need to provide, but you can google for a SIP clients and pick one of six/seven.
So this is all nonsense and FUD.To make it clearer, there is NO lock in, you pick your Client, then use any SIP server of your choice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260818</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30262050</id>
	<title>Re:Linux is a support nightmare</title>
	<author>RAMMS+EIN</author>
	<datestamp>1259516460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree with the general message of your post. Supporting "Linux" with non-open source software is a lot of work.</p><p>The reason is that there really isn't such a thing as the Linux operating system. Or rather, there are hundreds if not thousands of different operating systems based on Linux. Ubuntu and OpenWRT are different operating systems just like OpenBSD and QNX are different operating systems.</p><p>In that light, I think it makes perfect sense for an organization to support, say, Fedora Core, but no other Linux distros. After all, every Linux distro they add means extra work and extra expertise and extra support capacity are required. The source code may compile without any issues on numerous other distros, but compiling the source is only part of the work. You need to test the program, integrate it with the distro, package it in the appropriate package format, have people who can help users of the distro along, etc. etc. So even though you can make a binary blob that will run on any distro of the right machine architecture that has the right libraries installed (and several companies do this), that doesn't really equate supporting all those distros.</p><p>If your software is open-source, the software can be packaged by the distro, or packages can be contributed by volunteers. If the software is not open-source, the burden on packagers is much greater, and the chances of anyone packaging it for a specific distro are correspondingly slimmer. So what you see in practice is that popular open-source software is available for practically all Unix-like systems, or at least GNU systems, but that closed-source software works only on specific hardware architectures and specific Linux distros, and not on other Linux distros, let alone the BSDs or proprietary Unices.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree with the general message of your post .
Supporting " Linux " with non-open source software is a lot of work.The reason is that there really is n't such a thing as the Linux operating system .
Or rather , there are hundreds if not thousands of different operating systems based on Linux .
Ubuntu and OpenWRT are different operating systems just like OpenBSD and QNX are different operating systems.In that light , I think it makes perfect sense for an organization to support , say , Fedora Core , but no other Linux distros .
After all , every Linux distro they add means extra work and extra expertise and extra support capacity are required .
The source code may compile without any issues on numerous other distros , but compiling the source is only part of the work .
You need to test the program , integrate it with the distro , package it in the appropriate package format , have people who can help users of the distro along , etc .
etc. So even though you can make a binary blob that will run on any distro of the right machine architecture that has the right libraries installed ( and several companies do this ) , that does n't really equate supporting all those distros.If your software is open-source , the software can be packaged by the distro , or packages can be contributed by volunteers .
If the software is not open-source , the burden on packagers is much greater , and the chances of anyone packaging it for a specific distro are correspondingly slimmer .
So what you see in practice is that popular open-source software is available for practically all Unix-like systems , or at least GNU systems , but that closed-source software works only on specific hardware architectures and specific Linux distros , and not on other Linux distros , let alone the BSDs or proprietary Unices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree with the general message of your post.
Supporting "Linux" with non-open source software is a lot of work.The reason is that there really isn't such a thing as the Linux operating system.
Or rather, there are hundreds if not thousands of different operating systems based on Linux.
Ubuntu and OpenWRT are different operating systems just like OpenBSD and QNX are different operating systems.In that light, I think it makes perfect sense for an organization to support, say, Fedora Core, but no other Linux distros.
After all, every Linux distro they add means extra work and extra expertise and extra support capacity are required.
The source code may compile without any issues on numerous other distros, but compiling the source is only part of the work.
You need to test the program, integrate it with the distro, package it in the appropriate package format, have people who can help users of the distro along, etc.
etc. So even though you can make a binary blob that will run on any distro of the right machine architecture that has the right libraries installed (and several companies do this), that doesn't really equate supporting all those distros.If your software is open-source, the software can be packaged by the distro, or packages can be contributed by volunteers.
If the software is not open-source, the burden on packagers is much greater, and the chances of anyone packaging it for a specific distro are correspondingly slimmer.
So what you see in practice is that popular open-source software is available for practically all Unix-like systems, or at least GNU systems, but that closed-source software works only on specific hardware architectures and specific Linux distros, and not on other Linux distros, let alone the BSDs or proprietary Unices.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30263530</id>
	<title>Re:Protest this.</title>
	<author>The Original Yama</author>
	<datestamp>1259486520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was going to call people about it, but I couldn't find the Gizmo client for Linux.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was going to call people about it , but I could n't find the Gizmo client for Linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was going to call people about it, but I couldn't find the Gizmo client for Linux.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260804</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260882</id>
	<title>Any SIP Client works</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259504940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use Asterisk, but you can still use any SIP client with Gizmo's service.  They even have a webapp client: https://www.gizmocall.com</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use Asterisk , but you can still use any SIP client with Gizmo 's service .
They even have a webapp client : https : //www.gizmocall.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use Asterisk, but you can still use any SIP client with Gizmo's service.
They even have a webapp client: https://www.gizmocall.com</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260994</id>
	<title>Are you sure?</title>
	<author>akcpe</author>
	<datestamp>1259506200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Um, i checked the gizmo5 site this morning and the Linux client is still on the download page with the OS X and Windows versions.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Um , i checked the gizmo5 site this morning and the Linux client is still on the download page with the OS X and Windows versions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um, i checked the gizmo5 site this morning and the Linux client is still on the download page with the OS X and Windows versions.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261350</id>
	<title>You want ReactOS</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1259509800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If we could combine the transparency of Linux system and its expert friendliness, with the user friendly GUI characteristics of Windows and Windows backwards driver and app backwards compatability, it would be a winning combination.</p></div><p>Windows drivers rely on services provided by the NT kernel. So the only way to ensure compatibility with Windows drivers is to reimplement the NT kernel. <a href="http://www.reactos.org/en/index.html" title="reactos.org">ReactOS</a> [reactos.org] attempts to clone Windows NT 5.x thoroughly, but it's nowhere near ready for prime time. So let me sum up your rant: "I'm disappointed that development has concentrated on Linux rather than ReactOS."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If we could combine the transparency of Linux system and its expert friendliness , with the user friendly GUI characteristics of Windows and Windows backwards driver and app backwards compatability , it would be a winning combination.Windows drivers rely on services provided by the NT kernel .
