<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_04_2327204</id>
	<title>Why Open Source Phones Still Fail</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1259928780000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>adeelarshad82 writes <i>"Truly open-development, open-source phones like the Nokia N900 will never hit the mainstream in the US <a href="http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2356603,00.asp">because wireless carriers in the country hate the unexpected</a>, writes PCMag's Sascha Segan. The open-source philosophy is all about unexpected, disruptive ideas bubbling upwards, and that drives network planners nuts. So, you get unsatisfactory hybrids like Google Android, which uses some open-source components but locks third-party developers into a crippled Java sandbox. The bottom line is that while Linux the OS, the kernel, and the memory manager are attractive to phone manufacturers, Linux the philosophy &mdash; and users banding together ad hoc to create new things &mdash; is anathema to wireless carriers."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>adeelarshad82 writes " Truly open-development , open-source phones like the Nokia N900 will never hit the mainstream in the US because wireless carriers in the country hate the unexpected , writes PCMag 's Sascha Segan .
The open-source philosophy is all about unexpected , disruptive ideas bubbling upwards , and that drives network planners nuts .
So , you get unsatisfactory hybrids like Google Android , which uses some open-source components but locks third-party developers into a crippled Java sandbox .
The bottom line is that while Linux the OS , the kernel , and the memory manager are attractive to phone manufacturers , Linux the philosophy    and users banding together ad hoc to create new things    is anathema to wireless carriers .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>adeelarshad82 writes "Truly open-development, open-source phones like the Nokia N900 will never hit the mainstream in the US because wireless carriers in the country hate the unexpected, writes PCMag's Sascha Segan.
The open-source philosophy is all about unexpected, disruptive ideas bubbling upwards, and that drives network planners nuts.
So, you get unsatisfactory hybrids like Google Android, which uses some open-source components but locks third-party developers into a crippled Java sandbox.
The bottom line is that while Linux the OS, the kernel, and the memory manager are attractive to phone manufacturers, Linux the philosophy — and users banding together ad hoc to create new things — is anathema to wireless carriers.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332996</id>
	<title>Native development on Android</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259953140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"locks third-party developers into a crippled Java sandbox"</p><p>Hmm, no it doesn't. Android offers an <a href="http://developer.android.com/sdk/ndk/1.6\_r1/index.html" title="android.com">NDK</a> [android.com] for native application development. Yes your application entry point is still Java, but using Java's Native Interface (JNI) the main part of the app can be native (C/C++) just fine. It already supports native OpenGL ES 1.1 which is great for 3D games development on G1 or Droid phones which have great 3D graphics hardware.</p><p>note: I develop native apps for Android for a living.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" locks third-party developers into a crippled Java sandbox " Hmm , no it does n't .
Android offers an NDK [ android.com ] for native application development .
Yes your application entry point is still Java , but using Java 's Native Interface ( JNI ) the main part of the app can be native ( C/C + + ) just fine .
It already supports native OpenGL ES 1.1 which is great for 3D games development on G1 or Droid phones which have great 3D graphics hardware.note : I develop native apps for Android for a living .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"locks third-party developers into a crippled Java sandbox"Hmm, no it doesn't.
Android offers an NDK [android.com] for native application development.
Yes your application entry point is still Java, but using Java's Native Interface (JNI) the main part of the app can be native (C/C++) just fine.
It already supports native OpenGL ES 1.1 which is great for 3D games development on G1 or Droid phones which have great 3D graphics hardware.note: I develop native apps for Android for a living.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331228</id>
	<title>Re:Open their blinders with amazing apps</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259933340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are many reasons to lock shit down.</p><p>Fear of teh hax0rs taking down a tower.</p><p>Fear of pirates sucking up your bandwidth, and getting all your apps for free.</p><p>Fear of zealots circumventing traditional pay schemes by getting voice, data, and other services off network (and thus free).</p><p>Fear of the russian mob using the phone hardware to spy on or disrupt other people's communications.</p><p>Fear of lawsuits when it gets out that you illegally used copyrighted shit when making the phone's os image.</p><p>Fear of people finding out that you rig the fucking battery display to show higher than it is, or that you rig the reception indicator to show full bars when it shouldn't...until you make a call.</p><p>Fear of Bob deciding to take his shiny new toy to another network.</p><p>While virtually ALL of the reasons center around the company being afraid of people exploiting the company's stupidity, they are still valid concerns - the companies are stupid.</p><p>However, TFA is completely incorrect.  Companies don't fear the unknown - they know EXACTLY what we'd do with open phones.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are many reasons to lock shit down.Fear of teh hax0rs taking down a tower.Fear of pirates sucking up your bandwidth , and getting all your apps for free.Fear of zealots circumventing traditional pay schemes by getting voice , data , and other services off network ( and thus free ) .Fear of the russian mob using the phone hardware to spy on or disrupt other people 's communications.Fear of lawsuits when it gets out that you illegally used copyrighted shit when making the phone 's os image.Fear of people finding out that you rig the fucking battery display to show higher than it is , or that you rig the reception indicator to show full bars when it should n't...until you make a call.Fear of Bob deciding to take his shiny new toy to another network.While virtually ALL of the reasons center around the company being afraid of people exploiting the company 's stupidity , they are still valid concerns - the companies are stupid.However , TFA is completely incorrect .
Companies do n't fear the unknown - they know EXACTLY what we 'd do with open phones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are many reasons to lock shit down.Fear of teh hax0rs taking down a tower.Fear of pirates sucking up your bandwidth, and getting all your apps for free.Fear of zealots circumventing traditional pay schemes by getting voice, data, and other services off network (and thus free).Fear of the russian mob using the phone hardware to spy on or disrupt other people's communications.Fear of lawsuits when it gets out that you illegally used copyrighted shit when making the phone's os image.Fear of people finding out that you rig the fucking battery display to show higher than it is, or that you rig the reception indicator to show full bars when it shouldn't...until you make a call.Fear of Bob deciding to take his shiny new toy to another network.While virtually ALL of the reasons center around the company being afraid of people exploiting the company's stupidity, they are still valid concerns - the companies are stupid.However, TFA is completely incorrect.
Companies don't fear the unknown - they know EXACTLY what we'd do with open phones.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331094</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331294</id>
	<title>Too costly</title>
	<author>Medgur</author>
	<datestamp>1259933940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>No.<br> <br>

It's because they cost hundreds of dollars.<br> <br>

I want an open source phone, I really do, but I can't justify spending 500 on little more than a PDA + phone. I already had a PDA once, hardly used it, and phones that just work as phones are less than a hundred these days. Make an open source phone that's a reasonable price and I'll buy it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
It 's because they cost hundreds of dollars .
I want an open source phone , I really do , but I ca n't justify spending 500 on little more than a PDA + phone .
I already had a PDA once , hardly used it , and phones that just work as phones are less than a hundred these days .
Make an open source phone that 's a reasonable price and I 'll buy it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
It's because they cost hundreds of dollars.
I want an open source phone, I really do, but I can't justify spending 500 on little more than a PDA + phone.
I already had a PDA once, hardly used it, and phones that just work as phones are less than a hundred these days.
Make an open source phone that's a reasonable price and I'll buy it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332706</id>
	<title>Android is a step in the right direction</title>
	<author>slapout</author>
	<datestamp>1259948940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The new Android phones may not be 100\% open, but I think they are certainly a step in the right direction. I'm really surprised that Verizon allowed them on their network.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The new Android phones may not be 100 \ % open , but I think they are certainly a step in the right direction .
I 'm really surprised that Verizon allowed them on their network .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The new Android phones may not be 100\% open, but I think they are certainly a step in the right direction.
I'm really surprised that Verizon allowed them on their network.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333956</id>
	<title>Re:what do you call "truly open" there??</title>
	<author>EvilNTUser</author>
	<datestamp>1260013680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The second page you link to seems outdated.  Many fixes are "planned for Fremantle", and that OS version is already shipping.  Also see <a href="http://ofono.org/" title="ofono.org">oFono</a> [ofono.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The second page you link to seems outdated .
Many fixes are " planned for Fremantle " , and that OS version is already shipping .
Also see oFono [ ofono.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The second page you link to seems outdated.
Many fixes are "planned for Fremantle", and that OS version is already shipping.
Also see oFono [ofono.org].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332564</id>
	<title>the first cell phone company to offer open source</title>
	<author>Dan667</author>
	<datestamp>1259947500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Will make a huge amount of money for the very fact that it is a disruptive technology.  Just like the iphone.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Will make a huge amount of money for the very fact that it is a disruptive technology .
Just like the iphone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Will make a huge amount of money for the very fact that it is a disruptive technology.
Just like the iphone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331456</id>
	<title>Why should the OS matter?</title>
	<author>Nikker</author>
	<datestamp>1259935020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Right now most if not all major carriers offer some sort USB stick that connects to their networks, this opens up to Windows and (not sure of support) possibly Linux.  This opens the door to the 'dreaded' bitTorrent protocol and of course malware and viruses running from laptops, netbooks, et al.  So as form factors get smaller and smaller what is stopping me from making my own mobile device out of off the shelf components?  VOIP and net access is really the fundamental building blocks for these devices and as this becomes more apparent more manufactures will be getting into the market.  <br> <br>
Maybe one day Asus will come up with a smaller netbook and a baseband chip / usb slot?  Maybe some one else will do the same?  The components required to make such devices are getting more and more generalized, cheaper and easier for the end consumer to get their hands on (call China<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;) ) .  These providers should start taking their network and their advertised capabilities more seriously now, give it another 5 years and people will start demanding their advertised speeds rather than just shrugging and waiting while the download ticks.  <br> <br>
These providers have it easy now selling people some imaginary 10-20mb/s network so they can email and twitter but it's going to catch up to them quick and make people look for alternatives.  So open source phones will not fail but will be reincarnated when ARM really starts ramping up its low power alternatives and companies start pumping out their SoC designs.  <br> <br>
I know it sounds like a "Year of the Linux!" type post but Linux is the most fluid solution right now and with the right hardware its small, quick, tested and easy to deploy and update so it is the right solution but it will be waiting in the wings for a bit longer.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Right now most if not all major carriers offer some sort USB stick that connects to their networks , this opens up to Windows and ( not sure of support ) possibly Linux .
This opens the door to the 'dreaded ' bitTorrent protocol and of course malware and viruses running from laptops , netbooks , et al .
So as form factors get smaller and smaller what is stopping me from making my own mobile device out of off the shelf components ?
VOIP and net access is really the fundamental building blocks for these devices and as this becomes more apparent more manufactures will be getting into the market .
Maybe one day Asus will come up with a smaller netbook and a baseband chip / usb slot ?
Maybe some one else will do the same ?
The components required to make such devices are getting more and more generalized , cheaper and easier for the end consumer to get their hands on ( call China ; ) ) .
These providers should start taking their network and their advertised capabilities more seriously now , give it another 5 years and people will start demanding their advertised speeds rather than just shrugging and waiting while the download ticks .
These providers have it easy now selling people some imaginary 10-20mb/s network so they can email and twitter but it 's going to catch up to them quick and make people look for alternatives .
So open source phones will not fail but will be reincarnated when ARM really starts ramping up its low power alternatives and companies start pumping out their SoC designs .
I know it sounds like a " Year of the Linux !
" type post but Linux is the most fluid solution right now and with the right hardware its small , quick , tested and easy to deploy and update so it is the right solution but it will be waiting in the wings for a bit longer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right now most if not all major carriers offer some sort USB stick that connects to their networks, this opens up to Windows and (not sure of support) possibly Linux.
This opens the door to the 'dreaded' bitTorrent protocol and of course malware and viruses running from laptops, netbooks, et al.
So as form factors get smaller and smaller what is stopping me from making my own mobile device out of off the shelf components?
VOIP and net access is really the fundamental building blocks for these devices and as this becomes more apparent more manufactures will be getting into the market.
Maybe one day Asus will come up with a smaller netbook and a baseband chip / usb slot?
Maybe some one else will do the same?
The components required to make such devices are getting more and more generalized, cheaper and easier for the end consumer to get their hands on (call China ;) ) .
These providers should start taking their network and their advertised capabilities more seriously now, give it another 5 years and people will start demanding their advertised speeds rather than just shrugging and waiting while the download ticks.
These providers have it easy now selling people some imaginary 10-20mb/s network so they can email and twitter but it's going to catch up to them quick and make people look for alternatives.
So open source phones will not fail but will be reincarnated when ARM really starts ramping up its low power alternatives and companies start pumping out their SoC designs.
I know it sounds like a "Year of the Linux!
" type post but Linux is the most fluid solution right now and with the right hardware its small, quick, tested and easy to deploy and update so it is the right solution but it will be waiting in the wings for a bit longer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332216</id>
	<title>Re:The N900 is a computer milestone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259943120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>His email address is<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...@ovi.com. Ovi is the name of Nokia's internet services brand, so it looks like this is just astroturfing.</p></div><p>You couldn't be more wrong. <a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=define\%3Aastroturfing&amp;ie=utf-8&amp;oe=utf-8&amp;aq=t&amp;rls=com.ubuntu:en-US:official&amp;client=firefox-a" title="google.com">Astroturfing</a> [google.com] is when you <em>hide</em> your professional affiliation, pretending to be completely objective and disinterested. This person is doing exactly the opposite. That's commonly known as <em>advocacy</em>, and it's perfectly all right in my books, because we can weigh what they say on its merits.</p><p>General note: I'm getting really, <strong>really</strong> tired of people who think bias has anything to do with the merits of an argument. Bias is <em>good</em>. It breeds enthusiasm and makes it clear which side a person is arguing. Until we all become Spock, there will be no objectivity in the world, so let's quit pretending that objective sources exist.</p><p>That said, anyone who can't change his mind in the face of a better argument is just a fool.</p><p>Go ahead, prove me wrong. I'm willing to listen. 8^)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>His email address is ... @ ovi.com .
Ovi is the name of Nokia 's internet services brand , so it looks like this is just astroturfing.You could n't be more wrong .
Astroturfing [ google.com ] is when you hide your professional affiliation , pretending to be completely objective and disinterested .
This person is doing exactly the opposite .
That 's commonly known as advocacy , and it 's perfectly all right in my books , because we can weigh what they say on its merits.General note : I 'm getting really , really tired of people who think bias has anything to do with the merits of an argument .
Bias is good .
It breeds enthusiasm and makes it clear which side a person is arguing .
Until we all become Spock , there will be no objectivity in the world , so let 's quit pretending that objective sources exist.That said , anyone who ca n't change his mind in the face of a better argument is just a fool.Go ahead , prove me wrong .
I 'm willing to listen .
8 ^ )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>His email address is ...@ovi.com.
Ovi is the name of Nokia's internet services brand, so it looks like this is just astroturfing.You couldn't be more wrong.
Astroturfing [google.com] is when you hide your professional affiliation, pretending to be completely objective and disinterested.
This person is doing exactly the opposite.
That's commonly known as advocacy, and it's perfectly all right in my books, because we can weigh what they say on its merits.General note: I'm getting really, really tired of people who think bias has anything to do with the merits of an argument.
Bias is good.
It breeds enthusiasm and makes it clear which side a person is arguing.
Until we all become Spock, there will be no objectivity in the world, so let's quit pretending that objective sources exist.That said, anyone who can't change his mind in the face of a better argument is just a fool.Go ahead, prove me wrong.
I'm willing to listen.
8^)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30334038</id>
	<title>you're missing the point</title>
	<author>Weezul</author>
	<datestamp>1260014880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Applications are rapidly becoming the determining factor for platforms success.  A truly open phone was never viable before the Andoird and n900.</p><p>iPhone : Apple attracts thousands of sleazy third party Mac developers.  So almost all applications are commercial closed source, nobody will port them to other platforms, etc.  Zero progress towards an open platform.</p><p>Android : Android offers an application store competitive with Apple's but using Java means applications can easily be ported to other platforms.  Also more open source applications are available since Apple has sucked up so many of the sleaze bags.  Big win!</p><p>n900 : No application store.  Applications should be portable to other Qt based platforms.  Well established distribution channel for open source applications.  Major win!</p><p>All the open phones you named failed because they didn't offer enough applications.  A truly open phone could now be built around Maemo native APIs and Android Java APIs, thus allowing users to port all the applications.</p><p>Or maybe people can even develop open version for critical closed packaged used by Nokia.</p><p>I'll be buying an n900 once they hit the second rev. of the OS, maybe even before.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Applications are rapidly becoming the determining factor for platforms success .
A truly open phone was never viable before the Andoird and n900.iPhone : Apple attracts thousands of sleazy third party Mac developers .
So almost all applications are commercial closed source , nobody will port them to other platforms , etc .
Zero progress towards an open platform.Android : Android offers an application store competitive with Apple 's but using Java means applications can easily be ported to other platforms .
Also more open source applications are available since Apple has sucked up so many of the sleaze bags .
Big win ! n900 : No application store .
Applications should be portable to other Qt based platforms .
Well established distribution channel for open source applications .
Major win ! All the open phones you named failed because they did n't offer enough applications .
A truly open phone could now be built around Maemo native APIs and Android Java APIs , thus allowing users to port all the applications.Or maybe people can even develop open version for critical closed packaged used by Nokia.I 'll be buying an n900 once they hit the second rev .
of the OS , maybe even before .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Applications are rapidly becoming the determining factor for platforms success.
A truly open phone was never viable before the Andoird and n900.iPhone : Apple attracts thousands of sleazy third party Mac developers.
So almost all applications are commercial closed source, nobody will port them to other platforms, etc.
Zero progress towards an open platform.Android : Android offers an application store competitive with Apple's but using Java means applications can easily be ported to other platforms.
Also more open source applications are available since Apple has sucked up so many of the sleaze bags.
Big win!n900 : No application store.
Applications should be portable to other Qt based platforms.
Well established distribution channel for open source applications.
Major win!All the open phones you named failed because they didn't offer enough applications.
A truly open phone could now be built around Maemo native APIs and Android Java APIs, thus allowing users to port all the applications.Or maybe people can even develop open version for critical closed packaged used by Nokia.I'll be buying an n900 once they hit the second rev.
of the OS, maybe even before.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331260</id>
	<title>Carriers hate offering services</title>
	<author>iamacat</author>
	<datestamp>1259933640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If they had their way, we would be paying them large amounts of money for nothing whatsoever. It's up to us to show dissatisfaction by either political action demanding open access or refusing to buy smartphones until a completely open one comes to market.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If they had their way , we would be paying them large amounts of money for nothing whatsoever .
It 's up to us to show dissatisfaction by either political action demanding open access or refusing to buy smartphones until a completely open one comes to market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they had their way, we would be paying them large amounts of money for nothing whatsoever.
It's up to us to show dissatisfaction by either political action demanding open access or refusing to buy smartphones until a completely open one comes to market.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30337570</id>
	<title>Re:The N900 is a computer milestone</title>
	<author>weave</author>
	<datestamp>1260046140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just got a N900 and love the thing. First thing I did was install openssh server, set a root password, and then ssh'ed into my phone. I created a nice little script I found on maemo site that enables the DUN bluetooth profile so I can use it to tether.

