<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_18_0210240</id>
	<title>How Europe's Mandated Browser Ballot Screen Works</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1261158000000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>CWmike writes <i>"After an 11-month legal face-off, Microsoft and European antitrust officials <a href="http://slashdot.org/story/09/12/16/1418242/EU-Accepts-Microsofts-Browser-Choice-Promise">signed off yesterday</a> on the ballot screen concept that will give Windows users a chance to download rivals' browsers. But now that the battle's over and the ink has dried, <a href="http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9142416/FAQ\_How\_the\_IE\_ballot\_screen\_works">it's time to look closely</a>. Some FAQ examples: What's Microsoft promised? How will it work? How many browsers will be on the ballot? Who decides which browsers? Who will see it?"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>CWmike writes " After an 11-month legal face-off , Microsoft and European antitrust officials signed off yesterday on the ballot screen concept that will give Windows users a chance to download rivals ' browsers .
But now that the battle 's over and the ink has dried , it 's time to look closely .
Some FAQ examples : What 's Microsoft promised ?
How will it work ?
How many browsers will be on the ballot ?
Who decides which browsers ?
Who will see it ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>CWmike writes "After an 11-month legal face-off, Microsoft and European antitrust officials signed off yesterday on the ballot screen concept that will give Windows users a chance to download rivals' browsers.
But now that the battle's over and the ink has dried, it's time to look closely.
Some FAQ examples: What's Microsoft promised?
How will it work?
How many browsers will be on the ballot?
Who decides which browsers?
Who will see it?
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484132</id>
	<title>Too many choices overwhelms</title>
	<author>distantbody</author>
	<datestamp>1261078200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Thats MS's desire. Its been shown that when people are overwhelmed with choices they go with what they know.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Thats MS 's desire .
Its been shown that when people are overwhelmed with choices they go with what they know .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thats MS's desire.
Its been shown that when people are overwhelmed with choices they go with what they know.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30487798</id>
	<title>Re:Waste of Time</title>
	<author>Phroggy</author>
	<datestamp>1261154280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...for most users I'd imagine. The number of people I've seen close Norton/McAfee messages that say "For Gods' sake man, you're trial-ware virus subscription have expired - your computer could literally be ass-raped any minute!" leads me to think most users won't give a shit about other browsers.</p></div><p>Yeah, those users are funny.  If you ask them whether they have antivirus software installed, they'll say "Yes, I think I have Norton...  but oh yeah, that reminds me, I get this popup every time I turn my computer on, and I have to close it.  Do you know how to fix that?"</p><p>Read, people!  It's not that hard!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...for most users I 'd imagine .
The number of people I 've seen close Norton/McAfee messages that say " For Gods ' sake man , you 're trial-ware virus subscription have expired - your computer could literally be ass-raped any minute !
" leads me to think most users wo n't give a shit about other browsers.Yeah , those users are funny .
If you ask them whether they have antivirus software installed , they 'll say " Yes , I think I have Norton... but oh yeah , that reminds me , I get this popup every time I turn my computer on , and I have to close it .
Do you know how to fix that ?
" Read , people !
It 's not that hard !</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...for most users I'd imagine.
The number of people I've seen close Norton/McAfee messages that say "For Gods' sake man, you're trial-ware virus subscription have expired - your computer could literally be ass-raped any minute!
" leads me to think most users won't give a shit about other browsers.Yeah, those users are funny.
If you ask them whether they have antivirus software installed, they'll say "Yes, I think I have Norton...  but oh yeah, that reminds me, I get this popup every time I turn my computer on, and I have to close it.
Do you know how to fix that?
"Read, people!
It's not that hard!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30487332</id>
	<title>Re:The ballot screen is Europe only</title>
	<author>ArmyOfAardvarks</author>
	<datestamp>1261152420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why should it?
The OS doesn't belong to the US government. It belongs to Microsoft.
If they want to make the default browser IE, it's their business.

If you don't like it, use Ubuntu.

I don't like IE, but even more I don't like the government pretending that they own everything.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why should it ?