So the only way to ensure compatibility with Windows drivers is to reimplement the NT kernel .
ReactOS [ reactos.org ] attempts to clone Windows NT 5.x thoroughly , but it 's nowhere near ready for prime time .
So let me sum up your rant : " I 'm disappointed that development has concentrated on Linux rather than ReactOS .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If we could combine the transparency of Linux system and its expert friendliness, with the user friendly GUI characteristics of Windows and Windows backwards driver and app backwards compatability, it would be a winning combination.Windows drivers rely on services provided by the NT kernel.
So the only way to ensure compatibility with Windows drivers is to reimplement the NT kernel.
ReactOS [reactos.org] attempts to clone Windows NT 5.x thoroughly, but it's nowhere near ready for prime time.
So let me sum up your rant: "I'm disappointed that development has concentrated on Linux rather than ReactOS.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261182</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260804</id>
	<title>Protest this.</title>
	<author>Zombie Ryushu</author>
	<datestamp>1259503980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do not allow Linux users to be silenced</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do not allow Linux users to be silenced</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do not allow Linux users to be silenced</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30262490</id>
	<title>Google Earth</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259519820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is not the only application.  Look at Google Earth.  It has not been updated for Linux for ages, is probably dead too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is not the only application .
Look at Google Earth .
It has not been updated for Linux for ages , is probably dead too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is not the only application.
Look at Google Earth.
It has not been updated for Linux for ages, is probably dead too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260818</id>
	<title>Chrome OS?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259504160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Since Google is busy on its own linux-based Chrome OS, I would be surprised if they weren't planning  on providing a linux client anytime soon. My guess would be that they're making a linux client to ship with ChromeOS that is kickass, compared to the Gizmo5 builds of windows/mac.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Since Google is busy on its own linux-based Chrome OS , I would be surprised if they were n't planning on providing a linux client anytime soon .
My guess would be that they 're making a linux client to ship with ChromeOS that is kickass , compared to the Gizmo5 builds of windows/mac .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since Google is busy on its own linux-based Chrome OS, I would be surprised if they weren't planning  on providing a linux client anytime soon.
My guess would be that they're making a linux client to ship with ChromeOS that is kickass, compared to the Gizmo5 builds of windows/mac.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261234</id>
	<title>Re:Chrome OS?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259508900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except for Chrome OS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except for Chrome OS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except for Chrome OS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261168</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261160</id>
	<title>Download Still avalible..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259508060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>... but you have to go direct to the download site:<br>http://download.gizmo5.com/jasmine/</tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>... but you have to go direct to the download site : http : //download.gizmo5.com/jasmine/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... but you have to go direct to the download site:http://download.gizmo5.com/jasmine/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30262014</id>
	<title>iPhone?</title>
	<author>alex\_guy\_CA</author>
	<datestamp>1259516160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The summary says there is still and iPhone version. As far as I know, there is not. If you want to make Gizmo5 work with iPhone, you have to use fring (there may be other apps that work too, but fring does work)

If there is an iPhone Gizom5 app I don't know about, please let me know, I'd love to have it.

Google has disabled new Gizom5 signups, and Google Voice is invite only, but if you already have both, you can make Google Voice ring to your Gizmo5 for free. I can make free incoming and outgoing calls to my Mac with my G5 and GV combo.

Alex</htmltext>
<tokenext>The summary says there is still and iPhone version .
As far as I know , there is not .
If you want to make Gizmo5 work with iPhone , you have to use fring ( there may be other apps that work too , but fring does work ) If there is an iPhone Gizom5 app I do n't know about , please let me know , I 'd love to have it .
Google has disabled new Gizom5 signups , and Google Voice is invite only , but if you already have both , you can make Google Voice ring to your Gizmo5 for free .
I can make free incoming and outgoing calls to my Mac with my G5 and GV combo .
Alex</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The summary says there is still and iPhone version.
As far as I know, there is not.
If you want to make Gizmo5 work with iPhone, you have to use fring (there may be other apps that work too, but fring does work)

If there is an iPhone Gizom5 app I don't know about, please let me know, I'd love to have it.
Google has disabled new Gizom5 signups, and Google Voice is invite only, but if you already have both, you can make Google Voice ring to your Gizmo5 for free.
I can make free incoming and outgoing calls to my Mac with my G5 and GV combo.
Alex</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30266412</id>
	<title>Re:You want ReactOS</title>
	<author>Eravnrekaree</author>
	<datestamp>1259514720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, no, no. You could implement a wrapper on Linux that would allow you to run Windows drivers on Linux. This would give you both compatability with Linux and with Windows stuff. I actually like the Unix system, however, this would also allow for a lot of Windows drivers to be used on Unix as well. I dont really like the ReactOS concept, its better to implement a compatability layer on Linux.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , no , no .
You could implement a wrapper on Linux that would allow you to run Windows drivers on Linux .
This would give you both compatability with Linux and with Windows stuff .
I actually like the Unix system , however , this would also allow for a lot of Windows drivers to be used on Unix as well .
I dont really like the ReactOS concept , its better to implement a compatability layer on Linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, no, no.
You could implement a wrapper on Linux that would allow you to run Windows drivers on Linux.
This would give you both compatability with Linux and with Windows stuff.
I actually like the Unix system, however, this would also allow for a lot of Windows drivers to be used on Unix as well.
I dont really like the ReactOS concept, its better to implement a compatability layer on Linux.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30264048</id>
	<title>Re:Time to learn a lesson about Linux support</title>
	<author>rubycodez</author>
	<datestamp>1259492280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>right on, gizmo5 works fine with *every* soft phone client package I've tried  under Ubuntu, Debian and Centos and also works great with Asterisk.  It should be windows and Mac users complaining their OS doesn't support it out of the box!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>right on , gizmo5 works fine with * every * soft phone client package I 've tried under Ubuntu , Debian and Centos and also works great with Asterisk .
It should be windows and Mac users complaining their OS does n't support it out of the box !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>right on, gizmo5 works fine with *every* soft phone client package I've tried  under Ubuntu, Debian and Centos and also works great with Asterisk.