</p><p>It's a great feeling.

</p><p>I also own an iPhone 3GS and will carry around both. Overall, for the average consumer, the iPhone is a great phone.    But the N900 is a geek dream come true.  It is quite the milestone.

</p><p>Generally I agree with the article.  It's going to remain a niche product. I can't see any carrier subsidizing this phone, and with no carrier support, it will never hit mainstream.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just got a N900 and love the thing .
First thing I did was install openssh server , set a root password , and then ssh'ed into my phone .
I created a nice little script I found on maemo site that enables the DUN bluetooth profile so I can use it to tether .
It 's a great feeling .
I also own an iPhone 3GS and will carry around both .
Overall , for the average consumer , the iPhone is a great phone .
But the N900 is a geek dream come true .
It is quite the milestone .
Generally I agree with the article .
It 's going to remain a niche product .
I ca n't see any carrier subsidizing this phone , and with no carrier support , it will never hit mainstream .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just got a N900 and love the thing.
First thing I did was install openssh server, set a root password, and then ssh'ed into my phone.
I created a nice little script I found on maemo site that enables the DUN bluetooth profile so I can use it to tether.
It's a great feeling.
I also own an iPhone 3GS and will carry around both.
Overall, for the average consumer, the iPhone is a great phone.
But the N900 is a geek dream come true.
It is quite the milestone.
Generally I agree with the article.
It's going to remain a niche product.
I can't see any carrier subsidizing this phone, and with no carrier support, it will never hit mainstream.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331446</id>
	<title>Merging of the smartphone and the laptop</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259934960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I suspect open development phones will become more mainstream as the smartphone and the laptop merge. As phone hardware improves, it's not so hard to imagine a phone with, say, a DisplayPort mini connection (or perhaps a pico projector), USB support, and bluetooth support will displace laptops as the mobile computers of choice. Perhaps instead of buying a laptop you instead buy a widescreen monitor and USB keyboard and mouse and plug those into your phone. Perhaps you just plug your phone into your HDTV and use a bluetooth keyboard and mouse.</p><p>For me, the Nokia N900 represents the beginning of this trend. It really is more of a mobile computer which happens to have a phone function. However, longer term, I don't think this necessarily means Linux will be the dominant mobile computer platform. If Intel's Atom CPUs improve their power usage to the point where it's reasonable to put them in devices of the N900's class, then you'd have to suspect that Windows will become the dominant operating system as it is for laptops today.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I suspect open development phones will become more mainstream as the smartphone and the laptop merge .
As phone hardware improves , it 's not so hard to imagine a phone with , say , a DisplayPort mini connection ( or perhaps a pico projector ) , USB support , and bluetooth support will displace laptops as the mobile computers of choice .
Perhaps instead of buying a laptop you instead buy a widescreen monitor and USB keyboard and mouse and plug those into your phone .
Perhaps you just plug your phone into your HDTV and use a bluetooth keyboard and mouse.For me , the Nokia N900 represents the beginning of this trend .
It really is more of a mobile computer which happens to have a phone function .
However , longer term , I do n't think this necessarily means Linux will be the dominant mobile computer platform .
If Intel 's Atom CPUs improve their power usage to the point where it 's reasonable to put them in devices of the N900 's class , then you 'd have to suspect that Windows will become the dominant operating system as it is for laptops today .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I suspect open development phones will become more mainstream as the smartphone and the laptop merge.
As phone hardware improves, it's not so hard to imagine a phone with, say, a DisplayPort mini connection (or perhaps a pico projector), USB support, and bluetooth support will displace laptops as the mobile computers of choice.
Perhaps instead of buying a laptop you instead buy a widescreen monitor and USB keyboard and mouse and plug those into your phone.
Perhaps you just plug your phone into your HDTV and use a bluetooth keyboard and mouse.For me, the Nokia N900 represents the beginning of this trend.
It really is more of a mobile computer which happens to have a phone function.
However, longer term, I don't think this necessarily means Linux will be the dominant mobile computer platform.
If Intel's Atom CPUs improve their power usage to the point where it's reasonable to put them in devices of the N900's class, then you'd have to suspect that Windows will become the dominant operating system as it is for laptops today.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333762</id>
	<title>Re:Too costly</title>
	<author>trbdavies</author>
	<datestamp>1260010800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I just got a nearly new version of the predecessor of the N900 - the Nokia N810 Internet Tablet - for $140 on EBay. Prices should be coming down even more. It's not a phone, but runs Maemo, gives you root (with a simple download), and has bluetooth, Skype over wifi, and a USB port, so there are multiple ways to turn it into a phone through a data plan (with USB cellular modems and routers, for example). And it's a GPS device to boot. There really is some wonderful technology out there if you know where to look and don't buy hyped up but locked down "smart" phones.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I just got a nearly new version of the predecessor of the N900 - the Nokia N810 Internet Tablet - for $ 140 on EBay .
Prices should be coming down even more .
It 's not a phone , but runs Maemo , gives you root ( with a simple download ) , and has bluetooth , Skype over wifi , and a USB port , so there are multiple ways to turn it into a phone through a data plan ( with USB cellular modems and routers , for example ) .
And it 's a GPS device to boot .
There really is some wonderful technology out there if you know where to look and do n't buy hyped up but locked down " smart " phones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just got a nearly new version of the predecessor of the N900 - the Nokia N810 Internet Tablet - for $140 on EBay.
Prices should be coming down even more.
It's not a phone, but runs Maemo, gives you root (with a simple download), and has bluetooth, Skype over wifi, and a USB port, so there are multiple ways to turn it into a phone through a data plan (with USB cellular modems and routers, for example).
And it's a GPS device to boot.
There really is some wonderful technology out there if you know where to look and don't buy hyped up but locked down "smart" phones.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332118</id>
	<title>Re:Open their blinders with amazing apps</title>
	<author>palegray.net</author>
	<datestamp>1259941320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hey mods: the parent comment is only at +3 as of this writing. It really ought to be at +5.<br> <br>

This is one of the most honest and informative posts I've seen on Slashdot in a very long time. I use Linux day in and out for both work and personal hobbies, but there are many valid reasons why companies won't completely open every platform on Earth. This will apply as long as resource scarcity is in forth; the good news is you can have all the completely open, mesh-networked, unencumbered communications you want just after the Singularity arrives.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey mods : the parent comment is only at + 3 as of this writing .
It really ought to be at + 5 .
This is one of the most honest and informative posts I 've seen on Slashdot in a very long time .
I use Linux day in and out for both work and personal hobbies , but there are many valid reasons why companies wo n't completely open every platform on Earth .
This will apply as long as resource scarcity is in forth ; the good news is you can have all the completely open , mesh-networked , unencumbered communications you want just after the Singularity arrives .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey mods: the parent comment is only at +3 as of this writing.
It really ought to be at +5.
This is one of the most honest and informative posts I've seen on Slashdot in a very long time.
I use Linux day in and out for both work and personal hobbies, but there are many valid reasons why companies won't completely open every platform on Earth.
This will apply as long as resource scarcity is in forth; the good news is you can have all the completely open, mesh-networked, unencumbered communications you want just after the Singularity arrives.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331228</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332802</id>
	<title>Re:what do you call "truly open" there??</title>
	<author>Microlith</author>
	<datestamp>1259950260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>there are a few devices that strive to be as open as a linux phone should be</p></div></blockquote><p>You rip into the N900 yet fail to take notice that Nokia has made a mainstream device far more open than any other to date, built almost entirely on open source technologies. You could say Android is as well, but it's all about being "open" for hardware developers but sandboxing the user. You're also restricted to Google's version of Java for any sort of user interaction (even if you do write a native app.)</p><p>And OpenMoko? Between the hardware and the software, they couldn't keep in a straight enough line to get anything done.</p><blockquote><div><p>openmoko tried and indeed even though the calypso is undocumented they provided a implementation of how to interface it and thanks to it one can use all of its hardware without binary blobs - NOT POSSIBLE ON THE N900!!!</p></div></blockquote><p>OH NO!!! We should, of course, give up on encouraging and pushing Nokia's move towards a more open environment and settle for a device with severe flaws and ancient radio technology, and an OS that changes so much it's barely usable.</p><blockquote><div><p>is it only me or did the slashdot crowd forget what "truly open" means and is now all over a device that is open on the top but not if one wants to really start messing around with it?</p></div></blockquote><p>The Slashdot crowd isn't packed full of hardcore FSFites of the Stallman variety. Compared to every other <b>viable</b> option out there, the N900 is Truly Open. Making it Free is the next (and harder) step.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>there are a few devices that strive to be as open as a linux phone should beYou rip into the N900 yet fail to take notice that Nokia has made a mainstream device far more open than any other to date , built almost entirely on open source technologies .
You could say Android is as well , but it 's all about being " open " for hardware developers but sandboxing the user .
You 're also restricted to Google 's version of Java for any sort of user interaction ( even if you do write a native app .
) And OpenMoko ?
Between the hardware and the software , they could n't keep in a straight enough line to get anything done.openmoko tried and indeed even though the calypso is undocumented they provided a implementation of how to interface it and thanks to it one can use all of its hardware without binary blobs - NOT POSSIBLE ON THE N900 ! !
! OH NO ! ! !
We should , of course , give up on encouraging and pushing Nokia 's move towards a more open environment and settle for a device with severe flaws and ancient radio technology , and an OS that changes so much it 's barely usable.is it only me or did the slashdot crowd forget what " truly open " means and is now all over a device that is open on the top but not if one wants to really start messing around with it ? The Slashdot crowd is n't packed full of hardcore FSFites of the Stallman variety .
Compared to every other viable option out there , the N900 is Truly Open .
Making it Free is the next ( and harder ) step .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>there are a few devices that strive to be as open as a linux phone should beYou rip into the N900 yet fail to take notice that Nokia has made a mainstream device far more open than any other to date, built almost entirely on open source technologies.
You could say Android is as well, but it's all about being "open" for hardware developers but sandboxing the user.
You're also restricted to Google's version of Java for any sort of user interaction (even if you do write a native app.
)And OpenMoko?
Between the hardware and the software, they couldn't keep in a straight enough line to get anything done.openmoko tried and indeed even though the calypso is undocumented they provided a implementation of how to interface it and thanks to it one can use all of its hardware without binary blobs - NOT POSSIBLE ON THE N900!!
!OH NO!!!
We should, of course, give up on encouraging and pushing Nokia's move towards a more open environment and settle for a device with severe flaws and ancient radio technology, and an OS that changes so much it's barely usable.is it only me or did the slashdot crowd forget what "truly open" means and is now all over a device that is open on the top but not if one wants to really start messing around with it?The Slashdot crowd isn't packed full of hardcore FSFites of the Stallman variety.
Compared to every other viable option out there, the N900 is Truly Open.
Making it Free is the next (and harder) step.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30342030</id>
	<title>Re:Only "Open Source"? US only?...</title>
	<author>cboslin</author>
	<datestamp>1260095100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But I've heard that US carriers didn't really want to offer them in unlocked state, and Nokia wouldn't castrate its products; so the carriers went with RAZR... (and look where Motorola is now)</p></div><p>You heard correctly.  Further their choice of hardware components were specifically chosen to prevent their phones from being unlocked.  One of the Linux magazines covered all the cellular / wireless company phones from a hardware perspective module by module.

</p><p>Most of the individual components to these $300 - $500 hand sets cost less than $40, probably less when bought in bulk.  And some deluded American cell phone customers actually believe that the cellular providers are giving you a <b>discount</b> on the purchase of new hardware...what a joke.

</p><p>Not only do they lock you in with vendor locked-in hardware, they gouge you for the price and lock you in with a plan that if you try to leave early you get fined for well over the cost of a new hand set.

</p><p>The best solution is to purchase the phone retail for the cellular provider whose cell towers best fit your life and avoid 1, 2 or 3 year contracts all together.  At least this way if they try to stick you with an inflated bill for charges you did not incur you can tell them to take a long walk off a short pier before they sick collections on you and ruin your credit.