The OS does n't belong to the US government .
It belongs to Microsoft .
If they want to make the default browser IE , it 's their business .
If you do n't like it , use Ubuntu .
I do n't like IE , but even more I do n't like the government pretending that they own everything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why should it?
The OS doesn't belong to the US government.
It belongs to Microsoft.
If they want to make the default browser IE, it's their business.
If you don't like it, use Ubuntu.
I don't like IE, but even more I don't like the government pretending that they own everything.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483980</id>
	<title>1 comments</title>
	<author>ysth</author>
	<datestamp>1261075920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>*cough* Lingua::EN::Inflect *cough*</htmltext>
<tokenext>* cough * Lingua : : EN : : Inflect * cough *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>*cough* Lingua::EN::Inflect *cough*</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30486288</id>
	<title>Re:Waiting for</title>
	<author>V!NCENT</author>
	<datestamp>1261147380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In Soviet Russia, the joke' s on you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In Soviet Russia , the joke ' s on you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Soviet Russia, the joke' s on you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483952</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484376</id>
	<title>Why is it that everyone always misses the point?</title>
	<author>chucklebutte</author>
	<datestamp>1261168020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People bitch and bitch, look paint/notepad/IE/any shitty MS product comes bundled with the OS because it makes sense! Just like OSX comes loaded with a ton of shit and Linux distro's do the same, why? Because shit works better that way! Duh!</p><p>Yes IE blows, and MS fixed it for the most part... I bet it runs pretty smoothly in windows based OS's, Same why my Linux distro comes with FF3.0.15 instead of whatever it is now, why? Probably cause it is the most compatible, meaning it will work the best with my OS. I can change my browser but why? It works great, I can use all the plugins I like to have all in all my system is stable aslong as I keep to specific distro based app's. Just like if you use a windows box with strictly MS apps and MS certified hardware. Same with Apple.</p><p>Dont bitch when your shit works! Be happy! If you dont like MS go to Apple, or Linux easy as that! Suing businesses to push your shitty software should be a wake up call! If you software sucks that much that you have to sue to get it out there, then try making better software!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People bitch and bitch , look paint/notepad/IE/any shitty MS product comes bundled with the OS because it makes sense !
Just like OSX comes loaded with a ton of shit and Linux distro 's do the same , why ?
Because shit works better that way !
Duh ! Yes IE blows , and MS fixed it for the most part... I bet it runs pretty smoothly in windows based OS 's , Same why my Linux distro comes with FF3.0.15 instead of whatever it is now , why ?
Probably cause it is the most compatible , meaning it will work the best with my OS .
I can change my browser but why ?
It works great , I can use all the plugins I like to have all in all my system is stable aslong as I keep to specific distro based app 's .
Just like if you use a windows box with strictly MS apps and MS certified hardware .
Same with Apple.Dont bitch when your shit works !
Be happy !
If you dont like MS go to Apple , or Linux easy as that !
Suing businesses to push your shitty software should be a wake up call !
If you software sucks that much that you have to sue to get it out there , then try making better software !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People bitch and bitch, look paint/notepad/IE/any shitty MS product comes bundled with the OS because it makes sense!
Just like OSX comes loaded with a ton of shit and Linux distro's do the same, why?
Because shit works better that way!
Duh!Yes IE blows, and MS fixed it for the most part... I bet it runs pretty smoothly in windows based OS's, Same why my Linux distro comes with FF3.0.15 instead of whatever it is now, why?
Probably cause it is the most compatible, meaning it will work the best with my OS.
I can change my browser but why?
It works great, I can use all the plugins I like to have all in all my system is stable aslong as I keep to specific distro based app's.
Just like if you use a windows box with strictly MS apps and MS certified hardware.
Same with Apple.Dont bitch when your shit works!
Be happy!
If you dont like MS go to Apple, or Linux easy as that!
Suing businesses to push your shitty software should be a wake up call!