It should be windows and Mac users complaining their OS doesn't support it out of the box!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30263072</id>
	<title>Re:ok now more seriously--</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259525160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Viatalk (http://www.viatalk.com/) supports SIP and has US based pretty good tech support.  I've been using them for years with good success.</p><p>I have no association with viatalk except as a customer.  But they seem far less evil and intent on vendor lock-in than many other VOIP services.</p><p>Captcha: "Captive"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Viatalk ( http : //www.viatalk.com/ ) supports SIP and has US based pretty good tech support .
I 've been using them for years with good success.I have no association with viatalk except as a customer .
But they seem far less evil and intent on vendor lock-in than many other VOIP services.Captcha : " Captive " : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Viatalk (http://www.viatalk.com/) supports SIP and has US based pretty good tech support.
I've been using them for years with good success.I have no association with viatalk except as a customer.
But they seem far less evil and intent on vendor lock-in than many other VOIP services.Captcha: "Captive" :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261964</id>
	<title>Cool; what about the rest of their apps?</title>
	<author>WindBourne</author>
	<datestamp>1259515800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sketch?<br>
Gtalk client?<br>
etc, etc, etc</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sketch ?
Gtalk client ?
etc , etc , etc</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sketch?
Gtalk client?
etc, etc, etc</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260818</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261224</id>
	<title>Re:Chrome OS?</title>
	<author>Nerdfest</author>
	<datestamp>1259508720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Perhaps, but they recently dropped support for the Linux version of Picasa as well. The Linux version was actually just a Wine install anyway, but the nicely wrapped installer was convenient. I'm disappointed that tay have so much infrastructure running on it and have been letting the (desktop, admittedly) community down a bit lately. I hope Chrome changes this, but it really sounds like it's not going to.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps , but they recently dropped support for the Linux version of Picasa as well .
The Linux version was actually just a Wine install anyway , but the nicely wrapped installer was convenient .
I 'm disappointed that tay have so much infrastructure running on it and have been letting the ( desktop , admittedly ) community down a bit lately .
I hope Chrome changes this , but it really sounds like it 's not going to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps, but they recently dropped support for the Linux version of Picasa as well.
The Linux version was actually just a Wine install anyway, but the nicely wrapped installer was convenient.
I'm disappointed that tay have so much infrastructure running on it and have been letting the (desktop, admittedly) community down a bit lately.
I hope Chrome changes this, but it really sounds like it's not going to.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260818</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260880</id>
	<title>Mindless panic as usual</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259504880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Gizmo, entirely unlike Skype, is based on standard SIP interfaces.  You don't need their proprietary client to use the service.</p><p>Just pick your favorite SIP client, preferably with a lot of codecs and STUN support, and get on with your day.</p><p>Panic over!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Gizmo , entirely unlike Skype , is based on standard SIP interfaces .
You do n't need their proprietary client to use the service.Just pick your favorite SIP client , preferably with a lot of codecs and STUN support , and get on with your day.Panic over !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gizmo, entirely unlike Skype, is based on standard SIP interfaces.
You don't need their proprietary client to use the service.Just pick your favorite SIP client, preferably with a lot of codecs and STUN support, and get on with your day.Panic over!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261930</id>
	<title>Re:Linux is a support nightmare</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259515620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can't be worse than Side-by-Side configuration. It's a matter of competence among your developers. For example, google might use cmake to resolve Platform dependencies and packaging.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ca n't be worse than Side-by-Side configuration .
It 's a matter of competence among your developers .
For example , google might use cmake to resolve Platform dependencies and packaging .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can't be worse than Side-by-Side configuration.
It's a matter of competence among your developers.
For example, google might use cmake to resolve Platform dependencies and packaging.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261312</id>
	<title>Re:Chrome OS?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259509440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But see, that is the thing, Google is a pretty big company, all who have their own views on computing in general.<br>I wouldn't be surprised if there are quite a few who don't care for Linux, and some who outright hate it.</p><p>The Chrome OS project is quite small.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But see , that is the thing , Google is a pretty big company , all who have their own views on computing in general.I would n't be surprised if there are quite a few who do n't care for Linux , and some who outright hate it.The Chrome OS project is quite small .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But see, that is the thing, Google is a pretty big company, all who have their own views on computing in general.I wouldn't be surprised if there are quite a few who don't care for Linux, and some who outright hate it.The Chrome OS project is quite small.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260818</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30262750</id>
	<title>Re:Chrome OS?</title>
	<author>Haymaker</author>
	<datestamp>1259522400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I would be surprised if they weren't planning  on providing a linux client anytime soon.</p></div><p>You mean in-browser client.  Only software ChromeOS runs is the browser, everything else is on a webpage.

However, I do agree that Google should be coming out with some linux client- they have native linux versions of Google Earth, Google Desktop, and Picasa, which work very well.

Not to mention Google uses <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goobuntu" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">their own mix of Ubuntu</a> [wikipedia.org], so we'll see.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would be surprised if they were n't planning on providing a linux client anytime soon.You mean in-browser client .
Only software ChromeOS runs is the browser , everything else is on a webpage .
However , I do agree that Google should be coming out with some linux client- they have native linux versions of Google Earth , Google Desktop , and Picasa , which work very well .
Not to mention Google uses their own mix of Ubuntu [ wikipedia.org ] , so we 'll see .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would be surprised if they weren't planning  on providing a linux client anytime soon.You mean in-browser client.
Only software ChromeOS runs is the browser, everything else is on a webpage.
However, I do agree that Google should be coming out with some linux client- they have native linux versions of Google Earth, Google Desktop, and Picasa, which work very well.