</p><p>Of course if you are starting to pay cash for most things as many of us are, your credit score means nada!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But I 've heard that US carriers did n't really want to offer them in unlocked state , and Nokia would n't castrate its products ; so the carriers went with RAZR... ( and look where Motorola is now ) You heard correctly .
Further their choice of hardware components were specifically chosen to prevent their phones from being unlocked .
One of the Linux magazines covered all the cellular / wireless company phones from a hardware perspective module by module .
Most of the individual components to these $ 300 - $ 500 hand sets cost less than $ 40 , probably less when bought in bulk .
And some deluded American cell phone customers actually believe that the cellular providers are giving you a discount on the purchase of new hardware...what a joke .
Not only do they lock you in with vendor locked-in hardware , they gouge you for the price and lock you in with a plan that if you try to leave early you get fined for well over the cost of a new hand set .
The best solution is to purchase the phone retail for the cellular provider whose cell towers best fit your life and avoid 1 , 2 or 3 year contracts all together .
At least this way if they try to stick you with an inflated bill for charges you did not incur you can tell them to take a long walk off a short pier before they sick collections on you and ruin your credit .
Of course if you are starting to pay cash for most things as many of us are , your credit score means nada !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But I've heard that US carriers didn't really want to offer them in unlocked state, and Nokia wouldn't castrate its products; so the carriers went with RAZR... (and look where Motorola is now)You heard correctly.
Further their choice of hardware components were specifically chosen to prevent their phones from being unlocked.
One of the Linux magazines covered all the cellular / wireless company phones from a hardware perspective module by module.
Most of the individual components to these $300 - $500 hand sets cost less than $40, probably less when bought in bulk.
And some deluded American cell phone customers actually believe that the cellular providers are giving you a discount on the purchase of new hardware...what a joke.
Not only do they lock you in with vendor locked-in hardware, they gouge you for the price and lock you in with a plan that if you try to leave early you get fined for well over the cost of a new hand set.
The best solution is to purchase the phone retail for the cellular provider whose cell towers best fit your life and avoid 1, 2 or 3 year contracts all together.
At least this way if they try to stick you with an inflated bill for charges you did not incur you can tell them to take a long walk off a short pier before they sick collections on you and ruin your credit.
Of course if you are starting to pay cash for most things as many of us are, your credit score means nada!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331094</id>
	<title>Open their blinders with amazing apps</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259932380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>No carrier wants geeks. Geeks use up a lot of network resources, try to find ways around rules, and create problems for tech support.</p></div><p>Yes. But geeks also build new cool applications never before thought possible, that become next year's must-haves.</p><p>In a sense, the iPhone app ecosystem is proof to that, despite its less-than-open review process. Palm and the PC as well, if you want to go back in history.</p><p>How hard can it be for the base-station to monitor bandwidth and avoid taking the whole network down?</p><p>--<br><a href="http://fairsoftware.net/" title="fairsoftware.net" rel="nofollow">Meet co-founders</a> [fairsoftware.net] for your startup</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>No carrier wants geeks .
Geeks use up a lot of network resources , try to find ways around rules , and create problems for tech support.Yes .
But geeks also build new cool applications never before thought possible , that become next year 's must-haves.In a sense , the iPhone app ecosystem is proof to that , despite its less-than-open review process .
Palm and the PC as well , if you want to go back in history.How hard can it be for the base-station to monitor bandwidth and avoid taking the whole network down ? --Meet co-founders [ fairsoftware.net ] for your startup</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No carrier wants geeks.
Geeks use up a lot of network resources, try to find ways around rules, and create problems for tech support.Yes.
But geeks also build new cool applications never before thought possible, that become next year's must-haves.In a sense, the iPhone app ecosystem is proof to that, despite its less-than-open review process.
Palm and the PC as well, if you want to go back in history.How hard can it be for the base-station to monitor bandwidth and avoid taking the whole network down?--Meet co-founders [fairsoftware.net] for your startup
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331712</id>
	<title>what do you call "truly open" there??</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259936880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Truly open-development, open-source phones like the Nokia N900..."</p><p>are you kidding me???</p><p>what is "Truly open-development, open-source" about a platform that has</p><p>* proprietary power management (bme)<br>* no docs for the gsm modem interface (and no source code for the apps using it)<br>* proprietary powervr graphics drivers<br>* proprietary osso-dsp-modules</p><p>read also:<br><a href="https://bugs.maemo.org/show\_bug.cgi?id=1584" title="maemo.org" rel="nofollow">https://bugs.maemo.org/show\_bug.cgi?id=1584</a> [maemo.org]<br><a href="http://wiki.maemo.org/Why\_the\_closed\_packages" title="maemo.org" rel="nofollow">http://wiki.maemo.org/Why\_the\_closed\_packages</a> [maemo.org]</p><p>i'm not so much pissed by proprietary applications as i can replace the rootfs by a free and open source one what pisses me off is the undocumented hardware used and lacking communication with upstream kernel development.<br>dont call this device "truly open"-blah... it is definitely NOT.</p><p>there are a few devices that strive to be as open as a linux phone should be:<br>openmoko tried and indeed even though the calypso is undocumented they provided a implementation of how to interface it and thanks to it one can use all of its hardware without binary blobs - NOT POSSIBLE ON THE N900!!!<br>then there is the FLOW by gizmoforyou which uses a gumstix overo as the base and added a telit modem for which you can download the FULL DOCS from their website - hey guys at nokia, this is the kind of modem you should have picked if you wanted your device to be called "truly open"!<br>the modem used in the n900 uses ISI for which no reference interpretation in oss exists.</p><p>is it only me or did the slashdot crowd forget what "truly open" means and is now all over a device that is open on the top but not if one wants to really start messing around with it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Truly open-development , open-source phones like the Nokia N900... " are you kidding me ? ?
? what is " Truly open-development , open-source " about a platform that has * proprietary power management ( bme ) * no docs for the gsm modem interface ( and no source code for the apps using it ) * proprietary powervr graphics drivers * proprietary osso-dsp-modulesread also : https : //bugs.maemo.org/show \ _bug.cgi ? id = 1584 [ maemo.org ] http : //wiki.maemo.org/Why \ _the \ _closed \ _packages [ maemo.org ] i 'm not so much pissed by proprietary applications as i can replace the rootfs by a free and open source one what pisses me off is the undocumented hardware used and lacking communication with upstream kernel development.dont call this device " truly open " -blah... it is definitely NOT.there are a few devices that strive to be as open as a linux phone should be : openmoko tried and indeed even though the calypso is undocumented they provided a implementation of how to interface it and thanks to it one can use all of its hardware without binary blobs - NOT POSSIBLE ON THE N900 ! !
! then there is the FLOW by gizmoforyou which uses a gumstix overo as the base and added a telit modem for which you can download the FULL DOCS from their website - hey guys at nokia , this is the kind of modem you should have picked if you wanted your device to be called " truly open " ! the modem used in the n900 uses ISI for which no reference interpretation in oss exists.is it only me or did the slashdot crowd forget what " truly open " means and is now all over a device that is open on the top but not if one wants to really start messing around with it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Truly open-development, open-source phones like the Nokia N900..."are you kidding me??
?what is "Truly open-development, open-source" about a platform that has* proprietary power management (bme)* no docs for the gsm modem interface (and no source code for the apps using it)* proprietary powervr graphics drivers* proprietary osso-dsp-modulesread also:https://bugs.maemo.org/show\_bug.cgi?id=1584 [maemo.org]http://wiki.maemo.org/Why\_the\_closed\_packages [maemo.org]i'm not so much pissed by proprietary applications as i can replace the rootfs by a free and open source one what pisses me off is the undocumented hardware used and lacking communication with upstream kernel development.dont call this device "truly open"-blah... it is definitely NOT.there are a few devices that strive to be as open as a linux phone should be:openmoko tried and indeed even though the calypso is undocumented they provided a implementation of how to interface it and thanks to it one can use all of its hardware without binary blobs - NOT POSSIBLE ON THE N900!!
!then there is the FLOW by gizmoforyou which uses a gumstix overo as the base and added a telit modem for which you can download the FULL DOCS from their website - hey guys at nokia, this is the kind of modem you should have picked if you wanted your device to be called "truly open"!the modem used in the n900 uses ISI for which no reference interpretation in oss exists.is it only me or did the slashdot crowd forget what "truly open" means and is now all over a device that is open on the top but not if one wants to really start messing around with it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332750</id>
	<title>There, I fixed that for you . . .</title>
	<author>npsimons</author>
	<datestamp>1259949660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Why US cell carriers Still Fail</p></div></blockquote><blockquote><div><p>users banding together ad hoc to create new things -- is anathema to wireless carriers</p></div></blockquote><p>Sounds like a problem with the wireless carriers to me.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why US cell carriers Still Failusers banding together ad hoc to create new things -- is anathema to wireless carriersSounds like a problem with the wireless carriers to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why US cell carriers Still Failusers banding together ad hoc to create new things -- is anathema to wireless carriersSounds like a problem with the wireless carriers to me.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30366634</id>
	<title>Re:Native development on Android</title>
	<author>jfanning</author>
	<datestamp>1260293400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But Android is definitely not a standard Linux distro, far from it. Google has ripped the guts out of most of the normal Linux and userspace. The N900 is probably as close to a full distro as you are going to get on a mobile phone sized device. It is practically Debian.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But Android is definitely not a standard Linux distro , far from it .
Google has ripped the guts out of most of the normal Linux and userspace .
The N900 is probably as close to a full distro as you are going to get on a mobile phone sized device .
It is practically Debian .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But Android is definitely not a standard Linux distro, far from it.
Google has ripped the guts out of most of the normal Linux and userspace.
The N900 is probably as close to a full distro as you are going to get on a mobile phone sized device.
It is practically Debian.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332996</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332096</id>
	<title>Re:Too costly</title>
	<author>stephanruby</author>
	<datestamp>1259941020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fine. Don't pay $500 now. Pay thousands of dollars later in additional cell fees, and lock yourself into a two-year contract that's probably ill-suited for you and purposefully crippled by your provider in many hidden and unforeseen ways. Go ahead, I'm not stopping you. Go buy a brand-new car on credit while you're at it. Get a mortgage you can barely afford. Get all your furniture at Rent-to-Own. And buy all your computers, plasma TVs, and monster cables at Best Buy.  No one is stopping you from screwing yourself in the long-run -- if that's what you really want for yourself.</p><p>By the way, if anyone is thinking about buying the N900 through Nokia USA, realize that its maximum speed will only really work on T-mobile (it's some kind of frequency band thing, and T-Mobile's network is the only one that operates that band). Let's face it, Nokia is still not focusing on the US market right now, otherwise other providers would be supported -- not just T-Mobile's band. That being said, if you buy an unlocked N900 and get T-Mobile as your provider, you will have the fastest smart-phone on the US Market -- hands-down. </p><p>I'm assuming that only a few people will do that, at least in the US, in the rest of the world -- the N900 will be selling like hotcakes. So in that sense, the original article is right that the N900 won't be that big in the US, it's just not for the reasons it mentioned. </p><p>That being said, there are still many good reasons you should get yourself an unlocked phone, even if it's not the N900. There are many good quality smart-phones out there, and assuming the American currency goes back up to its previous level, and you do a little bit of research, you should be able to buy smart-phones directly from Asia, or directly from Europe, that should work just fine in the US and still make all your iPhone friends jealous. </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fine .
Do n't pay $ 500 now .
Pay thousands of dollars later in additional cell fees , and lock yourself into a two-year contract that 's probably ill-suited for you and purposefully crippled by your provider in many hidden and unforeseen ways .
Go ahead , I 'm not stopping you .
Go buy a brand-new car on credit while you 're at it .
Get a mortgage you can barely afford .
Get all your furniture at Rent-to-Own .
And buy all your computers , plasma TVs , and monster cables at Best Buy .
No one is stopping you from screwing yourself in the long-run -- if that 's what you really want for yourself.By the way , if anyone is thinking about buying the N900 through Nokia USA , realize that its maximum speed will only really work on T-mobile ( it 's some kind of frequency band thing , and T-Mobile 's network is the only one that operates that band ) .
Let 's face it , Nokia is still not focusing on the US market right now , otherwise other providers would be supported -- not just T-Mobile 's band .
That being said , if you buy an unlocked N900 and get T-Mobile as your provider , you will have the fastest smart-phone on the US Market -- hands-down .
I 'm assuming that only a few people will do that , at least in the US , in the rest of the world -- the N900 will be selling like hotcakes .
So in that sense , the original article is right that the N900 wo n't be that big in the US , it 's just not for the reasons it mentioned .
That being said , there are still many good reasons you should get yourself an unlocked phone , even if it 's not the N900 .
There are many good quality smart-phones out there , and assuming the American currency goes back up to its previous level , and you do a little bit of research , you should be able to buy smart-phones directly from Asia , or directly from Europe , that should work just fine in the US and still make all your iPhone friends jealous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fine.
Don't pay $500 now.
Pay thousands of dollars later in additional cell fees, and lock yourself into a two-year contract that's probably ill-suited for you and purposefully crippled by your provider in many hidden and unforeseen ways.
Go ahead, I'm not stopping you.
Go buy a brand-new car on credit while you're at it.
Get a mortgage you can barely afford.
Get all your furniture at Rent-to-Own.
And buy all your computers, plasma TVs, and monster cables at Best Buy.
No one is stopping you from screwing yourself in the long-run -- if that's what you really want for yourself.By the way, if anyone is thinking about buying the N900 through Nokia USA, realize that its maximum speed will only really work on T-mobile (it's some kind of frequency band thing, and T-Mobile's network is the only one that operates that band).
Let's face it, Nokia is still not focusing on the US market right now, otherwise other providers would be supported -- not just T-Mobile's band.
That being said, if you buy an unlocked N900 and get T-Mobile as your provider, you will have the fastest smart-phone on the US Market -- hands-down.
I'm assuming that only a few people will do that, at least in the US, in the rest of the world -- the N900 will be selling like hotcakes.
So in that sense, the original article is right that the N900 won't be that big in the US, it's just not for the reasons it mentioned.
That being said, there are still many good reasons you should get yourself an unlocked phone, even if it's not the N900.
There are many good quality smart-phones out there, and assuming the American currency goes back up to its previous level, and you do a little bit of research, you should be able to buy smart-phones directly from Asia, or directly from Europe, that should work just fine in the US and still make all your iPhone friends jealous. </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331254</id>
	<title>Re:Open their blinders with amazing apps</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259933580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>But geeks also build new cool applications never before thought possible, that become next year's must-haves.... Palm and the PC as well, if you want to go back in history.</p></div></blockquote><p>

But look at the Palm, which is dying.  Look at the PC, where Linux adoption to the desktop hovers for a decade at a few percent.  There is no control-freak network provider to blame there.  Why doesn't open source take over then?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But geeks also build new cool applications never before thought possible , that become next year 's must-haves.... Palm and the PC as well , if you want to go back in history .
But look at the Palm , which is dying .
Look at the PC , where Linux adoption to the desktop hovers for a decade at a few percent .
There is no control-freak network provider to blame there .
Why does n't open source take over then ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But geeks also build new cool applications never before thought possible, that become next year's must-haves.... Palm and the PC as well, if you want to go back in history.
But look at the Palm, which is dying.
Look at the PC, where Linux adoption to the desktop hovers for a decade at a few percent.
There is no control-freak network provider to blame there.
Why doesn't open source take over then?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331094</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332562</id>
	<title>But whats stopping you from...</title>
	<author>DiSKiLLeR</author>
	<datestamp>1259947500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But what exactly is stopping you from just buying whatever phone you want and chucking your simcard into it?</p><p>Its what we do in Australia... every phone in the past 10 years i've bought off of ebay.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But what exactly is stopping you from just buying whatever phone you want and chucking your simcard into it ? Its what we do in Australia... every phone in the past 10 years i 've bought off of ebay .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But what exactly is stopping you from just buying whatever phone you want and chucking your simcard into it?Its what we do in Australia... every phone in the past 10 years i've bought off of ebay.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30336492</id>
	<title>Re:Open their blinders with amazing apps</title>
	<author>adeelarshad82</author>
	<datestamp>1260039180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"However, TFA is completely incorrect. Companies don't fear the unknown - they know EXACTLY what we'd do with open phones."

Right but they don't the extent of what you can do, hence the unknown</htmltext>
<tokenext>" However , TFA is completely incorrect .
Companies do n't fear the unknown - they know EXACTLY what we 'd do with open phones .
" Right but they do n't the extent of what you can do , hence the unknown</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"However, TFA is completely incorrect.
Companies don't fear the unknown - they know EXACTLY what we'd do with open phones.
"

Right but they don't the extent of what you can do, hence the unknown</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331228</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333444</id>
	<title>Please, everyone, read this book:</title>
	<author>nicolasmendo</author>
	<datestamp>1260004320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://futureoftheinternet.org/" title="futureoftheinternet.org" rel="nofollow">http://futureoftheinternet.org/</a> [futureoftheinternet.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //futureoftheinternet.org/ [ futureoftheinternet.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://futureoftheinternet.org/ [futureoftheinternet.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331508</id>
	<title>It's obvious why</title>
	<author>thetoadwarrior</author>
	<datestamp>1259935380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The phone companies, as mentioned, don't want you to have freedom but also that most people don't actually want freedom either. They can't use computers well enough to handle it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The phone companies , as mentioned , do n't want you to have freedom but also that most people do n't actually want freedom either .
They ca n't use computers well enough to handle it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The phone companies, as mentioned, don't want you to have freedom but also that most people don't actually want freedom either.
They can't use computers well enough to handle it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30334310</id>
	<title>The carriers have nothing to do with it</title>
	<author>logfish</author>
	<datestamp>1260020160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The OpenMoko phone is a fail because the community is trying to create iPhone effects while they are completely overlooking the base problems: no proper power management, unable to accept calls and calls failing, audio problems, no way to handle text messages, no proper contact handling. These are all basic phone things that are being completely ignored by people trying to reinvent the wheel using only square corners. Carriers have nothing to do with it and even the OpenMoko company does not want anything to do with it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The OpenMoko phone is a fail because the community is trying to create iPhone effects while they are completely overlooking the base problems : no proper power management , unable to accept calls and calls failing , audio problems , no way to handle text messages , no proper contact handling .
These are all basic phone things that are being completely ignored by people trying to reinvent the wheel using only square corners .
Carriers have nothing to do with it and even the OpenMoko company does not want anything to do with it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The OpenMoko phone is a fail because the community is trying to create iPhone effects while they are completely overlooking the base problems: no proper power management, unable to accept calls and calls failing, audio problems, no way to handle text messages, no proper contact handling.
These are all basic phone things that are being completely ignored by people trying to reinvent the wheel using only square corners.
Carriers have nothing to do with it and even the OpenMoko company does not want anything to do with it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30334184</id>
	<title>I want a phone</title>
	<author>maggotbrain\_777</author>
	<datestamp>1260017820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How about I just want a phone that works? Unfortunately, it has come to the point where I need to be an IT geek to maintain my phone.