If you software sucks that much that you have to sue to get it out there, then try making better software!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484316</id>
	<title>Consumers do have a choice</title>
	<author>Sycraft-fu</author>
	<datestamp>1261167120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem is they don't want a choice. There are plenty of other operating systems for PCs, Linux of course being the one everyone around here would think about. However consumers don't seem to want any of those. There is just next to zero demand for Linux on desktop systems. Companies have tried it, and their sales have been abysmal. Workstations and servers are a different story, and indeed you find it often IS an option. However on the desktop, people want Windows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is they do n't want a choice .
There are plenty of other operating systems for PCs , Linux of course being the one everyone around here would think about .
However consumers do n't seem to want any of those .
There is just next to zero demand for Linux on desktop systems .
Companies have tried it , and their sales have been abysmal .
Workstations and servers are a different story , and indeed you find it often IS an option .
However on the desktop , people want Windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is they don't want a choice.
There are plenty of other operating systems for PCs, Linux of course being the one everyone around here would think about.
However consumers don't seem to want any of those.
There is just next to zero demand for Linux on desktop systems.
Companies have tried it, and their sales have been abysmal.
Workstations and servers are a different story, and indeed you find it often IS an option.
However on the desktop, people want Windows.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30486114</id>
	<title>Re:Consumers do have a choice</title>
	<author>Trelane</author>
	<datestamp>1261146480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A third of all netbooks is "abysmal"?! In addition, netbooks were selling like hotcakes <i>before</i> Microsoft brought back XP from the dead. It's that<ol>
<li>people are comfortable with what they know, and all most people know is Windows (even if there're major UI changes, it still has the right brand name to make them feel safe</li>
<li>People feel forced into it because of their prior software and hardware choices</li>
<li>People feel forced into it because it's what everyone else uses (either just feelings or because they receive proprietary formatted files that they can only use with software that only runs on Windows</li>
</ol><p>

Most people I know of don't <i>like</i> Windows, and they <i>want</i> another option; they just feel there's no other option for them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A third of all netbooks is " abysmal " ? !
In addition , netbooks were selling like hotcakes before Microsoft brought back XP from the dead .
It 's that people are comfortable with what they know , and all most people know is Windows ( even if there 're major UI changes , it still has the right brand name to make them feel safe People feel forced into it because of their prior software and hardware choices People feel forced into it because it 's what everyone else uses ( either just feelings or because they receive proprietary formatted files that they can only use with software that only runs on Windows Most people I know of do n't like Windows , and they want another option ; they just feel there 's no other option for them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A third of all netbooks is "abysmal"?!
In addition, netbooks were selling like hotcakes before Microsoft brought back XP from the dead.
It's that
people are comfortable with what they know, and all most people know is Windows (even if there're major UI changes, it still has the right brand name to make them feel safe
People feel forced into it because of their prior software and hardware choices
People feel forced into it because it's what everyone else uses (either just feelings or because they receive proprietary formatted files that they can only use with software that only runs on Windows


Most people I know of don't like Windows, and they want another option; they just feel there's no other option for them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484316</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484230</id>
	<title>Re:Quit making it so complicated</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261079640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's one thing when people who feel they have the requisite knowledge <i>choose</i> to locate an alternative browser and install it. If <i>every</i> user had to use Google to locate what they thought might be a web browser and then attempt to install it successfully, a significant percentage would go straight off the cliff.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's one thing when people who feel they have the requisite knowledge choose to locate an alternative browser and install it .
If every user had to use Google to locate what they thought might be a web browser and then attempt to install it successfully , a significant percentage would go straight off the cliff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's one thing when people who feel they have the requisite knowledge choose to locate an alternative browser and install it.
If every user had to use Google to locate what they thought might be a web browser and then attempt to install it successfully, a significant percentage would go straight off the cliff.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483982</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30494132</id>
	<title>Re:Too many choices overwhelms</title>
	<author>Capt.DrumkenBum</author>
	<datestamp>1261135560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Thats MS's desire. Its been shown that when people are overwhelmed with choices they go with what they know.</p></div></blockquote><p>
and when Windows asks a question, most people go with the default. I got $5 that says the default is IE.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Thats MS 's desire .