Not to mention Google uses their own mix of Ubuntu [wikipedia.org], so we'll see.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260818</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261650</id>
	<title>Re:Chrome OS?</title>
	<author>chabotc</author>
	<datestamp>1259512920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or perhaps Google is just more Web focused?</p><p>Oh and as many other people pointed out, you can use any standard SIP client with Gizmo5, so there are valid alternatives out there</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or perhaps Google is just more Web focused ? Oh and as many other people pointed out , you can use any standard SIP client with Gizmo5 , so there are valid alternatives out there</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or perhaps Google is just more Web focused?Oh and as many other people pointed out, you can use any standard SIP client with Gizmo5, so there are valid alternatives out there</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261182</id>
	<title>Linux's own fault</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259508240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Probably one of the reasons they dont support Linux and why no one else does is the headache of supporting its 10,000 distributions which can't agree on anything about how the system should be set up. Let's face it, making a software installer for Linux is a nightmare. This, and the lack of a stable driver interface, is why Linux remains a niche OS for a few elites who seem impressed that they are able to cope with using such a confounding and difficult operating system. Such is the mentality of Linux people, their userunfriendly behaviour, that instead of accomodating users needs, i have often heard Linux developers say that users should have to learn how to compile software, debug makefiles and C code and the million ways that software may not compile, resolve library dependancies, find out why a driver wont compile against one of 2000 different conventions on the location of Linux kernel headers, to name a few Linux useability nightmares. On Windows, you put the disk in, click install, and your hardware and software just works. No messy days trying to figure out why a kernel module wont compile or some arcane problem admist millions of lines of code. I have always said that being welcoming and making it easier for companies to make program and binary drivers that run on every Linux operating system version is key to its success, especially since it is months or years until open source drivers can appear for hardware, and also that open source drivers are often filled with bugs while the manufacturers driver is subjected to extensive quality control testing with the actual hardware. The really absurd thing is that while kernel developers continue to make it hard for companies to make a driver for Linux, allowing binary drivers would actually lead to faster creation of open source software, it would allow the vendors driver to be used in back engineering by monitoring communications with hardware devices.</p><p>In another screwup, Linux developers in order to address the risk of null pointer dereference in the kernel, blocked all applications from using address 0. In the process they blew up hundreds of applications that run on Wine, when they could have just cleared address 0 when the system goes into kernel mode and preserved compatability. Incompetence, and lack of imagination to not have come up with such a simple solution.</p><p>
 Linux is worth it is your time is worth nothing, but if you are doing real work you need something that does not take 10 times as long to get anything done. Most Linux developers, in my dealings with this, seem to have an elite complex and want to keep Linux hard to use, so that they can feel special in using an operating system which is only useable to 3\% of computer users, it makes them feel special and superior that they can figure out such a nightmare of an OS.</p><p>As I have always said, the key to software useability is in backwards compatability, layout, and flexibility and feature richness of software. In another messup Linux developers have been making software that is so rigid and inflexible it is unuseable. One example is gnome which is a nightmare to customise. There are hundreds of cases where Linux software has been unuseable to me because some important feature was removed. Making software feature bare and inflexible does not make it useable. The key to useability is many features and lots of customisability but in layout, placing lesser used features deeper into the UI and laying out the user interface so the features can be found easily. Secondly, a system can be user and expert friendly at the same time. Software can be built in layers, with a friendly GUI interface for most users, and experts would be able to access the configuration files, source code, command line and so on at the lower layers. Everything should be able to be done by both CLI and GUI. One of the things I like about Linux is its commmand line interface and that it is possible for one to understand how the entire system works and is put together, and a modular approach is also important. There</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Probably one of the reasons they dont support Linux and why no one else does is the headache of supporting its 10,000 distributions which ca n't agree on anything about how the system should be set up .
Let 's face it , making a software installer for Linux is a nightmare .
This , and the lack of a stable driver interface , is why Linux remains a niche OS for a few elites who seem impressed that they are able to cope with using such a confounding and difficult operating system .
Such is the mentality of Linux people , their userunfriendly behaviour , that instead of accomodating users needs , i have often heard Linux developers say that users should have to learn how to compile software , debug makefiles and C code and the million ways that software may not compile , resolve library dependancies , find out why a driver wont compile against one of 2000 different conventions on the location of Linux kernel headers , to name a few Linux useability nightmares .
On Windows , you put the disk in , click install , and your hardware and software just works .
No messy days trying to figure out why a kernel module wont compile or some arcane problem admist millions of lines of code .
I have always said that being welcoming and making it easier for companies to make program and binary drivers that run on every Linux operating system version is key to its success , especially since it is months or years until open source drivers can appear for hardware , and also that open source drivers are often filled with bugs while the manufacturers driver is subjected to extensive quality control testing with the actual hardware .
The really absurd thing is that while kernel developers continue to make it hard for companies to make a driver for Linux , allowing binary drivers would actually lead to faster creation of open source software , it would allow the vendors driver to be used in back engineering by monitoring communications with hardware devices.In another screwup , Linux developers in order to address the risk of null pointer dereference in the kernel , blocked all applications from using address 0 .
In the process they blew up hundreds of applications that run on Wine , when they could have just cleared address 0 when the system goes into kernel mode and preserved compatability .
Incompetence , and lack of imagination to not have come up with such a simple solution .
Linux is worth it is your time is worth nothing , but if you are doing real work you need something that does not take 10 times as long to get anything done .
Most Linux developers , in my dealings with this , seem to have an elite complex and want to keep Linux hard to use , so that they can feel special in using an operating system which is only useable to 3 \ % of computer users , it makes them feel special and superior that they can figure out such a nightmare of an OS.As I have always said , the key to software useability is in backwards compatability , layout , and flexibility and feature richness of software .
In another messup Linux developers have been making software that is so rigid and inflexible it is unuseable .
One example is gnome which is a nightmare to customise .
There are hundreds of cases where Linux software has been unuseable to me because some important feature was removed .
Making software feature bare and inflexible does not make it useable .
The key to useability is many features and lots of customisability but in layout , placing lesser used features deeper into the UI and laying out the user interface so the features can be found easily .
Secondly , a system can be user and expert friendly at the same time .
Software can be built in layers , with a friendly GUI interface for most users , and experts would be able to access the configuration files , source code , command line and so on at the lower layers .
Everything should be able to be done by both CLI and GUI .
One of the things I like about Linux is its commmand line interface and that it is possible for one to understand how the entire system works and is put together , and a modular approach is also important .
There</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Probably one of the reasons they dont support Linux and why no one else does is the headache of supporting its 10,000 distributions which can't agree on anything about how the system should be set up.
Let's face it, making a software installer for Linux is a nightmare.
This, and the lack of a stable driver interface, is why Linux remains a niche OS for a few elites who seem impressed that they are able to cope with using such a confounding and difficult operating system.