What's next? Will I need to apt-get to get the latest release of my phone's firmware? It's a phone, fer crissakes, not the comm to my starship's bridge.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How about I just want a phone that works ?
Unfortunately , it has come to the point where I need to be an IT geek to maintain my phone .
What 's next ?
Will I need to apt-get to get the latest release of my phone 's firmware ?
It 's a phone , fer crissakes , not the comm to my starship 's bridge .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about I just want a phone that works?
Unfortunately, it has come to the point where I need to be an IT geek to maintain my phone.
What's next?
Will I need to apt-get to get the latest release of my phone's firmware?
It's a phone, fer crissakes, not the comm to my starship's bridge.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331894</id>
	<title>4G LTE Networks To The Rescue</title>
	<author>WiseWeasel</author>
	<datestamp>1259938500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of the stipulations that Google managed to have placed in the FCC license for commercial 4G LTE spectrum is open device access, which is absent in current wireless spectrum licenses. They did this by getting approval for a clause that if a certain minimum bid for the spectrum was met, that that open device access rule would go into effect, then they bid that amount, and then proceeded to let Verizon outbid them, ensuring that clause would go into effect. Carriers may have been able to get away with this type of draconian control over their networks in the past, but it seems that's coming to an end with the shift to 4G LTE already underway. With this open device access regulation, actual user-accessible open source handsets may finally be able to see widespread use.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the stipulations that Google managed to have placed in the FCC license for commercial 4G LTE spectrum is open device access , which is absent in current wireless spectrum licenses .
They did this by getting approval for a clause that if a certain minimum bid for the spectrum was met , that that open device access rule would go into effect , then they bid that amount , and then proceeded to let Verizon outbid them , ensuring that clause would go into effect .
Carriers may have been able to get away with this type of draconian control over their networks in the past , but it seems that 's coming to an end with the shift to 4G LTE already underway .
With this open device access regulation , actual user-accessible open source handsets may finally be able to see widespread use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the stipulations that Google managed to have placed in the FCC license for commercial 4G LTE spectrum is open device access, which is absent in current wireless spectrum licenses.
They did this by getting approval for a clause that if a certain minimum bid for the spectrum was met, that that open device access rule would go into effect, then they bid that amount, and then proceeded to let Verizon outbid them, ensuring that clause would go into effect.
Carriers may have been able to get away with this type of draconian control over their networks in the past, but it seems that's coming to an end with the shift to 4G LTE already underway.
With this open device access regulation, actual user-accessible open source handsets may finally be able to see widespread use.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331198</id>
	<title>The N900 is a computer milestone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259933100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Whether or not the N900 reaches iPhone numbers is irrelevant to the fact that it will stand in computer history along with the Kaypro II, PDP-11, SORD IS-11, Altair 8080;</p><p>I don't care if AT&amp;T likes it or not.</p><p>If you actually get your hands on one, you will understand that it feels good to actually own something, and not pay to carry the wireless equivalent of a cable box.</p><p>If people in America were "customers" and actually were allowed to decided what they wanted, and not "consumers" to be culled by the wireless carriers, then the N900 would on it's merits be the best selling mobile computer of all times.</p><p>Does anyone really like the fact that all you can get from the big wireless carriers is what they want you to have, and not what you want?</p><p>Those that go out and buy an N900 will understand.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Whether or not the N900 reaches iPhone numbers is irrelevant to the fact that it will stand in computer history along with the Kaypro II , PDP-11 , SORD IS-11 , Altair 8080 ; I do n't care if AT&amp;T likes it or not.If you actually get your hands on one , you will understand that it feels good to actually own something , and not pay to carry the wireless equivalent of a cable box.If people in America were " customers " and actually were allowed to decided what they wanted , and not " consumers " to be culled by the wireless carriers , then the N900 would on it 's merits be the best selling mobile computer of all times.Does anyone really like the fact that all you can get from the big wireless carriers is what they want you to have , and not what you want ? Those that go out and buy an N900 will understand .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whether or not the N900 reaches iPhone numbers is irrelevant to the fact that it will stand in computer history along with the Kaypro II, PDP-11, SORD IS-11, Altair 8080;I don't care if AT&amp;T likes it or not.If you actually get your hands on one, you will understand that it feels good to actually own something, and not pay to carry the wireless equivalent of a cable box.If people in America were "customers" and actually were allowed to decided what they wanted, and not "consumers" to be culled by the wireless carriers, then the N900 would on it's merits be the best selling mobile computer of all times.Does anyone really like the fact that all you can get from the big wireless carriers is what they want you to have, and not what you want?Those that go out and buy an N900 will understand.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30342612</id>
	<title>The hottest phone in the world is open source</title>
	<author>gig</author>
	<datestamp>1260106500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The iPhone has an open source kernel and open source Web browser engine, and has the best support for the outrageously open HTML5 API of any phone. It also has security features such as not running arbitrary native code, so that even people who are not computer scientists can run it safely. If you can't understand that both the openness and the locking down are features, that is your problem, not the problem of phone companies and the 90\% of humanity that DOES NOT WANT to have to learn about bits and bytes in order to use a fucking phone, they have THEIR OWN JOBS to geek out on.</p><p>It's just as bad to say that everything has to be open as it is to say everything has to be closed, because your extremism blinds you, gives you myopia, and you go on to produce a piece of shite like Windows Mobile or OpenMoko and tell people that's better than an iPhone, which is an actual solution to phone problems, not an academic exercise for computer nerds. Have you learned nothing from the PC, where you have one totally closed OS and one totally open, and you have to dual boot between them to get anything done? Me, I'm running Photoshop and Apache side-by-side for a decade. I have work to do.</p><p>I truly feel sorry for anyone who has evangelized open source over the past 20 years and doesn't see the iPhone as a success. You will never find peace. You will just grind yourself down on your bullshit philosophy until you die unhappy. The rest of humanity is not going to join you in your extremism.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The iPhone has an open source kernel and open source Web browser engine , and has the best support for the outrageously open HTML5 API of any phone .
It also has security features such as not running arbitrary native code , so that even people who are not computer scientists can run it safely .
If you ca n't understand that both the openness and the locking down are features , that is your problem , not the problem of phone companies and the 90 \ % of humanity that DOES NOT WANT to have to learn about bits and bytes in order to use a fucking phone , they have THEIR OWN JOBS to geek out on.It 's just as bad to say that everything has to be open as it is to say everything has to be closed , because your extremism blinds you , gives you myopia , and you go on to produce a piece of shite like Windows Mobile or OpenMoko and tell people that 's better than an iPhone , which is an actual solution to phone problems , not an academic exercise for computer nerds .
Have you learned nothing from the PC , where you have one totally closed OS and one totally open , and you have to dual boot between them to get anything done ?
Me , I 'm running Photoshop and Apache side-by-side for a decade .
I have work to do.I truly feel sorry for anyone who has evangelized open source over the past 20 years and does n't see the iPhone as a success .
You will never find peace .
You will just grind yourself down on your bullshit philosophy until you die unhappy .
The rest of humanity is not going to join you in your extremism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The iPhone has an open source kernel and open source Web browser engine, and has the best support for the outrageously open HTML5 API of any phone.
It also has security features such as not running arbitrary native code, so that even people who are not computer scientists can run it safely.
If you can't understand that both the openness and the locking down are features, that is your problem, not the problem of phone companies and the 90\% of humanity that DOES NOT WANT to have to learn about bits and bytes in order to use a fucking phone, they have THEIR OWN JOBS to geek out on.It's just as bad to say that everything has to be open as it is to say everything has to be closed, because your extremism blinds you, gives you myopia, and you go on to produce a piece of shite like Windows Mobile or OpenMoko and tell people that's better than an iPhone, which is an actual solution to phone problems, not an academic exercise for computer nerds.
Have you learned nothing from the PC, where you have one totally closed OS and one totally open, and you have to dual boot between them to get anything done?
Me, I'm running Photoshop and Apache side-by-side for a decade.
I have work to do.I truly feel sorry for anyone who has evangelized open source over the past 20 years and doesn't see the iPhone as a success.
You will never find peace.
You will just grind yourself down on your bullshit philosophy until you die unhappy.
The rest of humanity is not going to join you in your extremism.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331814</id>
	<title>Re:Too costly</title>
	<author>vxice</author>
	<datestamp>1259937720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>your current phone costs $500, if you got one of those fancy pda ones less if it is a less advanced phone, you just don't pay for it directly.  Instead you enter into a contract with the phone company which you pay a monthly fee.  Part of that monthly fee is payment for  phone service the other part is essentially to pay off a loan on that phone.  Service providers know you are not big on large up front costs so they pay $400 for the phone give it to you and charge for your monthly service and then another $34 a month to pay off the phone for a two year contract.</htmltext>
<tokenext>your current phone costs $ 500 , if you got one of those fancy pda ones less if it is a less advanced phone , you just do n't pay for it directly .
Instead you enter into a contract with the phone company which you pay a monthly fee .
Part of that monthly fee is payment for phone service the other part is essentially to pay off a loan on that phone .
Service providers know you are not big on large up front costs so they pay $ 400 for the phone give it to you and charge for your monthly service and then another $ 34 a month to pay off the phone for a two year contract .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>your current phone costs $500, if you got one of those fancy pda ones less if it is a less advanced phone, you just don't pay for it directly.
Instead you enter into a contract with the phone company which you pay a monthly fee.
Part of that monthly fee is payment for  phone service the other part is essentially to pay off a loan on that phone.
Service providers know you are not big on large up front costs so they pay $400 for the phone give it to you and charge for your monthly service and then another $34 a month to pay off the phone for a two year contract.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333672</id>
	<title>Re:what do you call "truly open" there??</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260008880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Somebody in the know should edit the wikipedia article on n900, these facts are really important to some of us.</p><p>Looking for this (parent) comment is why I decided to read the comments at all. Well said.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Somebody in the know should edit the wikipedia article on n900 , these facts are really important to some of us.Looking for this ( parent ) comment is why I decided to read the comments at all .
Well said .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Somebody in the know should edit the wikipedia article on n900, these facts are really important to some of us.Looking for this (parent) comment is why I decided to read the comments at all.
Well said.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331486</id>
	<title>Wow</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259935200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I probably should have known this, but I didn't realize that Google Android cripples the phone by requiring Java. I thought it was a truly open environment where you could write native applications like the iPhone.<br><br>Well, there goes any chance of Android getting the same level of applications as the iPhone. And no, I don't believe Java apps are ever going to be as fast and good as native apps. I thought I might be tempted to get an Android phone someday, but not as long as they don't have native apps.<br><br>(Queue the Javalytes telling me that "Java runtimes are getting really fast, and they'll be as fast as native code &lt;i&gt;real soon now...&lt;/i&gt; In fact, even FASTER than native code, because the runtimes are so amazingly smart at optimization...)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I probably should have known this , but I did n't realize that Google Android cripples the phone by requiring Java .
I thought it was a truly open environment where you could write native applications like the iPhone.Well , there goes any chance of Android getting the same level of applications as the iPhone .
And no , I do n't believe Java apps are ever going to be as fast and good as native apps .
I thought I might be tempted to get an Android phone someday , but not as long as they do n't have native apps .
( Queue the Javalytes telling me that " Java runtimes are getting really fast , and they 'll be as fast as native code real soon now... In fact , even FASTER than native code , because the runtimes are so amazingly smart at optimization... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I probably should have known this, but I didn't realize that Google Android cripples the phone by requiring Java.
I thought it was a truly open environment where you could write native applications like the iPhone.Well, there goes any chance of Android getting the same level of applications as the iPhone.
And no, I don't believe Java apps are ever going to be as fast and good as native apps.
I thought I might be tempted to get an Android phone someday, but not as long as they don't have native apps.
(Queue the Javalytes telling me that "Java runtimes are getting really fast, and they'll be as fast as native code real soon now... In fact, even FASTER than native code, because the runtimes are so amazingly smart at optimization...)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30334290</id>
	<title>Buy unlocked?</title>
	<author>ickleberry</author>
	<datestamp>1260019740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't understand why everyone is rabbling on about 'carriers' like they have any actual say in the matter. sure a lot of people buy their phone that way but I'm going to assume that everyone in the target market for an open source phone knows that this is a rip-off.<br> <br>

I havn't bought a phone through a network since 2000. Since then all my phones have been unlocked, unbranded and uncrippled.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't understand why everyone is rabbling on about 'carriers ' like they have any actual say in the matter .
sure a lot of people buy their phone that way but I 'm going to assume that everyone in the target market for an open source phone knows that this is a rip-off .
I hav n't bought a phone through a network since 2000 .
Since then all my phones have been unlocked , unbranded and uncrippled .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't understand why everyone is rabbling on about 'carriers' like they have any actual say in the matter.
sure a lot of people buy their phone that way but I'm going to assume that everyone in the target market for an open source phone knows that this is a rip-off.
I havn't bought a phone through a network since 2000.
Since then all my phones have been unlocked, unbranded and uncrippled.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30342136</id>
	<title>Dissent</title>
	<author>ripragged</author>
	<datestamp>1260097140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The carriers have Open Source phones on the shelves, all equipped with price tags and UPC codes. They aren't mainstream because not very many people are buying them. The phones lots of people buy are mainstream because lots of people buy them. An over-engineered, fetid, steaming, convoluted pile of logic wrapped around a predetermined conclusion doesn't change the facts. Reality is much simpler than that. Mainstream is what the stupid consumer gets out his wallet for.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The carriers have Open Source phones on the shelves , all equipped with price tags and UPC codes .
They are n't mainstream because not very many people are buying them .
The phones lots of people buy are mainstream because lots of people buy them .
An over-engineered , fetid , steaming , convoluted pile of logic wrapped around a predetermined conclusion does n't change the facts .
Reality is much simpler than that .
Mainstream is what the stupid consumer gets out his wallet for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The carriers have Open Source phones on the shelves, all equipped with price tags and UPC codes.
They aren't mainstream because not very many people are buying them.
The phones lots of people buy are mainstream because lots of people buy them.
An over-engineered, fetid, steaming, convoluted pile of logic wrapped around a predetermined conclusion doesn't change the facts.
Reality is much simpler than that.
Mainstream is what the stupid consumer gets out his wallet for.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332058</id>
	<title>Buy N900 Today</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259940300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pick one at www.nokia.com today</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pick one at www.nokia.com today</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pick one at www.nokia.com today</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331918</id>
	<title>Re:The N900 is a computer milestone</title>
	<author>rdnetto</author>
	<datestamp>1259938920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>His email address is<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...@ovi.com. Ovi is the name of Nokia's internet services brand, so it looks like this is just astroturfing.<br>(That said, I do agree that the N900 is phenomenal and plan on buying one soon)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>His email address is ... @ ovi.com .
Ovi is the name of Nokia 's internet services brand , so it looks like this is just astroturfing .
( That said , I do agree that the N900 is phenomenal and plan on buying one soon )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>His email address is ...@ovi.com.
Ovi is the name of Nokia's internet services brand, so it looks like this is just astroturfing.
(That said, I do agree that the N900 is phenomenal and plan on buying one soon)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333834</id>
	<title>fear</title>
	<author>l3v1</author>
	<datestamp>1260012060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They - companies - are mostly just afraid that what they've been producing as things that could only be produced by a company, these things can these days be created by a bunch of people, without any company control over them. It just doesn't fit into their bussinness model, and they don't want to change what they had up to now - they do what they want and they ask as much for it as they want.

<br> <br>

It's very similar to what the music "industry" (what a crazy word that is in that context) is - or at least should be - going through, also unwilling to change how their cash cows work.

<br> <br>

Someone has to realize that you can't close the consumers out of the development process. After a while the efforts to keep you closed down will result in painful death.