Such is the mentality of Linux people, their userunfriendly behaviour, that instead of accomodating users needs, i have often heard Linux developers say that users should have to learn how to compile software, debug makefiles and C code and the million ways that software may not compile, resolve library dependancies, find out why a driver wont compile against one of 2000 different conventions on the location of Linux kernel headers, to name a few Linux useability nightmares.
On Windows, you put the disk in, click install, and your hardware and software just works.
No messy days trying to figure out why a kernel module wont compile or some arcane problem admist millions of lines of code.
I have always said that being welcoming and making it easier for companies to make program and binary drivers that run on every Linux operating system version is key to its success, especially since it is months or years until open source drivers can appear for hardware, and also that open source drivers are often filled with bugs while the manufacturers driver is subjected to extensive quality control testing with the actual hardware.
The really absurd thing is that while kernel developers continue to make it hard for companies to make a driver for Linux, allowing binary drivers would actually lead to faster creation of open source software, it would allow the vendors driver to be used in back engineering by monitoring communications with hardware devices.In another screwup, Linux developers in order to address the risk of null pointer dereference in the kernel, blocked all applications from using address 0.
In the process they blew up hundreds of applications that run on Wine, when they could have just cleared address 0 when the system goes into kernel mode and preserved compatability.
Incompetence, and lack of imagination to not have come up with such a simple solution.
Linux is worth it is your time is worth nothing, but if you are doing real work you need something that does not take 10 times as long to get anything done.
Most Linux developers, in my dealings with this, seem to have an elite complex and want to keep Linux hard to use, so that they can feel special in using an operating system which is only useable to 3\% of computer users, it makes them feel special and superior that they can figure out such a nightmare of an OS.As I have always said, the key to software useability is in backwards compatability, layout, and flexibility and feature richness of software.
In another messup Linux developers have been making software that is so rigid and inflexible it is unuseable.
One example is gnome which is a nightmare to customise.
There are hundreds of cases where Linux software has been unuseable to me because some important feature was removed.
Making software feature bare and inflexible does not make it useable.
The key to useability is many features and lots of customisability but in layout, placing lesser used features deeper into the UI and laying out the user interface so the features can be found easily.
Secondly, a system can be user and expert friendly at the same time.
Software can be built in layers, with a friendly GUI interface for most users, and experts would be able to access the configuration files, source code, command line and so on at the lower layers.
Everything should be able to be done by both CLI and GUI.
One of the things I like about Linux is its commmand line interface and that it is possible for one to understand how the entire system works and is put together, and a modular approach is also important.
There</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30262134</id>
	<title>Re:Linux is a support nightmare</title>
	<author>Pecisk</author>
	<datestamp>1259517180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"I don't care whether your software is open source or not, Linux is a support nightmare. It's the dozens of distributions. What works on Red Hat won't necessarily work on Debian, Ubuntu, Gentoo, Arch, OpenSuSE, Mandriva, etc. In each case, due to minor differences in libraries, where libraries are stored, customizations of KDE and GNOME, other window managers, different xlib versions, and countless other things, apps often have to be PORTED from one Linux distro to another. And you certainly can't make a binary distribution (even if just for convenience), because those are even more brittle."</p><p>You seemingly don't care or have actual knowledge what LSB means or how distributions are supported in real world. First of all, there are Redhat/Fedora and Ubuntu/Debian group. This fully covers about 80\% of casual Linux users. Debian packages, carefully put together, are usable and easy to support on Debian, Ubuntu, Arch, Mint, etc. etc. etc. RedHat/Fedora - the same. Just be careful with depencies and whola - you have 80\% of the market covered, and propably 99\% of users covered who cares about your product anyway. Problem solved.</p><p>About LSB - it about package naming, where you get info from system, etc. And it actually works in systems which care to implement LSB. That is Debian and friends.</p><p>But of course it is much easier to spread this myth that parse actual situation. Typical Slashdotism at best.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I do n't care whether your software is open source or not , Linux is a support nightmare .
It 's the dozens of distributions .
What works on Red Hat wo n't necessarily work on Debian , Ubuntu , Gentoo , Arch , OpenSuSE , Mandriva , etc .
In each case , due to minor differences in libraries , where libraries are stored , customizations of KDE and GNOME , other window managers , different xlib versions , and countless other things , apps often have to be PORTED from one Linux distro to another .
And you certainly ca n't make a binary distribution ( even if just for convenience ) , because those are even more brittle .
" You seemingly do n't care or have actual knowledge what LSB means or how distributions are supported in real world .
First of all , there are Redhat/Fedora and Ubuntu/Debian group .
This fully covers about 80 \ % of casual Linux users .
Debian packages , carefully put together , are usable and easy to support on Debian , Ubuntu , Arch , Mint , etc .
etc. etc .
RedHat/Fedora - the same .
Just be careful with depencies and whola - you have 80 \ % of the market covered , and propably 99 \ % of users covered who cares about your product anyway .
Problem solved.About LSB - it about package naming , where you get info from system , etc .
And it actually works in systems which care to implement LSB .
That is Debian and friends.But of course it is much easier to spread this myth that parse actual situation .
Typical Slashdotism at best .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I don't care whether your software is open source or not, Linux is a support nightmare.
It's the dozens of distributions.
What works on Red Hat won't necessarily work on Debian, Ubuntu, Gentoo, Arch, OpenSuSE, Mandriva, etc.
In each case, due to minor differences in libraries, where libraries are stored, customizations of KDE and GNOME, other window managers, different xlib versions, and countless other things, apps often have to be PORTED from one Linux distro to another.
And you certainly can't make a binary distribution (even if just for convenience), because those are even more brittle.
"You seemingly don't care or have actual knowledge what LSB means or how distributions are supported in real world.
First of all, there are Redhat/Fedora and Ubuntu/Debian group.
This fully covers about 80\% of casual Linux users.
Debian packages, carefully put together, are usable and easy to support on Debian, Ubuntu, Arch, Mint, etc.
etc. etc.
RedHat/Fedora - the same.
Just be careful with depencies and whola - you have 80\% of the market covered, and propably 99\% of users covered who cares about your product anyway.
Problem solved.About LSB - it about package naming, where you get info from system, etc.
And it actually works in systems which care to implement LSB.
That is Debian and friends.But of course it is much easier to spread this myth that parse actual situation.
Typical Slashdotism at best.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261640</id>
	<title>not impressed</title>
	<author>SMOKEING</author>
	<datestamp>1259512800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When leaders of a project decide to get incorporated as a firm and draw profit from their product, they become necessarily aware that they run the risk of being bought, all their body and soul. This happens because in their mindset, they consider a growth, a successful career, and all things commercial -- not related or stemming from the merits and fitness for life of the project itself. It's all logical from entrepreneurial point of view, isn't it, but there fun becomes a chore.</p><p>By a deliberate extension, I try to imagine Ekiga or Twinkle -- projects just as good in their capacity of VoIP clients -- getting `bought' and eliminated as projects, on some commercial grounds, and I can't imagine this happening.</p><p>Out of three (perhaps more) FOSS SIP clients disappeared, what a sensational news.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When leaders of a project decide to get incorporated as a firm and draw profit from their product , they become necessarily aware that they run the risk of being bought , all their body and soul .
This happens because in their mindset , they consider a growth , a successful career , and all things commercial -- not related or stemming from the merits and fitness for life of the project itself .
It 's all logical from entrepreneurial point of view , is n't it , but there fun becomes a chore.By a deliberate extension , I try to imagine Ekiga or Twinkle -- projects just as good in their capacity of VoIP clients -- getting ` bought ' and eliminated as projects , on some commercial grounds , and I ca n't imagine this happening.Out of three ( perhaps more ) FOSS SIP clients disappeared , what a sensational news .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When leaders of a project decide to get incorporated as a firm and draw profit from their product, they become necessarily aware that they run the risk of being bought, all their body and soul.
This happens because in their mindset, they consider a growth, a successful career, and all things commercial -- not related or stemming from the merits and fitness for life of the project itself.
It's all logical from entrepreneurial point of view, isn't it, but there fun becomes a chore.By a deliberate extension, I try to imagine Ekiga or Twinkle -- projects just as good in their capacity of VoIP clients -- getting `bought' and eliminated as projects, on some commercial grounds, and I can't imagine this happening.Out of three (perhaps more) FOSS SIP clients disappeared, what a sensational news.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30266732</id>
	<title>Re:Chrome OS?</title>
	<author>shentino</author>
	<datestamp>1259517360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually there is, it's just not officially sanctioned.</p><p>I use it myself and for an "unstable" product it's performed remarkably well.</p><p>They even added plugin support recently.  I got my youtube back.</p><p>Abandoning the windows market is suicide.  I'm actually proud of google for not leaving linux completely in the dust.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually there is , it 's just not officially sanctioned.I use it myself and for an " unstable " product it 's performed remarkably well.They even added plugin support recently .
I got my youtube back.Abandoning the windows market is suicide .
I 'm actually proud of google for not leaving linux completely in the dust .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually there is, it's just not officially sanctioned.I use it myself and for an "unstable" product it's performed remarkably well.They even added plugin support recently.
I got my youtube back.Abandoning the windows market is suicide.
I'm actually proud of google for not leaving linux completely in the dust.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261168</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30265632</id>
	<title>Gizmo is being re-evaluated and may go extinct</title>
	<author>velen</author>
	<datestamp>1259508480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the TFA.</p><p>---------</p><p>Google welcomes Gizmo5<br>Thursday, November 12, 2009 | 2:30 PM<br>Today we're pleased to announce we've acquired Gizmo5, a company that provides Internet-based calling software for mobile phones and computers. While we don't have any specific features to announce right now, Gizmo5's engineers will be joining the Google Voice team to continue improving the Google Voice and Gizmo5 experience. Current Gizmo5 users will still be able to use the service, though we will be suspending new signups for the time being, and existing users will no longer be able to sign up for a call-in number.</p><p>We've acquired a number of small companies over the past five years, and the people and technology that have come to Google from other places have contributed in many ways, large and small, to all kinds of Google products. Since the GrandCentral team joined Google in 2007, they've done incredible things with Google's technology and resources to launch and improve Google Voice.</p><p>We welcome the Gizmo5 team to Google and look forward to working together to bringing more useful features to Google Voice.</p><p>---------</p><p>The future of Gizmo is being evaluated.   It is not just the Linux client we have to worry about.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From the TFA.---------Google welcomes Gizmo5Thursday , November 12 , 2009 | 2 : 30 PMToday we 're pleased to announce we 've acquired Gizmo5 , a company that provides Internet-based calling software for mobile phones and computers .
While we do n't have any specific features to announce right now , Gizmo5 's engineers will be joining the Google Voice team to continue improving the Google Voice and Gizmo5 experience .
Current Gizmo5 users will still be able to use the service , though we will be suspending new signups for the time being , and existing users will no longer be able to sign up for a call-in number.We 've acquired a number of small companies over the past five years , and the people and technology that have come to Google from other places have contributed in many ways , large and small , to all kinds of Google products .
Since the GrandCentral team joined Google in 2007 , they 've done incredible things with Google 's technology and resources to launch and improve Google Voice.We welcome the Gizmo5 team to Google and look forward to working together to bringing more useful features to Google Voice.---------The future of Gizmo is being evaluated .
It is not just the Linux client we have to worry about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the TFA.---------Google welcomes Gizmo5Thursday, November 12, 2009 | 2:30 PMToday we're pleased to announce we've acquired Gizmo5, a company that provides Internet-based calling software for mobile phones and computers.
While we don't have any specific features to announce right now, Gizmo5's engineers will be joining the Google Voice team to continue improving the Google Voice and Gizmo5 experience.
Current Gizmo5 users will still be able to use the service, though we will be suspending new signups for the time being, and existing users will no longer be able to sign up for a call-in number.We've acquired a number of small companies over the past five years, and the people and technology that have come to Google from other places have contributed in many ways, large and small, to all kinds of Google products.
Since the GrandCentral team joined Google in 2007, they've done incredible things with Google's technology and resources to launch and improve Google Voice.We welcome the Gizmo5 team to Google and look forward to working together to bringing more useful features to Google Voice.---------The future of Gizmo is being evaluated.