<br> <br>

These industries that have such problems now just can't seem willing to differentiate themselves from real industries, like coal mining, steel producing, and so on, but they are different. In an age where technological knowledge spreads faster than any disease, keeping customers out of your products - even more so when these products are based on open source results, which come from the those same customers - will cause you more harm than good.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They - companies - are mostly just afraid that what they 've been producing as things that could only be produced by a company , these things can these days be created by a bunch of people , without any company control over them .
It just does n't fit into their bussinness model , and they do n't want to change what they had up to now - they do what they want and they ask as much for it as they want .
It 's very similar to what the music " industry " ( what a crazy word that is in that context ) is - or at least should be - going through , also unwilling to change how their cash cows work .
Someone has to realize that you ca n't close the consumers out of the development process .
After a while the efforts to keep you closed down will result in painful death .
These industries that have such problems now just ca n't seem willing to differentiate themselves from real industries , like coal mining , steel producing , and so on , but they are different .
In an age where technological knowledge spreads faster than any disease , keeping customers out of your products - even more so when these products are based on open source results , which come from the those same customers - will cause you more harm than good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They - companies - are mostly just afraid that what they've been producing as things that could only be produced by a company, these things can these days be created by a bunch of people, without any company control over them.
It just doesn't fit into their bussinness model, and they don't want to change what they had up to now - they do what they want and they ask as much for it as they want.
It's very similar to what the music "industry" (what a crazy word that is in that context) is - or at least should be - going through, also unwilling to change how their cash cows work.
Someone has to realize that you can't close the consumers out of the development process.
After a while the efforts to keep you closed down will result in painful death.
These industries that have such problems now just can't seem willing to differentiate themselves from real industries, like coal mining, steel producing, and so on, but they are different.
In an age where technological knowledge spreads faster than any disease, keeping customers out of your products - even more so when these products are based on open source results, which come from the those same customers - will cause you more harm than good.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30334356</id>
	<title>Nokia has shot itself in the foot without help.</title>
	<author>DSmith1974</author>
	<datestamp>1260021360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The N900 is a major step forward since it gives people root access and apt-get without jailbreaking and playing cat and mouse with the telcos.  Unfortunately though, some dick decided to render it pretty much useless by shipping it with the worst touchscreen ever known to man.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The N900 is a major step forward since it gives people root access and apt-get without jailbreaking and playing cat and mouse with the telcos .
Unfortunately though , some dick decided to render it pretty much useless by shipping it with the worst touchscreen ever known to man .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The N900 is a major step forward since it gives people root access and apt-get without jailbreaking and playing cat and mouse with the telcos.
Unfortunately though, some dick decided to render it pretty much useless by shipping it with the worst touchscreen ever known to man.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331584</id>
	<title>And yet...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259936040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...the same carriers will let you plug a mobile internet stick into your laptop and run anything you want over their 3G network.  No sim locking... No "per message" charges.  The stench of hypocrisy is hard to miss.</p><p>The public message is that protectionist activities like SIM locking, sandboxing and removing features from phones is about "network security".  The reality is that it is about MONEY.  Carriers want a cut of everything you do on their network and this requires them to control the handset and the user experience.  They will fight tooth and nail to ensure they maintain whatever control they can.  BlackBerry, iPhone and Andriod are chipping away at the edges but it has been a long hard uphill struggle.  In the end, the customers are the ones who lose.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...the same carriers will let you plug a mobile internet stick into your laptop and run anything you want over their 3G network .
No sim locking... No " per message " charges .
The stench of hypocrisy is hard to miss.The public message is that protectionist activities like SIM locking , sandboxing and removing features from phones is about " network security " .
The reality is that it is about MONEY .
Carriers want a cut of everything you do on their network and this requires them to control the handset and the user experience .
They will fight tooth and nail to ensure they maintain whatever control they can .
BlackBerry , iPhone and Andriod are chipping away at the edges but it has been a long hard uphill struggle .
In the end , the customers are the ones who lose .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...the same carriers will let you plug a mobile internet stick into your laptop and run anything you want over their 3G network.
No sim locking... No "per message" charges.
The stench of hypocrisy is hard to miss.The public message is that protectionist activities like SIM locking, sandboxing and removing features from phones is about "network security".
The reality is that it is about MONEY.
Carriers want a cut of everything you do on their network and this requires them to control the handset and the user experience.
They will fight tooth and nail to ensure they maintain whatever control they can.
BlackBerry, iPhone and Andriod are chipping away at the edges but it has been a long hard uphill struggle.
In the end, the customers are the ones who lose.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333488</id>
	<title>Re:The N900 is a computer milestone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260005580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Whether or not the N900 reaches iPhone numbers is irrelevant to the fact that it will stand in computer history along with the Kaypro II, PDP-11, SORD IS-11, Altair 8080;</p><p>I don't care if AT&amp;T likes it or not.</p><p>If you actually get your hands on one, you will understand that it feels good to actually own something, and not pay to carry the wireless equivalent of a cable box.</p><p>If people in America were "customers" and actually were allowed to decided what they wanted, and not "consumers" to be culled by the wireless carriers, then the N900 would on it's merits be the best selling mobile computer of all times.</p><p>Does anyone really like the fact that all you can get from the big wireless carriers is what they want you to have, and not what you want?</p><p>Those that go out and buy an N900 will understand.</p></div><p>Not really the first mobile computer with 3G that is completely open, technically:</p><p>http://www.umpcportal.com/2009/05/viliv-s5-premium-umpc-full-review/</p><p>(There are tons of other MIDs out there, and much better ones on the horizon that are proper smart phones, but the S5 is the most popular one atm.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Whether or not the N900 reaches iPhone numbers is irrelevant to the fact that it will stand in computer history along with the Kaypro II , PDP-11 , SORD IS-11 , Altair 8080 ; I do n't care if AT&amp;T likes it or not.If you actually get your hands on one , you will understand that it feels good to actually own something , and not pay to carry the wireless equivalent of a cable box.If people in America were " customers " and actually were allowed to decided what they wanted , and not " consumers " to be culled by the wireless carriers , then the N900 would on it 's merits be the best selling mobile computer of all times.Does anyone really like the fact that all you can get from the big wireless carriers is what they want you to have , and not what you want ? Those that go out and buy an N900 will understand.Not really the first mobile computer with 3G that is completely open , technically : http : //www.umpcportal.com/2009/05/viliv-s5-premium-umpc-full-review/ ( There are tons of other MIDs out there , and much better ones on the horizon that are proper smart phones , but the S5 is the most popular one atm .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whether or not the N900 reaches iPhone numbers is irrelevant to the fact that it will stand in computer history along with the Kaypro II, PDP-11, SORD IS-11, Altair 8080;I don't care if AT&amp;T likes it or not.If you actually get your hands on one, you will understand that it feels good to actually own something, and not pay to carry the wireless equivalent of a cable box.If people in America were "customers" and actually were allowed to decided what they wanted, and not "consumers" to be culled by the wireless carriers, then the N900 would on it's merits be the best selling mobile computer of all times.Does anyone really like the fact that all you can get from the big wireless carriers is what they want you to have, and not what you want?Those that go out and buy an N900 will understand.Not really the first mobile computer with 3G that is completely open, technically:http://www.umpcportal.com/2009/05/viliv-s5-premium-umpc-full-review/(There are tons of other MIDs out there, and much better ones on the horizon that are proper smart phones, but the S5 is the most popular one atm.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332110</id>
	<title>Re:Open their blinders with amazing apps</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259941200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, that lockdown approach has worked so great for MS and their closed source.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , that lockdown approach has worked so great for MS and their closed source .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, that lockdown approach has worked so great for MS and their closed source.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331228</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30343250</id>
	<title>Some flaws in this analysis</title>
	<author>jasdiz</author>
	<datestamp>1260116040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>While the author has correctly pointed out some of the issues, he failed to address the "average joe factor".
I wrote my response to this analysis at my blog : <a href="http://glembay.blogspot.com/2009/12/opensource-phones-vs-operators.html" title="blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">http://glembay.blogspot.com/2009/12/opensource-phones-vs-operators.html</a> [blogspot.com] .
Comments are welcome.</htmltext>
<tokenext>While the author has correctly pointed out some of the issues , he failed to address the " average joe factor " .
I wrote my response to this analysis at my blog : http : //glembay.blogspot.com/2009/12/opensource-phones-vs-operators.html [ blogspot.com ] .
Comments are welcome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While the author has correctly pointed out some of the issues, he failed to address the "average joe factor".
I wrote my response to this analysis at my blog : http://glembay.blogspot.com/2009/12/opensource-phones-vs-operators.html [blogspot.com] .
Comments are welcome.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331364</id>
	<title>Only "Open Source"? US only?...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259934360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The summary almost hints that there do exist popular phone platforms which, while not open source, certainly allowed for quite open development and modification by users for a long time. Many Nokia phones for example.</p><p>But I've heard that US carriers didn't really want to offer them in unlocked state, and Nokia wouldn't castrate its products; so the carriers went with RAZR... (and look where Motorola is now)</p><p>So this really seems like your local problem. Since Nokia almost completed open sourcing of Symbian and more than 50\% of smartphones run that OS, I'd even say that the article is quite irrelevant on the larger scale.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The summary almost hints that there do exist popular phone platforms which , while not open source , certainly allowed for quite open development and modification by users for a long time .
Many Nokia phones for example.But I 've heard that US carriers did n't really want to offer them in unlocked state , and Nokia would n't castrate its products ; so the carriers went with RAZR... ( and look where Motorola is now ) So this really seems like your local problem .
Since Nokia almost completed open sourcing of Symbian and more than 50 \ % of smartphones run that OS , I 'd even say that the article is quite irrelevant on the larger scale .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The summary almost hints that there do exist popular phone platforms which, while not open source, certainly allowed for quite open development and modification by users for a long time.
Many Nokia phones for example.But I've heard that US carriers didn't really want to offer them in unlocked state, and Nokia wouldn't castrate its products; so the carriers went with RAZR... (and look where Motorola is now)So this really seems like your local problem.
Since Nokia almost completed open sourcing of Symbian and more than 50\% of smartphones run that OS, I'd even say that the article is quite irrelevant on the larger scale.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331952</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>mzechner</author>
	<datestamp>1259939280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Android features it's own custom vm which is far behind the sun's vm. While the main gui stuff on android has to be done in java there's a very nice and easy to use native developement kit that allows you to write the performance critical portions of your code in c/c++ (with some limitations). As of NDK version 1.6 you can also access OpenGL directly, paving the way for truely performant 3D games.

I could provide you with some links but i don't think they'd work with your brain anyways...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Android features it 's own custom vm which is far behind the sun 's vm .
While the main gui stuff on android has to be done in java there 's a very nice and easy to use native developement kit that allows you to write the performance critical portions of your code in c/c + + ( with some limitations ) .
As of NDK version 1.6 you can also access OpenGL directly , paving the way for truely performant 3D games .
I could provide you with some links but i do n't think they 'd work with your brain anyways.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Android features it's own custom vm which is far behind the sun's vm.
While the main gui stuff on android has to be done in java there's a very nice and easy to use native developement kit that allows you to write the performance critical portions of your code in c/c++ (with some limitations).
As of NDK version 1.6 you can also access OpenGL directly, paving the way for truely performant 3D games.
I could provide you with some links but i don't think they'd work with your brain anyways...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333782</id>
	<title>Re:The N900 is a computer milestone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260011280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>According to google he makes centrifugal pumps

<a href="http://kurt555gs.blogspot.com/" title="blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">http://kurt555gs.blogspot.com/</a> [blogspot.com]
<a href="http://www.bihlertech.org/" title="bihlertech.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.bihlertech.org/</a> [bihlertech.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>According to google he makes centrifugal pumps http : //kurt555gs.blogspot.com/ [ blogspot.com ] http : //www.bihlertech.org/ [ bihlertech.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to google he makes centrifugal pumps