It is not just the Linux client we have to worry about.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261408</id>
	<title>Re:Chrome OS?</title>
	<author>Brett Viren</author>
	<datestamp>1259510460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>So, then I guess this is a dead link:

<a href="http://picasa.google.com/linux/" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">http://picasa.google.com/linux/</a> [google.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , then I guess this is a dead link : http : //picasa.google.com/linux/ [ google.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, then I guess this is a dead link:

http://picasa.google.com/linux/ [google.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261222</id>
	<title>Re:Chrome OS?</title>
	<author>David Gerard</author>
	<datestamp>1259508720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That would be Chromium, which I'm posting this from.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That would be Chromium , which I 'm posting this from .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That would be Chromium, which I'm posting this from.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261168</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261276</id>
	<title>Re:Chrome OS?</title>
	<author>Macka</author>
	<datestamp>1259509140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First, there's no such this as Chrome (from Google) - there's Chromium the browser, which does exist for Linux and is kickass (I'm using it right now) and there's Chrome OS which - a) <b>is</b> linux, and b) can be downloaded in a VMware or VirtualBox image, so will run on any platform that supports those VMs.</p><p>Maybe you should use your brain before posting in future.  Oh, right, you don't have one...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First , there 's no such this as Chrome ( from Google ) - there 's Chromium the browser , which does exist for Linux and is kickass ( I 'm using it right now ) and there 's Chrome OS which - a ) is linux , and b ) can be downloaded in a VMware or VirtualBox image , so will run on any platform that supports those VMs.Maybe you should use your brain before posting in future .
Oh , right , you do n't have one.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First, there's no such this as Chrome (from Google) - there's Chromium the browser, which does exist for Linux and is kickass (I'm using it right now) and there's Chrome OS which - a) is linux, and b) can be downloaded in a VMware or VirtualBox image, so will run on any platform that supports those VMs.Maybe you should use your brain before posting in future.
Oh, right, you don't have one...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261168</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30268102</id>
	<title>Re:Google: Community Taker, Not So Much Giver</title>
	<author>jipn4</author>
	<datestamp>1259575800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>It's moving heavily into the telephone biz with a mobile Linux that's competing with the iPhone by capturing lots of Linux developers already cultivated into productive position by the community.</i></p><p>Good.  The iPhone is a proprietary platform that's tightly controlled by Apple and based on "community projects" that Apple has closed.   We need an open and open source alternative to that, and Google is providing it.  And neither the iPhone nor Android are taking away Linux developers: iPhone is programmed in Objective C and Cocoa and Android is programmed in Java; neither of those has any great significance on Linux.</p><p><i>Google's got the resources, both financial and personnel, to maintain Linux versions of SW Google produces</i></p><p>No, they haven't.  They have a very limited supply of talented people.  Those people either work on, say, porting SketchUp to Linux or on developing, say, a product that really competes with Microsoft.</p><p><i>It's evil to build your huge business on a technology made from community contributions, then take more than you give back while shutting down some community projects.</i></p><p>Absolutely.  And that's what Apple has been doing.  Google has not been doing that.</p><p>What Google has done is not created Linux ports of some of their proprietary software. BFD.  For most of that software, there are better alternatives.</p><p><i>It looks like the "Don't Be Evil" days are long gone at Google.</i></p><p>No they aren't.  But it looks like you're a fanboy with an ax to grind.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's moving heavily into the telephone biz with a mobile Linux that 's competing with the iPhone by capturing lots of Linux developers already cultivated into productive position by the community.Good .
The iPhone is a proprietary platform that 's tightly controlled by Apple and based on " community projects " that Apple has closed .
We need an open and open source alternative to that , and Google is providing it .
And neither the iPhone nor Android are taking away Linux developers : iPhone is programmed in Objective C and Cocoa and Android is programmed in Java ; neither of those has any great significance on Linux.Google 's got the resources , both financial and personnel , to maintain Linux versions of SW Google producesNo , they have n't .
They have a very limited supply of talented people .
Those people either work on , say , porting SketchUp to Linux or on developing , say , a product that really competes with Microsoft.It 's evil to build your huge business on a technology made from community contributions , then take more than you give back while shutting down some community projects.Absolutely .
And that 's what Apple has been doing .
Google has not been doing that.What Google has done is not created Linux ports of some of their proprietary software .
BFD. For most of that software , there are better alternatives.It looks like the " Do n't Be Evil " days are long gone at Google.No they are n't .
But it looks like you 're a fanboy with an ax to grind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's moving heavily into the telephone biz with a mobile Linux that's competing with the iPhone by capturing lots of Linux developers already cultivated into productive position by the community.Good.
The iPhone is a proprietary platform that's tightly controlled by Apple and based on "community projects" that Apple has closed.
We need an open and open source alternative to that, and Google is providing it.
And neither the iPhone nor Android are taking away Linux developers: iPhone is programmed in Objective C and Cocoa and Android is programmed in Java; neither of those has any great significance on Linux.Google's got the resources, both financial and personnel, to maintain Linux versions of SW Google producesNo, they haven't.
They have a very limited supply of talented people.
Those people either work on, say, porting SketchUp to Linux or on developing, say, a product that really competes with Microsoft.It's evil to build your huge business on a technology made from community contributions, then take more than you give back while shutting down some community projects.Absolutely.
And that's what Apple has been doing.
Google has not been doing that.What Google has done is not created Linux ports of some of their proprietary software.
BFD.  For most of that software, there are better alternatives.It looks like the "Don't Be Evil" days are long gone at Google.No they aren't.
But it looks like you're a fanboy with an ax to grind.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30262192</id>
	<title>Re:Google: Community Taker, Not So Much Giver</title>
	<author>PatrickThomson</author>
	<datestamp>1259517780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i> So are you saying that the real story here is that one Linux user decided to install it while the server was momentarily down, freaked out and wrote a panic-mode slashdot submission which was then published to the front page with zero fact checking? </i></p><p>then 2 comments later, your post, with the succinct quote:<br><i>It looks like the "Don't Be Evil" days are long gone at Google</i></p><p>This is why I don't pay much attention to slashdot any more, and user-generated content on internet more generally. almost every eloquent vitriolic diatribe, is ill-informed and flat-out wrong. I've been desensitised to arguments that don't have verifiable proof, and it's made me be a complete dick to my friends in real-life debates.</p><p>I mean, come on, for a START, Google couldn't be less "evil" without going out of business. There are whole tracts of the moral spectrum that are dubiously grey, that Google make a daily choice not to live in, but nobody is completely immune to technical failures/website bugs/human error. Your rant offends me, because it's a lot harder for the good guys to be good when everyone's going to talk smack about them anyway. It's people like you that make good things go away.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So are you saying that the real story here is that one Linux user decided to install it while the server was momentarily down , freaked out and wrote a panic-mode slashdot submission which was then published to the front page with zero fact checking ?
then 2 comments later , your post , with the succinct quote : It looks like the " Do n't Be Evil " days are long gone at GoogleThis is why I do n't pay much attention to slashdot any more , and user-generated content on internet more generally .
almost every eloquent vitriolic diatribe , is ill-informed and flat-out wrong .
I 've been desensitised to arguments that do n't have verifiable proof , and it 's made me be a complete dick to my friends in real-life debates.I mean , come on , for a START , Google could n't be less " evil " without going out of business .
There are whole tracts of the moral spectrum that are dubiously grey , that Google make a daily choice not to live in , but nobody is completely immune to technical failures/website bugs/human error .
Your rant offends me , because it 's a lot harder for the good guys to be good when everyone 's going to talk smack about them anyway .
It 's people like you that make good things go away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> So are you saying that the real story here is that one Linux user decided to install it while the server was momentarily down, freaked out and wrote a panic-mode slashdot submission which was then published to the front page with zero fact checking?
then 2 comments later, your post, with the succinct quote:It looks like the "Don't Be Evil" days are long gone at GoogleThis is why I don't pay much attention to slashdot any more, and user-generated content on internet more generally.
almost every eloquent vitriolic diatribe, is ill-informed and flat-out wrong.
I've been desensitised to arguments that don't have verifiable proof, and it's made me be a complete dick to my friends in real-life debates.I mean, come on, for a START, Google couldn't be less "evil" without going out of business.
There are whole tracts of the moral spectrum that are dubiously grey, that Google make a daily choice not to live in, but nobody is completely immune to technical failures/website bugs/human error.
Your rant offends me, because it's a lot harder for the good guys to be good when everyone's going to talk smack about them anyway.
It's people like you that make good things go away.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30265636</id>
	<title>geez give it up already.</title>
	<author>joelja</author>
	<datestamp>1259508540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Use a standalone sip client...</p><p>I use ekiga, android sip, a polycom ip550, clearone max-ip and x-10's client on windows. sip as a platform for telephony doesn't much matter unless there's some basic level or interoperability between the various platforms and clients.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Use a standalone sip client...I use ekiga , android sip , a polycom ip550 , clearone max-ip and x-10 's client on windows .
sip as a platform for telephony does n't much matter unless there 's some basic level or interoperability between the various platforms and clients .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Use a standalone sip client...I use ekiga, android sip, a polycom ip550, clearone max-ip and x-10's client on windows.
sip as a platform for telephony doesn't much matter unless there's some basic level or interoperability between the various platforms and clients.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261466</id>
	<title>Re:Chrome OS?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259510940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Google's Windows-centric attitude goes beyond their apparent antipathy towards Linux. Development of Mac versions of their software is also sluggish. Given that other software houses with incomparably smaller resources to allocate manage to produce creditable multi-platform versions of their software, one can only assume Google's tardiness in this regard is a matter of policy.<br> <br>
Well, I have news for Google. They are not yet a total monopoly, and while some of their products are actually quite useful, they don't produce anything we can't live without. So I guess they can do whatever they want with Gizmo5, just so long as they realise that we have alternatives.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google 's Windows-centric attitude goes beyond their apparent antipathy towards Linux .
Development of Mac versions of their software is also sluggish .
Given that other software houses with incomparably smaller resources to allocate manage to produce creditable multi-platform versions of their software , one can only assume Google 's tardiness in this regard is a matter of policy .
Well , I have news for Google .
They are not yet a total monopoly , and while some of their products are actually quite useful , they do n't produce anything we ca n't live without .
So I guess they can do whatever they want with Gizmo5 , just so long as they realise that we have alternatives .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google's Windows-centric attitude goes beyond their apparent antipathy towards Linux.
Development of Mac versions of their software is also sluggish.
Given that other software houses with incomparably smaller resources to allocate manage to produce creditable multi-platform versions of their software, one can only assume Google's tardiness in this regard is a matter of policy.
Well, I have news for Google.
They are not yet a total monopoly, and while some of their products are actually quite useful, they don't produce anything we can't live without.
So I guess they can do whatever they want with Gizmo5, just so long as they realise that we have alternatives.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261224</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260994
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30266732
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261168
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260826
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30262134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261562
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30266412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261182
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261948
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260804
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30264618
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261394
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260842
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30262298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30268102
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30263772
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30262750
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261312
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30263392
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261562
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30263530
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260804
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30270376
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30265574
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261562
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261168
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30262050
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261562
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261378
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261168
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30262646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261562
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261306
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261182
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30262304
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261264
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261168
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30263072
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260826
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30262192
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30262122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261168
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261930
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261562
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261168
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30264048
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260922
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30263560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260804
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30263600
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261650
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30268060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261182
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261100
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260994
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_28_2332254_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30265516
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261046
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_2332254.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260826
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30263072
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260864
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_2332254.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261182
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261306
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261350
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30266412
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30268060
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_2332254.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30267934
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_2332254.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260804
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30263530
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261948
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30263560
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_2332254.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260880
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_2332254.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260882
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_2332254.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260994
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261100
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261396
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_2332254.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261238
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30262298
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261770
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30262192
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30268102
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30262304
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_2332254.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30265632
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_2332254.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260842
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260912
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_2332254.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261450
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_2332254.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261562
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30263392
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30262050
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30262134
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30265574
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30270376
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261930
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30262646
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_2332254.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261160
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_2332254.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260922
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260988
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30264048
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_2332254.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30264896
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_28_2332254.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30260818
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30262750
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261312
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261264
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30263772
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30264618
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261168
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261276
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30262122
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261378
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30266732
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261222
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261234
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261224
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261466
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261650
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30263600
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261408
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261394
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261964
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30261046
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_28_2332254.30265516
</commentlist>
</conversation>