http://kurt555gs.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com]
http://www.bihlertech.org/ [bihlertech.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332622</id>
	<title>Ultimate Acai Max</title>
	<author>gerrar</author>
	<datestamp>1259948100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Many Americans are focused with something else before 9/11 like Clinton was busy with Lewinsky during his term and Bush was pondering on his businesses in Texas when he assumed office. Thus, they ignored the threat of the terrorists and it was the reason why terrorism struck America by surprise.
<a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/23658247/Ultimate-Acai-Max-Review-Does-Ultimate-Acai-Max-Trial-Work" title="scribd.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.scribd.com/doc/23658247/Ultimate-Acai-Max-Review-Does-Ultimate-Acai-Max-Trial-Work</a> [scribd.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Many Americans are focused with something else before 9/11 like Clinton was busy with Lewinsky during his term and Bush was pondering on his businesses in Texas when he assumed office .
Thus , they ignored the threat of the terrorists and it was the reason why terrorism struck America by surprise .
http : //www.scribd.com/doc/23658247/Ultimate-Acai-Max-Review-Does-Ultimate-Acai-Max-Trial-Work [ scribd.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Many Americans are focused with something else before 9/11 like Clinton was busy with Lewinsky during his term and Bush was pondering on his businesses in Texas when he assumed office.
Thus, they ignored the threat of the terrorists and it was the reason why terrorism struck America by surprise.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/23658247/Ultimate-Acai-Max-Review-Does-Ultimate-Acai-Max-Trial-Work [scribd.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331588</id>
	<title>N900 fail?</title>
	<author>svanheulen</author>
	<datestamp>1259936040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, the N900 will never hit main stream. That's why they had to delay the release because Nokia was over whelmed by pre-orders, right? Because that's a clear sign no one is going to get it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , the N900 will never hit main stream .
That 's why they had to delay the release because Nokia was over whelmed by pre-orders , right ?
Because that 's a clear sign no one is going to get it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, the N900 will never hit main stream.
That's why they had to delay the release because Nokia was over whelmed by pre-orders, right?
Because that's a clear sign no one is going to get it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331556</id>
	<title>The writer expects me to believe that?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259935800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's funny this article came out today - I was just wanted buy one today.<br>So I go to the nokia store: <a href="http://store.nokia.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/productdetail\_10500\_10101\_-1\_10000367?cid=dev-fw-lec-micro\_maemo\_01-con-na-maemo-us-na-n900\_003" title="nokia.com" rel="nofollow">http://store.nokia.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/productdetail\_10500\_10101\_-1\_10000367?cid=dev-fw-lec-micro\_maemo\_01-con-na-maemo-us-na-n900\_003</a> [nokia.com], and they are "Temporarily out of stock".</p><p>They can't be selling all that badly then...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's funny this article came out today - I was just wanted buy one today.So I go to the nokia store : http : //store.nokia.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/productdetail \ _10500 \ _10101 \ _-1 \ _10000367 ? cid = dev-fw-lec-micro \ _maemo \ _01-con-na-maemo-us-na-n900 \ _003 [ nokia.com ] , and they are " Temporarily out of stock " .They ca n't be selling all that badly then.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's funny this article came out today - I was just wanted buy one today.So I go to the nokia store: http://store.nokia.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/productdetail\_10500\_10101\_-1\_10000367?cid=dev-fw-lec-micro\_maemo\_01-con-na-maemo-us-na-n900\_003 [nokia.com], and they are "Temporarily out of stock".They can't be selling all that badly then...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30348040</id>
	<title>Re:what do you call "truly open" there??</title>
	<author>Warbothong</author>
	<datestamp>1260109380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My  OpenMoko works perfectly well. Whilst I''ve played with a few distros on it that's only because I like to. The OS it shipped with (OM 2007) was incredibly basic and unsupported on arrival, but nonetheless worked exactly as it should have. OM 2008 is the same, and Qtopia/QtExtended. Android was rough around the edges but when I tried it the image was simply taken straight from the G1 and only had enough modifications for it to boot and run on the Freerunner, it's probably better now but I wanted a more traditional Linux system since Google's Java+tons-of-XML put me off. Debian is a bit hit-and-miss (I tried the QTMoko version, didn't work too well<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:( ). Got SHR on it at the moment, which is a nice system. Occasionally get some issues from DBus though<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p><p>Whilst I certainly wouldn't say it's a mass-market smartphone in the same way that the N900 or iPhone are, I'd say it's perfectly capable of being a mass-market basic phone with any of the OSs I've tried other than QTMoko (although obviously it's way too overspecced to do well in sales<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P ). However, for a geeky smartphone it is absolutely perfect for me, in the same way that Debian is perfect for my desktop, laptop and netbook systems, but I wouldn't lumber someone with Debian who wouldn't know what to do with it; that's what Ubuntu's for.</p><p>For the record, I probably would've got an N8*0 rather than the Freerunner at the time, but they're not phones. The N900 is, and thus is win. I know a number of people who've got one, more who want one, and I've recommended it a few times. I don't understand the "fail"...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My OpenMoko works perfectly well .
Whilst I ' 've played with a few distros on it that 's only because I like to .
The OS it shipped with ( OM 2007 ) was incredibly basic and unsupported on arrival , but nonetheless worked exactly as it should have .
OM 2008 is the same , and Qtopia/QtExtended .
Android was rough around the edges but when I tried it the image was simply taken straight from the G1 and only had enough modifications for it to boot and run on the Freerunner , it 's probably better now but I wanted a more traditional Linux system since Google 's Java + tons-of-XML put me off .
Debian is a bit hit-and-miss ( I tried the QTMoko version , did n't work too well : ( ) .
Got SHR on it at the moment , which is a nice system .
Occasionally get some issues from DBus though : ( Whilst I certainly would n't say it 's a mass-market smartphone in the same way that the N900 or iPhone are , I 'd say it 's perfectly capable of being a mass-market basic phone with any of the OSs I 've tried other than QTMoko ( although obviously it 's way too overspecced to do well in sales : P ) .
However , for a geeky smartphone it is absolutely perfect for me , in the same way that Debian is perfect for my desktop , laptop and netbook systems , but I would n't lumber someone with Debian who would n't know what to do with it ; that 's what Ubuntu 's for.For the record , I probably would 've got an N8 * 0 rather than the Freerunner at the time , but they 're not phones .
The N900 is , and thus is win .
I know a number of people who 've got one , more who want one , and I 've recommended it a few times .
I do n't understand the " fail " .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My  OpenMoko works perfectly well.
Whilst I''ve played with a few distros on it that's only because I like to.
The OS it shipped with (OM 2007) was incredibly basic and unsupported on arrival, but nonetheless worked exactly as it should have.
OM 2008 is the same, and Qtopia/QtExtended.
Android was rough around the edges but when I tried it the image was simply taken straight from the G1 and only had enough modifications for it to boot and run on the Freerunner, it's probably better now but I wanted a more traditional Linux system since Google's Java+tons-of-XML put me off.
Debian is a bit hit-and-miss (I tried the QTMoko version, didn't work too well :( ).
Got SHR on it at the moment, which is a nice system.
Occasionally get some issues from DBus though :(Whilst I certainly wouldn't say it's a mass-market smartphone in the same way that the N900 or iPhone are, I'd say it's perfectly capable of being a mass-market basic phone with any of the OSs I've tried other than QTMoko (although obviously it's way too overspecced to do well in sales :P ).
However, for a geeky smartphone it is absolutely perfect for me, in the same way that Debian is perfect for my desktop, laptop and netbook systems, but I wouldn't lumber someone with Debian who wouldn't know what to do with it; that's what Ubuntu's for.For the record, I probably would've got an N8*0 rather than the Freerunner at the time, but they're not phones.
The N900 is, and thus is win.
I know a number of people who've got one, more who want one, and I've recommended it a few times.
I don't understand the "fail"...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333438</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333474</id>
	<title>Re:They don't fail</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260004980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>n900 fails because of the resistive touchscreen, not for any other reason. If it had a capacitive screen I would buy five of them.</p><p>Oh, and i live in north america.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>n900 fails because of the resistive touchscreen , not for any other reason .
If it had a capacitive screen I would buy five of them.Oh , and i live in north america .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>n900 fails because of the resistive touchscreen, not for any other reason.
If it had a capacitive screen I would buy five of them.Oh, and i live in north america.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331304</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331686</id>
	<title>Android and native software</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259936700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Google Android, which uses some open-source components but locks third-party developers into a crippled Java sandbox.</p></div><p> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android\_os#Native\_code" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">not true</a> [wikipedia.org] anymore.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google Android , which uses some open-source components but locks third-party developers into a crippled Java sandbox .
not true [ wikipedia.org ] anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google Android, which uses some open-source components but locks third-party developers into a crippled Java sandbox.
not true [wikipedia.org] anymore.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331826</id>
	<title>Re:Too costly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259937780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Little more than a PDA? Seriously?</p><p>Smaller than a PDA. Hardware keyboard. Great display. A phone. Skype. A built fast(ish) internet connection. A browser. Email. An MP3 player. A Satnav. A camera. A RSS aggregator. Podcast downloader. A SSH client. Open Transport Tycoon. All the time. Whereever you are. In your pocket.</p><p>It's such an immense step forward for both users and developers.</p><p>Don't compare it to a PDA, compare it to a netbook that fits in your pocket that has awesome connectivity and has a better graphics chipset.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Little more than a PDA ?
Seriously ? Smaller than a PDA .
Hardware keyboard .
Great display .
A phone .
Skype. A built fast ( ish ) internet connection .
A browser .
Email. An MP3 player .
A Satnav .
A camera .
A RSS aggregator .
Podcast downloader .
A SSH client .
Open Transport Tycoon .
All the time .
Whereever you are .
In your pocket.It 's such an immense step forward for both users and developers.Do n't compare it to a PDA , compare it to a netbook that fits in your pocket that has awesome connectivity and has a better graphics chipset .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Little more than a PDA?
Seriously?Smaller than a PDA.
Hardware keyboard.
Great display.
A phone.
Skype. A built fast(ish) internet connection.
A browser.
Email. An MP3 player.
A Satnav.
A camera.
A RSS aggregator.
Podcast downloader.
A SSH client.
Open Transport Tycoon.
All the time.
Whereever you are.
In your pocket.It's such an immense step forward for both users and developers.Don't compare it to a PDA, compare it to a netbook that fits in your pocket that has awesome connectivity and has a better graphics chipset.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332686</id>
	<title>What a load of BS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259948700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I didn't even read the article, but this is the biggest piece of garbage ever. Open source phones are not "failing", Android is booming at the moment. And developers are certainly not "locked" into a Java sandbox, that's merely the method that is support by Google (by using Eclipse + Android plugin).</p><p>See http://developer.android.com/sdk/ndk/1.6\_r1/index.html:<br>Android applications run in the Dalvik virtual machine. The NDK allows developers to implement parts of their applications using native-code languages such as C and C++. This can provide benefits to certain classes of applications, in the form of reuse of existing code and in some cases increased speed.</p><p>The author also seems to be under the impression that Android is created by a bunch of "banded together" users, when in reality it's actually Google using predeveloped open-source libraries, plus their own bits and piece, which they have themselves open sourced.</p><p>Sascha Segan should be fired.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't even read the article , but this is the biggest piece of garbage ever .
Open source phones are not " failing " , Android is booming at the moment .
And developers are certainly not " locked " into a Java sandbox , that 's merely the method that is support by Google ( by using Eclipse + Android plugin ) .See http : //developer.android.com/sdk/ndk/1.6 \ _r1/index.html : Android applications run in the Dalvik virtual machine .
The NDK allows developers to implement parts of their applications using native-code languages such as C and C + + .
This can provide benefits to certain classes of applications , in the form of reuse of existing code and in some cases increased speed.The author also seems to be under the impression that Android is created by a bunch of " banded together " users , when in reality it 's actually Google using predeveloped open-source libraries , plus their own bits and piece , which they have themselves open sourced.Sascha Segan should be fired .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't even read the article, but this is the biggest piece of garbage ever.
Open source phones are not "failing", Android is booming at the moment.
And developers are certainly not "locked" into a Java sandbox, that's merely the method that is support by Google (by using Eclipse + Android plugin).See http://developer.android.com/sdk/ndk/1.6\_r1/index.html:Android applications run in the Dalvik virtual machine.
The NDK allows developers to implement parts of their applications using native-code languages such as C and C++.
This can provide benefits to certain classes of applications, in the form of reuse of existing code and in some cases increased speed.The author also seems to be under the impression that Android is created by a bunch of "banded together" users, when in reality it's actually Google using predeveloped open-source libraries, plus their own bits and piece, which they have themselves open sourced.Sascha Segan should be fired.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332122</id>
	<title>It's just like they want their "internet2" to be</title>
	<author>gd23ka</author>
	<datestamp>1259941380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are pretty much 3 reasons for that, one they're many times oversubscribed with their bandwidth. Just see what the iphone did to AT&amp;T, mobile networks are not<br>really looking for the next killer app. Two their infrastructure is way not as reliable as people might think, I know of a bunch of NT4 machines that were handling text msgs<br>at a German network in 2006 and I'm sure there still there. Three and this is what I believe is the most important reason:</p><p>They maintain a consumption culture where they are in control not only over the network and the services reachable through it but also the device itself (pay 4 apps, ringtones etc.) while<br>locking out the competition and keeping their customers in the app store. Locked down devices, usage restrictions, "AUP" "acceptable" use policies, chicanery and arbitrary<br>prohibitions - your mobile phone experience today is a taste of the "Internet2" joys to be forced on you tomorrow (if you let them).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are pretty much 3 reasons for that , one they 're many times oversubscribed with their bandwidth .
Just see what the iphone did to AT&amp;T , mobile networks are notreally looking for the next killer app .
Two their infrastructure is way not as reliable as people might think , I know of a bunch of NT4 machines that were handling text msgsat a German network in 2006 and I 'm sure there still there .
Three and this is what I believe is the most important reason : They maintain a consumption culture where they are in control not only over the network and the services reachable through it but also the device itself ( pay 4 apps , ringtones etc .
) whilelocking out the competition and keeping their customers in the app store .
Locked down devices , usage restrictions , " AUP " " acceptable " use policies , chicanery and arbitraryprohibitions - your mobile phone experience today is a taste of the " Internet2 " joys to be forced on you tomorrow ( if you let them ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are pretty much 3 reasons for that, one they're many times oversubscribed with their bandwidth.
Just see what the iphone did to AT&amp;T, mobile networks are notreally looking for the next killer app.
Two their infrastructure is way not as reliable as people might think, I know of a bunch of NT4 machines that were handling text msgsat a German network in 2006 and I'm sure there still there.
Three and this is what I believe is the most important reason:They maintain a consumption culture where they are in control not only over the network and the services reachable through it but also the device itself (pay 4 apps, ringtones etc.
) whilelocking out the competition and keeping their customers in the app store.
Locked down devices, usage restrictions, "AUP" "acceptable" use policies, chicanery and arbitraryprohibitions - your mobile phone experience today is a taste of the "Internet2" joys to be forced on you tomorrow (if you let them).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332420</id>
	<title>Fixed</title>
	<author>ToasterMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1259945520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The bottom line is that while Linux the OS, the kernel, and the memory manager are attractive to users, Linux the philosophy -- and users banding together ad hoc to create new things -- is anathema to potential users."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The bottom line is that while Linux the OS , the kernel , and the memory manager are attractive to users , Linux the philosophy -- and users banding together ad hoc to create new things -- is anathema to potential users .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The bottom line is that while Linux the OS, the kernel, and the memory manager are attractive to users, Linux the philosophy -- and users banding together ad hoc to create new things -- is anathema to potential users.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331730</id>
	<title>Re:Too costly</title>
	<author>turbidostato</author>
	<datestamp>1259937000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"No.<br>
&nbsp; It's because they cost hundreds of dollars."</p><p>You think you are arguing against the thread when you are instead conceding.</p><p>"I want an open source phone, I really do, but I can't justify spending 500 on little more than a PDA + phone."</p><p>You seem to forget that *all* PDA+phone-like devices cost 500+.  If you get some WinMo or iPhone almost for peanuts is because they are heavily subsidized by the carriers (wich, of course, get their ROI and way more on the long run).  And as long as you (consumers in general) concede to the carriers' game you will get whatever is in the best interest of the carriers, not yours.  And as long as your (consumers in general) concede to the carriers' game, device makers will produce them to the carriers' expectations, not yours.</p><p>Obvious, isn't it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" No .
  It 's because they cost hundreds of dollars .
" You think you are arguing against the thread when you are instead conceding .
" I want an open source phone , I really do , but I ca n't justify spending 500 on little more than a PDA + phone .
" You seem to forget that * all * PDA + phone-like devices cost 500 + .
If you get some WinMo or iPhone almost for peanuts is because they are heavily subsidized by the carriers ( wich , of course , get their ROI and way more on the long run ) .
And as long as you ( consumers in general ) concede to the carriers ' game you will get whatever is in the best interest of the carriers , not yours .
And as long as your ( consumers in general ) concede to the carriers ' game , device makers will produce them to the carriers ' expectations , not yours.Obvious , is n't it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"No.
  It's because they cost hundreds of dollars.
"You think you are arguing against the thread when you are instead conceding.
"I want an open source phone, I really do, but I can't justify spending 500 on little more than a PDA + phone.
"You seem to forget that *all* PDA+phone-like devices cost 500+.
If you get some WinMo or iPhone almost for peanuts is because they are heavily subsidized by the carriers (wich, of course, get their ROI and way more on the long run).
And as long as you (consumers in general) concede to the carriers' game you will get whatever is in the best interest of the carriers, not yours.
And as long as your (consumers in general) concede to the carriers' game, device makers will produce them to the carriers' expectations, not yours.Obvious, isn't it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332028</id>
	<title>Why do you care as a customer?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259940120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As a customer, why do you care that carriers don't like a certain phone model? Just buy the phone and buy a SIM card from your favorite carrier.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a customer , why do you care that carriers do n't like a certain phone model ?
Just buy the phone and buy a SIM card from your favorite carrier .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a customer, why do you care that carriers don't like a certain phone model?
Just buy the phone and buy a SIM card from your favorite carrier.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332298</id>
	<title>Re:The N900 is a computer milestone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259944020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Isn't it possible to have an ovi address by, for example, being a customer? a happy customer, in this case?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't it possible to have an ovi address by , for example , being a customer ?
a happy customer , in this case ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't it possible to have an ovi address by, for example, being a customer?
a happy customer, in this case?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332064</id>
	<title>Re:They don't fail</title>
	<author>cpscotti</author>
	<datestamp>1259940360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Fun thing is: the personal computer could be described exactly in that way some twenty years ago.<br>
What we should expect is that every happy geek realizes their responsibility (woa) in making software/proving that the n900 platform is better than any other.<br>
The n900/Maemo is the chance cool people (e.g. geeks) have to prove their point with support from a major player in the cell phone market. In some way (since it is all this "open"/"free"), if the n900 fails, the open source community/cool people/geeks are also failing.<br>

The article is right about it's historical background and all but lacks some optimism... hehe</htmltext>
<tokenext>Fun thing is : the personal computer could be described exactly in that way some twenty years ago .
What we should expect is that every happy geek realizes their responsibility ( woa ) in making software/proving that the n900 platform is better than any other .
The n900/Maemo is the chance cool people ( e.g .
geeks ) have to prove their point with support from a major player in the cell phone market .
In some way ( since it is all this " open " / " free " ) , if the n900 fails , the open source community/cool people/geeks are also failing .
The article is right about it 's historical background and all but lacks some optimism... hehe</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fun thing is: the personal computer could be described exactly in that way some twenty years ago.
What we should expect is that every happy geek realizes their responsibility (woa) in making software/proving that the n900 platform is better than any other.
The n900/Maemo is the chance cool people (e.g.
geeks) have to prove their point with support from a major player in the cell phone market.
In some way (since it is all this "open"/"free"), if the n900 fails, the open source community/cool people/geeks are also failing.
The article is right about it's historical background and all but lacks some optimism... hehe</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331304</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30334228</id>
	<title>Correction</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260018600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Android does not lock you into a java sandbox, you still can reach the apis as well in C, it locks you into userspace however (not on the dev phone though), which should be expected anyway by a client os.<br>The java vm is just there to ease the portability on all processor platforms and it is more convenient for most parts of a program to use than raw c/c++.</p><p>The main issue is that android itself more or less runs in a vm to prevent you to reach the lowest parts of the phone, which indeed could damage the carriers network if programmed incorrectly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Android does not lock you into a java sandbox , you still can reach the apis as well in C , it locks you into userspace however ( not on the dev phone though ) , which should be expected anyway by a client os.The java vm is just there to ease the portability on all processor platforms and it is more convenient for most parts of a program to use than raw c/c + + .The main issue is that android itself more or less runs in a vm to prevent you to reach the lowest parts of the phone , which indeed could damage the carriers network if programmed incorrectly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Android does not lock you into a java sandbox, you still can reach the apis as well in C, it locks you into userspace however (not on the dev phone though), which should be expected anyway by a client os.The java vm is just there to ease the portability on all processor platforms and it is more convenient for most parts of a program to use than raw c/c++.The main issue is that android itself more or less runs in a vm to prevent you to reach the lowest parts of the phone, which indeed could damage the carriers network if programmed incorrectly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333390</id>
	<title>"unsatisfactory hybrids"</title>
	<author>jipn4</author>
	<datestamp>1260046440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>So, you get unsatisfactory hybrids like Google Android, which uses some open-source components but locks third-party developers into a crippled Java sandbox.</i></p><p>Java isn't my preferred language, but I'm glad that my Android phone uses it.  With Java, Android actually manages to enforce permissions decently, it keeps applications from screwing up or crashing too badly, and it allows a component architecture for Android that beats pretty much anything else out there.  It's also pretty easy for people to get started in and there are plenty of apps.</p><p>Native programming on Android would be nice, and I suspect it will be coming sooner or later, but for now, this is fine.  We can look at the iPhon app store and look at what apps in there really do require native programming and hence aren't available for Android, and it's very few.</p><p>There are several open source phone operating systems now that allow native programming: Symbian, Maemo, OpenMoko, and they don't work as well.  And, frankly, I'd like a bit more non-native programming on my desktop as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , you get unsatisfactory hybrids like Google Android , which uses some open-source components but locks third-party developers into a crippled Java sandbox.Java is n't my preferred language , but I 'm glad that my Android phone uses it .
With Java , Android actually manages to enforce permissions decently , it keeps applications from screwing up or crashing too badly , and it allows a component architecture for Android that beats pretty much anything else out there .
It 's also pretty easy for people to get started in and there are plenty of apps.Native programming on Android would be nice , and I suspect it will be coming sooner or later , but for now , this is fine .
We can look at the iPhon app store and look at what apps in there really do require native programming and hence are n't available for Android , and it 's very few.There are several open source phone operating systems now that allow native programming : Symbian , Maemo , OpenMoko , and they do n't work as well .
And , frankly , I 'd like a bit more non-native programming on my desktop as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, you get unsatisfactory hybrids like Google Android, which uses some open-source components but locks third-party developers into a crippled Java sandbox.Java isn't my preferred language, but I'm glad that my Android phone uses it.
With Java, Android actually manages to enforce permissions decently, it keeps applications from screwing up or crashing too badly, and it allows a component architecture for Android that beats pretty much anything else out there.
It's also pretty easy for people to get started in and there are plenty of apps.Native programming on Android would be nice, and I suspect it will be coming sooner or later, but for now, this is fine.
We can look at the iPhon app store and look at what apps in there really do require native programming and hence aren't available for Android, and it's very few.There are several open source phone operating systems now that allow native programming: Symbian, Maemo, OpenMoko, and they don't work as well.
And, frankly, I'd like a bit more non-native programming on my desktop as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30342132</id>
	<title>Why open source phones will NEVER BE A FAIL!</title>
	<author>cboslin</author>
	<datestamp>1260097140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can buy them without a cellular provider and use VoIP (Skype like over 20 Million others) + WiFi to talk where I spend over 80\% of my life.  Why on earth should you use cellular if WiFi is available.  Even if you want cellular, here in the US every carrier, except Metro PCS, will nickel and dime you for every second, minute that you use.  And I am not talking about the rounding up to the nearest minute that they do to all of us either.

</p><p>An open source DD-WRT enabled hardware firewall/router (<i>price depending on features from $15 - $100</i>) at home and another one at work pretty much covers it.  The DD-WRT software gives you secure tunnels, SSH, VPNs, IPTables and most importantly a way to see your actual bandwidth usage 24 X 7.  If the cable company tries to rip you off marketing 16,000 Kbps down and 2,000 Kbps upstream; you can complain when they throttle you back to less than 400Kbps down and less than 40Kbps upstream.</p><p><div class="quote"><p> <a href="&rdquo;http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Supported\_Devices\%23List\_of\_all\_supported\_routers&rdquo;" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">ONLY purchase a DD-WRT supported router</a> [slashdot.org], do not waste your hard earned money.</p></div><p>If you are not using DD-WRT software on a residential router at home, you honestly do not know if you are being throttled back and/or restricted or not.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can buy them without a cellular provider and use VoIP ( Skype like over 20 Million others ) + WiFi to talk where I spend over 80 \ % of my life .
Why on earth should you use cellular if WiFi is available .
Even if you want cellular , here in the US every carrier , except Metro PCS , will nickel and dime you for every second , minute that you use .
And I am not talking about the rounding up to the nearest minute that they do to all of us either .
An open source DD-WRT enabled hardware firewall/router ( price depending on features from $ 15 - $ 100 ) at home and another one at work pretty much covers it .
The DD-WRT software gives you secure tunnels , SSH , VPNs , IPTables and most importantly a way to see your actual bandwidth usage 24 X 7 .
If the cable company tries to rip you off marketing 16,000 Kbps down and 2,000 Kbps upstream ; you can complain when they throttle you back to less than 400Kbps down and less than 40Kbps upstream .
ONLY purchase a DD-WRT supported router [ slashdot.org ] , do not waste your hard earned money.If you are not using DD-WRT software on a residential router at home , you honestly do not know if you are being throttled back and/or restricted or not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can buy them without a cellular provider and use VoIP (Skype like over 20 Million others) + WiFi to talk where I spend over 80\% of my life.
Why on earth should you use cellular if WiFi is available.
Even if you want cellular, here in the US every carrier, except Metro PCS, will nickel and dime you for every second, minute that you use.
And I am not talking about the rounding up to the nearest minute that they do to all of us either.
An open source DD-WRT enabled hardware firewall/router (price depending on features from $15 - $100) at home and another one at work pretty much covers it.
The DD-WRT software gives you secure tunnels, SSH, VPNs, IPTables and most importantly a way to see your actual bandwidth usage 24 X 7.
If the cable company tries to rip you off marketing 16,000 Kbps down and 2,000 Kbps upstream; you can complain when they throttle you back to less than 400Kbps down and less than 40Kbps upstream.
ONLY purchase a DD-WRT supported router [slashdot.org], do not waste your hard earned money.If you are not using DD-WRT software on a residential router at home, you honestly do not know if you are being throttled back and/or restricted or not.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331922</id>
	<title>Re:The N900 is a computer milestone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259938920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Linux locks third-party developers into a crippled Java sandbox.</p><p>Linux is a joke not a platform then. Isn't even this Java proprietary ? I see no freedom whatsoever in Linux.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Linux locks third-party developers into a crippled Java sandbox.Linux is a joke not a platform then .
Is n't even this Java proprietary ?
I see no freedom whatsoever in Linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Linux locks third-party developers into a crippled Java sandbox.Linux is a joke not a platform then.
Isn't even this Java proprietary ?
I see no freedom whatsoever in Linux.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333216</id>
	<title>Re:The N900 is a computer milestone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260043320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ovi is a service for Nokia's \_customers\_. Employees have @nokia.com<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:p</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ovi is a service for Nokia 's \ _customers \ _ .
Employees have @ nokia.com : p</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ovi is a service for Nokia's \_customers\_.
Employees have @nokia.com :p</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331936</id>
	<title>Re:The writer expects me to believe that?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259939040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>My brother pre-ordered one (from Amazon) over a month ago, and is not expecting it to show up for another few weeks. I don't know how many they are selling, but they are certainly having difficulty meeting demand.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My brother pre-ordered one ( from Amazon ) over a month ago , and is not expecting it to show up for another few weeks .
I do n't know how many they are selling , but they are certainly having difficulty meeting demand .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My brother pre-ordered one (from Amazon) over a month ago, and is not expecting it to show up for another few weeks.
I don't know how many they are selling, but they are certainly having difficulty meeting demand.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331556</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331726</id>
	<title>Re:Too costly</title>
	<author>Yrrebnarg</author>
	<datestamp>1259937000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Here you go.  A <a href="http://www.sparkfun.com/commerce/product\_info.php?products\_id=286" title="sparkfun.com" rel="nofollow">port-o-rotary</a> [sparkfun.com] for $200.  They provide full source and schematics.  You can even buy a 6000mAh battery to run the thing for weeks and you don't have to deal with any PDA functionality.  Any more complaints?
</p><p>
Radios are expensive.  The only reason phones are cheap is because they're heavily subsidized or because they're a simple little phone produced a million at a time from a small handful of highly-integrated mixed analog/digital ASICs.  "Open-source" devices are small-run devices with hopelessly obsolete radio hardware because it's all they can get documentation for and manufacturers aren't looking to release their secret sauce to just anybody.
</p><p>
And on top of all of this, most of the open-source types are desktop or server programmers.  On the desktop, you don't have to think about low-power code.  Everything changes when you're running off a battery.  There just isn't the expertise there (yet).  Having said all this, I love my rooted T-mobile G1.  I built a scratchbox environment for it and ported a few important CLI tools and it's now perfectly capable of being all the pocket Linux machine I need and it's not very difficult getting Debian running on top of the Android environment.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here you go .
A port-o-rotary [ sparkfun.com ] for $ 200 .
They provide full source and schematics .
You can even buy a 6000mAh battery to run the thing for weeks and you do n't have to deal with any PDA functionality .
Any more complaints ?
Radios are expensive .
The only reason phones are cheap is because they 're heavily subsidized or because they 're a simple little phone produced a million at a time from a small handful of highly-integrated mixed analog/digital ASICs .
" Open-source " devices are small-run devices with hopelessly obsolete radio hardware because it 's all they can get documentation for and manufacturers are n't looking to release their secret sauce to just anybody .
And on top of all of this , most of the open-source types are desktop or server programmers .
On the desktop , you do n't have to think about low-power code .
Everything changes when you 're running off a battery .
There just is n't the expertise there ( yet ) .
Having said all this , I love my rooted T-mobile G1 .
I built a scratchbox environment for it and ported a few important CLI tools and it 's now perfectly capable of being all the pocket Linux machine I need and it 's not very difficult getting Debian running on top of the Android environment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Here you go.
A port-o-rotary [sparkfun.com] for $200.
They provide full source and schematics.
You can even buy a 6000mAh battery to run the thing for weeks and you don't have to deal with any PDA functionality.
Any more complaints?
Radios are expensive.
The only reason phones are cheap is because they're heavily subsidized or because they're a simple little phone produced a million at a time from a small handful of highly-integrated mixed analog/digital ASICs.
"Open-source" devices are small-run devices with hopelessly obsolete radio hardware because it's all they can get documentation for and manufacturers aren't looking to release their secret sauce to just anybody.
And on top of all of this, most of the open-source types are desktop or server programmers.
On the desktop, you don't have to think about low-power code.
Everything changes when you're running off a battery.
There just isn't the expertise there (yet).
Having said all this, I love my rooted T-mobile G1.
I built a scratchbox environment for it and ported a few important CLI tools and it's now perfectly capable of being all the pocket Linux machine I need and it's not very difficult getting Debian running on top of the Android environment.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331350</id>
	<title>My prediction</title>
	<author>Wonko the Sane</author>
	<datestamp>1259934300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They'll get over it (eventually).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 'll get over it ( eventually ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They'll get over it (eventually).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30334954</id>
	<title>About crippled Java...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260028980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The "crippled Java sandbox" is the best thing that hapenned to Android.</p><p>The last thing you want is people's mobile phones to get exploited by admin/root exploits like a lot of Windows PCs do.</p><p>The Java virtual machine is, by design, completely immune to buffer overrun/overflow and doesn't allow "0" pointer dereferencing (last serious Linux kernel root exploit was due to that).  The Java virual machine renders most admin/root exploit impossible.</p><p>If a Java VM allows buffer overrun/overflow then it's not a compliant Java VM.  Last buffer overrun I remember for Java was on Linux, in a C-written lib (zlib IIRC), which has now be replaced (in Java), by pure-Java code, 100\% immune.</p><p>People don't realize how big the Java VM concept is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The " crippled Java sandbox " is the best thing that hapenned to Android.The last thing you want is people 's mobile phones to get exploited by admin/root exploits like a lot of Windows PCs do.The Java virtual machine is , by design , completely immune to buffer overrun/overflow and does n't allow " 0 " pointer dereferencing ( last serious Linux kernel root exploit was due to that ) .
The Java virual machine renders most admin/root exploit impossible.If a Java VM allows buffer overrun/overflow then it 's not a compliant Java VM .
Last buffer overrun I remember for Java was on Linux , in a C-written lib ( zlib IIRC ) , which has now be replaced ( in Java ) , by pure-Java code , 100 \ % immune.People do n't realize how big the Java VM concept is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The "crippled Java sandbox" is the best thing that hapenned to Android.The last thing you want is people's mobile phones to get exploited by admin/root exploits like a lot of Windows PCs do.The Java virtual machine is, by design, completely immune to buffer overrun/overflow and doesn't allow "0" pointer dereferencing (last serious Linux kernel root exploit was due to that).
The Java virual machine renders most admin/root exploit impossible.If a Java VM allows buffer overrun/overflow then it's not a compliant Java VM.
Last buffer overrun I remember for Java was on Linux, in a C-written lib (zlib IIRC), which has now be replaced (in Java), by pure-Java code, 100\% immune.People don't realize how big the Java VM concept is.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331304</id>
	<title>They don't fail</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259933940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They fail in the mainstream market because there's such a small market for them.  The Nokia n900 is a geek's dream, but most people want a phone, not a handheld computer.  Most as in 99.99\% of the marketplace.  And even fewer want a multi-hundred dollar handheld computer/phone.  So I'm sure it sells well in the market it was designed for...that<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.001\% of the population that wants a hackable, programmable micro computer that makes calls.  So it succeeds where its market is.  Saying it fails is like saying the Audi R8 supercar failed.  Though, at least that made it into Iron Man.</p><p>You could say the iPhone is a failure as well: it only has 1\% of the cell phone market.  But I think most of the U.S. will disagree with that statement.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They fail in the mainstream market because there 's such a small market for them .
The Nokia n900 is a geek 's dream , but most people want a phone , not a handheld computer .
Most as in 99.99 \ % of the marketplace .
And even fewer want a multi-hundred dollar handheld computer/phone .
So I 'm sure it sells well in the market it was designed for...that .001 \ % of the population that wants a hackable , programmable micro computer that makes calls .
So it succeeds where its market is .
Saying it fails is like saying the Audi R8 supercar failed .
Though , at least that made it into Iron Man.You could say the iPhone is a failure as well : it only has 1 \ % of the cell phone market .
But I think most of the U.S. will disagree with that statement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They fail in the mainstream market because there's such a small market for them.
The Nokia n900 is a geek's dream, but most people want a phone, not a handheld computer.
Most as in 99.99\% of the marketplace.
And even fewer want a multi-hundred dollar handheld computer/phone.
So I'm sure it sells well in the market it was designed for...that .001\% of the population that wants a hackable, programmable micro computer that makes calls.
So it succeeds where its market is.
Saying it fails is like saying the Audi R8 supercar failed.
Though, at least that made it into Iron Man.You could say the iPhone is a failure as well: it only has 1\% of the cell phone market.
But I think most of the U.S. will disagree with that statement.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332880</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>jbacon</author>
	<datestamp>1259951280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First of all, Android doesn't use Java.  It uses a subset of Java APIs, and its syntax.  It's VM is called Dalvik, and does not execute Java bytecode, but is all its own.</p><p>Anyways, the VM model for Android is a fantastic idea, and I'll tell you why.  Easy to develop for and hardware agnostic.  This allows Android to easily do exactly what it is doing right now - taking over the mobile OS market (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android\_(operating\_system)#Market\_share" title="wikipedia.org">Ahem</a> [wikipedia.org]).  Google has the muscle to ram it down carriers' throats, and they are ramming with gusto.  It's a pretty damn easy sell to manufacturers too.  They're offering an enterprise-quality, easily deployed mobile OS, scalable to nearly any device, FOR FREE?  Also, you can modify whatever the hell you want about it.  What self-respecting businessman would ignore that offer?  HTC, for example, is taking huge advantage of Android's openness with its Sense UI and countless apps, widgets, and such.  Sure, a VM model is certainly slower, but is it worth it?  Absolutely.</p><p>Also, Google recently released a Native Development Kit for Android.  So, now you can have ARM apps, hooray!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First of all , Android does n't use Java .
It uses a subset of Java APIs , and its syntax .
It 's VM is called Dalvik , and does not execute Java bytecode , but is all its own.Anyways , the VM model for Android is a fantastic idea , and I 'll tell you why .
Easy to develop for and hardware agnostic .
This allows Android to easily do exactly what it is doing right now - taking over the mobile OS market ( Ahem [ wikipedia.org ] ) .
Google has the muscle to ram it down carriers ' throats , and they are ramming with gusto .
It 's a pretty damn easy sell to manufacturers too .
They 're offering an enterprise-quality , easily deployed mobile OS , scalable to nearly any device , FOR FREE ?
Also , you can modify whatever the hell you want about it .
What self-respecting businessman would ignore that offer ?
HTC , for example , is taking huge advantage of Android 's openness with its Sense UI and countless apps , widgets , and such .
Sure , a VM model is certainly slower , but is it worth it ?
Absolutely.Also , Google recently released a Native Development Kit for Android .
So , now you can have ARM apps , hooray !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First of all, Android doesn't use Java.
It uses a subset of Java APIs, and its syntax.
It's VM is called Dalvik, and does not execute Java bytecode, but is all its own.Anyways, the VM model for Android is a fantastic idea, and I'll tell you why.
Easy to develop for and hardware agnostic.
This allows Android to easily do exactly what it is doing right now - taking over the mobile OS market (Ahem [wikipedia.org]).
Google has the muscle to ram it down carriers' throats, and they are ramming with gusto.
It's a pretty damn easy sell to manufacturers too.
They're offering an enterprise-quality, easily deployed mobile OS, scalable to nearly any device, FOR FREE?
Also, you can modify whatever the hell you want about it.
What self-respecting businessman would ignore that offer?
HTC, for example, is taking huge advantage of Android's openness with its Sense UI and countless apps, widgets, and such.
Sure, a VM model is certainly slower, but is it worth it?
Absolutely.Also, Google recently released a Native Development Kit for Android.
So, now you can have ARM apps, hooray!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333362</id>
	<title>Re:what do you call "truly open" there??</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1260046080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Both of your examples appear to be dead now. I guess "truly open" means "guaranteed to fail", at least in hardware-land. I will have more faith in open hardware when it becomes a hell of a lot cheaper to produce.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Both of your examples appear to be dead now .
I guess " truly open " means " guaranteed to fail " , at least in hardware-land .
I will have more faith in open hardware when it becomes a hell of a lot cheaper to produce .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Both of your examples appear to be dead now.
I guess "truly open" means "guaranteed to fail", at least in hardware-land.
I will have more faith in open hardware when it becomes a hell of a lot cheaper to produce.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332654</id>
	<title>The Java Sandbox is not crippling</title>
	<author>Hergio</author>
	<datestamp>1259948340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The article doesn't say or allude to the Java sandbox being crippling.  The Java Sandbox is a good, safe, standardized environment.  And unlike the Apple apps written in Objective C and locked to the iPhone, when the next Android phone comes out on any other carrier, we'll be able to run our apps on those with no changes, thanks to the "crippled java sandbox".</htmltext>
<tokenext>The article does n't say or allude to the Java sandbox being crippling .
The Java Sandbox is a good , safe , standardized environment .
And unlike the Apple apps written in Objective C and locked to the iPhone , when the next Android phone comes out on any other carrier , we 'll be able to run our apps on those with no changes , thanks to the " crippled java sandbox " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The article doesn't say or allude to the Java sandbox being crippling.
The Java Sandbox is a good, safe, standardized environment.
And unlike the Apple apps written in Objective C and locked to the iPhone, when the next Android phone comes out on any other carrier, we'll be able to run our apps on those with no changes, thanks to the "crippled java sandbox".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333240</id>
	<title>PC Rag at it again</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260043740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>PC Rag has hated Open Source software and Linux for a long long long time.  No paid ad revenue anywhere in sight.  The big paid ad buyer hates it, so they are (being a company) compelled to spew vitriol left and right.  There is nothing wrong with the quality of OSS.  There are no "Surprises".  There is no "Scary".  Apples iPhone has a ton of 3rd party developers (you name it, and theres an app for that too).  Open Source means you don't have to jailbreak.  You can jailbreak the others too, but here you don't have to feel bad about doing it.  But hey, if you don't like an app, you can change it.  The code is open, after all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>PC Rag has hated Open Source software and Linux for a long long long time .
No paid ad revenue anywhere in sight .
The big paid ad buyer hates it , so they are ( being a company ) compelled to spew vitriol left and right .
There is nothing wrong with the quality of OSS .
There are no " Surprises " .
There is no " Scary " .
Apples iPhone has a ton of 3rd party developers ( you name it , and theres an app for that too ) .
Open Source means you do n't have to jailbreak .
You can jailbreak the others too , but here you do n't have to feel bad about doing it .
But hey , if you do n't like an app , you can change it .
The code is open , after all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PC Rag has hated Open Source software and Linux for a long long long time.
No paid ad revenue anywhere in sight.
The big paid ad buyer hates it, so they are (being a company) compelled to spew vitriol left and right.
There is nothing wrong with the quality of OSS.
There are no "Surprises".
There is no "Scary".
Apples iPhone has a ton of 3rd party developers (you name it, and theres an app for that too).
Open Source means you don't have to jailbreak.
You can jailbreak the others too, but here you don't have to feel bad about doing it.
But hey, if you don't like an app, you can change it.
The code is open, after all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30349324</id>
	<title>Re:what do you call "truly open" there??</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260121800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since most slashdot readers are from the united states their view of open, free, right wing nut etc. is quite different than what the same words mean in Europe.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since most slashdot readers are from the united states their view of open , free , right wing nut etc .
is quite different than what the same words mean in Europe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since most slashdot readers are from the united states their view of open, free, right wing nut etc.
is quite different than what the same words mean in Europe.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30396360</id>
	<title>open source phone apps</title>
	<author>t3chn0n3rd</author>
	<datestamp>1260447900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>android phone</htmltext>
<tokenext>android phone</tokentext>
<sentencetext>android phone</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30334026</id>
	<title>An "Open" Cellular Network?  No Thanks.</title>
	<author>Stupid Crunt</author>
	<datestamp>1260014760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Who cares if cellphone carriers want to maintain tight control of their network?
</p><p>
I'm very happy with the stability and predictability of the cellular network, and I have no interest in seeing it clotted up with some god-awful Bittorrent-ish thing that some kid invented so that he could avoid paying for ringtones or whatever.  I would greatly prefer that my phone continues to be reliable than that the cellular networks are allowed to degenerate until they work as poorly as the internet.
</p><p>
Those of you with ATT service may not understand this distinction.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who cares if cellphone carriers want to maintain tight control of their network ?
I 'm very happy with the stability and predictability of the cellular network , and I have no interest in seeing it clotted up with some god-awful Bittorrent-ish thing that some kid invented so that he could avoid paying for ringtones or whatever .
I would greatly prefer that my phone continues to be reliable than that the cellular networks are allowed to degenerate until they work as poorly as the internet .
Those of you with ATT service may not understand this distinction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Who cares if cellphone carriers want to maintain tight control of their network?
I'm very happy with the stability and predictability of the cellular network, and I have no interest in seeing it clotted up with some god-awful Bittorrent-ish thing that some kid invented so that he could avoid paying for ringtones or whatever.
I would greatly prefer that my phone continues to be reliable than that the cellular networks are allowed to degenerate until they work as poorly as the internet.
Those of you with ATT service may not understand this distinction.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333434</id>
	<title>Fail?</title>
	<author>aysa</author>
	<datestamp>1260004080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The release of the N900 had to be delayed one month due to overwhelming preordering.

It is a tremendous success in spite of its very expensive price!</htmltext>
<tokenext>The release of the N900 had to be delayed one month due to overwhelming preordering .
It is a tremendous success in spite of its very expensive price !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The release of the N900 had to be delayed one month due to overwhelming preordering.
It is a tremendous success in spite of its very expensive price!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333352</id>
	<title>Re:Too costly</title>
	<author>TeXMaster</author>
	<datestamp>1260045900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>No.



It's because they cost hundreds of dollars.</p></div><p>Exactly. I can buy something like THREE Eeepc 900 for a Nokia N900, and I honestly don't think the extra GSM features justify the higher price in the smaller and more fragile packaging.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
It 's because they cost hundreds of dollars.Exactly .
I can buy something like THREE Eeepc 900 for a Nokia N900 , and I honestly do n't think the extra GSM features justify the higher price in the smaller and more fragile packaging .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
It's because they cost hundreds of dollars.Exactly.
I can buy something like THREE Eeepc 900 for a Nokia N900, and I honestly don't think the extra GSM features justify the higher price in the smaller and more fragile packaging.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30339664</id>
	<title>The US is no gauge..</title>
	<author>delire</author>
	<datestamp>1260018780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Typical US-centric, generalisation, extrapolated to the corners of the galaxy..
<br> <br>
The US has what the <i>vast majority</i> of mobile phone users consider utterly unacceptable, total telco lock in. A company like Nokia has 41\% of the world's largest handheld market, China, where Nokia phones are a status symbol, not to mention South America and India! Really open phones haven't been tested in the market (the Moko doesn't count, it never left the developer version and was never intended for the mass market) - it's too early to ring the bells of doom. Western Europe alone has more people using the internet than there are people in the US, that's  a lot of people that want the web in their pocket and this is where the N900 proves to be a perfect fit.<br> <br>
From where I sit, with my N900 (which incidentally is selling like hotcakes - Nokia is struggling with the demand), such speculation seems vacuous. The N900 is an absolutely <b>incredible</b> device with the best browsing experience bar none, flash support, beautiful screen, powerful preamp, great phone (Skype/SIP VoIP and regular calls) absolutely gorgeous UI and a physical keyboard you can <i>actually</i> type on at a real clip.
<br> <br>
As proof, I typed this post on the thing.<br> <br>
Thanks Nokia for being this brave. I'm glad it's clearly not just us geeks that are loving the thing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Typical US-centric , generalisation , extrapolated to the corners of the galaxy. . The US has what the vast majority of mobile phone users consider utterly unacceptable , total telco lock in .
A company like Nokia has 41 \ % of the world 's largest handheld market , China , where Nokia phones are a status symbol , not to mention South America and India !
Really open phones have n't been tested in the market ( the Moko does n't count , it never left the developer version and was never intended for the mass market ) - it 's too early to ring the bells of doom .
Western Europe alone has more people using the internet than there are people in the US , that 's a lot of people that want the web in their pocket and this is where the N900 proves to be a perfect fit .
From where I sit , with my N900 ( which incidentally is selling like hotcakes - Nokia is struggling with the demand ) , such speculation seems vacuous .
The N900 is an absolutely incredible device with the best browsing experience bar none , flash support , beautiful screen , powerful preamp , great phone ( Skype/SIP VoIP and regular calls ) absolutely gorgeous UI and a physical keyboard you can actually type on at a real clip .
As proof , I typed this post on the thing .
Thanks Nokia for being this brave .
I 'm glad it 's clearly not just us geeks that are loving the thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Typical US-centric, generalisation, extrapolated to the corners of the galaxy..
 
The US has what the vast majority of mobile phone users consider utterly unacceptable, total telco lock in.
A company like Nokia has 41\% of the world's largest handheld market, China, where Nokia phones are a status symbol, not to mention South America and India!
Really open phones haven't been tested in the market (the Moko doesn't count, it never left the developer version and was never intended for the mass market) - it's too early to ring the bells of doom.
Western Europe alone has more people using the internet than there are people in the US, that's  a lot of people that want the web in their pocket and this is where the N900 proves to be a perfect fit.
From where I sit, with my N900 (which incidentally is selling like hotcakes - Nokia is struggling with the demand), such speculation seems vacuous.
The N900 is an absolutely incredible device with the best browsing experience bar none, flash support, beautiful screen, powerful preamp, great phone (Skype/SIP VoIP and regular calls) absolutely gorgeous UI and a physical keyboard you can actually type on at a real clip.
As proof, I typed this post on the thing.
Thanks Nokia for being this brave.
I'm glad it's clearly not just us geeks that are loving the thing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333438</id>
	<title>Re:what do you call "truly open" there??</title>
	<author>lordcorusa</author>
	<datestamp>1260004200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Take it from someone who owned one: the OpenMoko was a terrible phone and a terrible handheld computer.  It was nearly useless when not hooked up to a computer via SSH over USB.  OpenMoko earned an A for vision in getting a fully open and documented hardware interface, although the results were dubious (crappy GPRS GSM modem in an era when 3G was just becoming popular, crappy non-accelerated drivers for the video chipset).  However, OpenMoko's worst failing was the total inability of the company to push a singular stable and complete platform for development; there were about 20 different incompatible distributions in various states of disarray, and you cannot have a platform for end-user app development in that sort of environment.  (Imagine how unsuccessful Apple's app store or Android's marketplace would be if developers and users had to choose between 20 different incompatible distributions, all in permanent alpha status...)  I think I can live with a few proprietary blobs if it means having a useful device.  All of the open technology in the world means nothing if the platform dies on the vine before ever taking off.  OpenMoko's ideal of a fully open phone platform proved unsustainable, as the company canceled their "next-gen" (translation: 2.5G in an era of 3G) phone and switched to producing a ridiculous "WikiReader" device which contains no pesky radio or accelerated video modules.</p><p>After more than a year of trying to use it, I finally was overjoyed to get rid of my crappy Freerunner.  On the other hand, even though my N800 does not have a cell radio, I still like to use it, and am strongly considering buying an N900.  I think the OpenMoko was for people who love putting together distributions and blogging about how much freer their device is compared to everyone elses'.  A platform like the N800/900 is for people who like programming mobile computers to accomplish useful tasks and then distributing those programs to non-programmers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Take it from someone who owned one : the OpenMoko was a terrible phone and a terrible handheld computer .
It was nearly useless when not hooked up to a computer via SSH over USB .
OpenMoko earned an A for vision in getting a fully open and documented hardware interface , although the results were dubious ( crappy GPRS GSM modem in an era when 3G was just becoming popular , crappy non-accelerated drivers for the video chipset ) .
However , OpenMoko 's worst failing was the total inability of the company to push a singular stable and complete platform for development ; there were about 20 different incompatible distributions in various states of disarray , and you can not have a platform for end-user app development in that sort of environment .
( Imagine how unsuccessful Apple 's app store or Android 's marketplace would be if developers and users had to choose between 20 different incompatible distributions , all in permanent alpha status... ) I think I can live with a few proprietary blobs if it means having a useful device .
All of the open technology in the world means nothing if the platform dies on the vine before ever taking off .
OpenMoko 's ideal of a fully open phone platform proved unsustainable , as the company canceled their " next-gen " ( translation : 2.5G in an era of 3G ) phone and switched to producing a ridiculous " WikiReader " device which contains no pesky radio or accelerated video modules.After more than a year of trying to use it , I finally was overjoyed to get rid of my crappy Freerunner .
On the other hand , even though my N800 does not have a cell radio , I still like to use it , and am strongly considering buying an N900 .
I think the OpenMoko was for people who love putting together distributions and blogging about how much freer their device is compared to everyone elses' .
A platform like the N800/900 is for people who like programming mobile computers to accomplish useful tasks and then distributing those programs to non-programmers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Take it from someone who owned one: the OpenMoko was a terrible phone and a terrible handheld computer.
It was nearly useless when not hooked up to a computer via SSH over USB.
OpenMoko earned an A for vision in getting a fully open and documented hardware interface, although the results were dubious (crappy GPRS GSM modem in an era when 3G was just becoming popular, crappy non-accelerated drivers for the video chipset).
However, OpenMoko's worst failing was the total inability of the company to push a singular stable and complete platform for development; there were about 20 different incompatible distributions in various states of disarray, and you cannot have a platform for end-user app development in that sort of environment.
(Imagine how unsuccessful Apple's app store or Android's marketplace would be if developers and users had to choose between 20 different incompatible distributions, all in permanent alpha status...)  I think I can live with a few proprietary blobs if it means having a useful device.
All of the open technology in the world means nothing if the platform dies on the vine before ever taking off.
OpenMoko's ideal of a fully open phone platform proved unsustainable, as the company canceled their "next-gen" (translation: 2.5G in an era of 3G) phone and switched to producing a ridiculous "WikiReader" device which contains no pesky radio or accelerated video modules.After more than a year of trying to use it, I finally was overjoyed to get rid of my crappy Freerunner.
On the other hand, even though my N800 does not have a cell radio, I still like to use it, and am strongly considering buying an N900.
I think the OpenMoko was for people who love putting together distributions and blogging about how much freer their device is compared to everyone elses'.
A platform like the N800/900 is for people who like programming mobile computers to accomplish useful tasks and then distributing those programs to non-programmers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30334196</id>
	<title>Re:The N900 is a computer milestone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260018060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nokia employees have a @nokia.com address (just look at the commit log of webkit). Ovi mail is a mail service, like Gmail/Hotmail.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nokia employees have a @ nokia.com address ( just look at the commit log of webkit ) .
Ovi mail is a mail service , like Gmail/Hotmail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nokia employees have a @nokia.com address (just look at the commit log of webkit).
Ovi mail is a mail service, like Gmail/Hotmail.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30334128</id>
	<title>Re:Open their blinders with amazing apps</title>
	<author>Ash-Fox</author>
	<datestamp>1260016860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>But look at the Palm, which is dying.</p></div></blockquote><p>That's not surprising, it's not like they've updated their stuff in years.</p><blockquote><div><p>Look at the PC, where Linux adoption to the desktop hovers for a decade at a few percent.</p></div> </blockquote><p>I've seen greater amounts of Linux users on websites I manage actually, also I've been noticing more and more Linux on various desktops systems in countries I've lived in, businesses, homes etc. I think I saw the most in Germany. So, I'd certainly say Linux is growing and not just hovering at a small install base.</p><blockquote><div><p>Why doesn't open source take over then?</p></div></blockquote><p>Ask a stupid question... For the same reason the majority of other proprietary systems don't take over.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But look at the Palm , which is dying.That 's not surprising , it 's not like they 've updated their stuff in years.Look at the PC , where Linux adoption to the desktop hovers for a decade at a few percent .
I 've seen greater amounts of Linux users on websites I manage actually , also I 've been noticing more and more Linux on various desktops systems in countries I 've lived in , businesses , homes etc .
I think I saw the most in Germany .
So , I 'd certainly say Linux is growing and not just hovering at a small install base.Why does n't open source take over then ? Ask a stupid question... For the same reason the majority of other proprietary systems do n't take over .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But look at the Palm, which is dying.That's not surprising, it's not like they've updated their stuff in years.Look at the PC, where Linux adoption to the desktop hovers for a decade at a few percent.
I've seen greater amounts of Linux users on websites I manage actually, also I've been noticing more and more Linux on various desktops systems in countries I've lived in, businesses, homes etc.
I think I saw the most in Germany.
So, I'd certainly say Linux is growing and not just hovering at a small install base.Why doesn't open source take over then?Ask a stupid question... For the same reason the majority of other proprietary systems don't take over.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30334328</id>
	<title>Re:Open their blinders with amazing apps</title>
	<author>jonbryce</author>
	<datestamp>1260020760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Windows Mobile is relatively open, in that anyone can buy a copy of Visual Studio, write apps for it and sell them or give them to people without requiring Steve Ballmer's blessing.  That doesn't seem to be causing anyone any problems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows Mobile is relatively open , in that anyone can buy a copy of Visual Studio , write apps for it and sell them or give them to people without requiring Steve Ballmer 's blessing .
That does n't seem to be causing anyone any problems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows Mobile is relatively open, in that anyone can buy a copy of Visual Studio, write apps for it and sell them or give them to people without requiring Steve Ballmer's blessing.
That doesn't seem to be causing anyone any problems.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331228</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331730
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331294
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30334196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331198
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333474
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332802
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331922
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331198
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333762
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331294
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331198
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331814
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331294
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331726
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331294
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30334128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331094
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332118
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331094
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331198
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30337570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331198
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331198
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333672
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331952
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331294
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30366634
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332996
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333782
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331198
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332096
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331294
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30336492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331094
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332110
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331094
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332064
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30349324
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30348040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333438
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331198
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30342030
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331294
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30334328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331094
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_04_2327204_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30334038
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_04_2327204.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331294
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333352
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332096
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331826
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331814
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331726
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331730
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333762
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_04_2327204.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331584
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_04_2327204.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332996
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30366634
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_04_2327204.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331198
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331922
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331918
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332298
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332216
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333782
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30334196
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333216
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333488
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30337570
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331556
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331936
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_04_2327204.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331686
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_04_2327204.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30334228
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_04_2327204.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333390
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_04_2327204.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331304
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332064
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333474
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_04_2327204.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332706
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_04_2327204.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331364
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30342030
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_04_2327204.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331486
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332880
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331952
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_04_2327204.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331588
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_04_2327204.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331712
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332802
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333672
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333956
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333438
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30348040
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30334038
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30333362
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30349324
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_04_2327204.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331094
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331228
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332110
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30332118
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30336492
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30334328
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30331254
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_04_2327204.30334128
</commentlist>
</conversation>