Its been shown that when people are overwhelmed with choices they go with what they know .
and when Windows asks a question , most people go with the default .
I got $ 5 that says the default is IE .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thats MS's desire.
Its been shown that when people are overwhelmed with choices they go with what they know.
and when Windows asks a question, most people go with the default.
I got $5 that says the default is IE.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484132</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484984</id>
	<title>Re:more to the point, is this really necessary?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261133280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are right about the idiots, non-idiots part, BUT... What will happen when Mr. Idiot first sees ballot screen? Mr. Idiot panics, then Mr. Idiot picks up phone, and calls Mr Non-Idiot for help. Mr. Non-Idiot says: "Choose [some non IE browser], it would be fine". Mr. Idiot proceeds as instructed, and the world is saved.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are right about the idiots , non-idiots part , BUT... What will happen when Mr. Idiot first sees ballot screen ?
Mr. Idiot panics , then Mr. Idiot picks up phone , and calls Mr Non-Idiot for help .
Mr. Non-Idiot says : " Choose [ some non IE browser ] , it would be fine " .
Mr. Idiot proceeds as instructed , and the world is saved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are right about the idiots, non-idiots part, BUT... What will happen when Mr. Idiot first sees ballot screen?
Mr. Idiot panics, then Mr. Idiot picks up phone, and calls Mr Non-Idiot for help.
Mr. Non-Idiot says: "Choose [some non IE browser], it would be fine".
Mr. Idiot proceeds as instructed, and the world is saved.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484052</id>
	<title>Not fair if Lynx is missing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261077000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Their hegemonic empire will not be torn down in the name of equality if Lynx isn't included in the list of choices. They should also be forced to include alternatives to Paint and Notepad. That they have the audacity to continue bundling these applications is a slap to the face of every righteous EU official. They may also want to look into rumors that Apple is bundling a single web browser into their own OS at the expense of other meritorious alternatives.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Their hegemonic empire will not be torn down in the name of equality if Lynx is n't included in the list of choices .
They should also be forced to include alternatives to Paint and Notepad .
That they have the audacity to continue bundling these applications is a slap to the face of every righteous EU official .
They may also want to look into rumors that Apple is bundling a single web browser into their own OS at the expense of other meritorious alternatives .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Their hegemonic empire will not be torn down in the name of equality if Lynx isn't included in the list of choices.
They should also be forced to include alternatives to Paint and Notepad.
That they have the audacity to continue bundling these applications is a slap to the face of every righteous EU official.
They may also want to look into rumors that Apple is bundling a single web browser into their own OS at the expense of other meritorious alternatives.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484006</id>
	<title>The ballot screen is Europe only</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261076280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>The bad news is that, the screen is to appear only for users in Europe. I hope the US anti-trust takes hint a from their European counterparts and mandate in the US too.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The bad news is that , the screen is to appear only for users in Europe .
I hope the US anti-trust takes hint a from their European counterparts and mandate in the US too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The bad news is that, the screen is to appear only for users in Europe.
I hope the US anti-trust takes hint a from their European counterparts and mandate in the US too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30486290</id>
	<title>Re:The proper Solution:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261147440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I take it that you haven't actually used a Windows box running IE 7 or newer.  Or actually read the article.</p><p>As for everything past the first paragraph... WAT?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I take it that you have n't actually used a Windows box running IE 7 or newer .
Or actually read the article.As for everything past the first paragraph... WAT ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I take it that you haven't actually used a Windows box running IE 7 or newer.
Or actually read the article.As for everything past the first paragraph... WAT?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30485158</id>
	<title>Re:Not fair if Lynx is missing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261135860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And yet again, someone misunderstands antitrust laws. If you accept that a free market is a good thing, then you also need to accept that regulation is required to keep it free. Without competition, free markets cannot function; monopolies are dangerous and anti-competitive, and mean prices rise for customers in the long run.</p><p>Having a monopoly isn't illegal. Having two monopolies isn't illegal. Bundling isn't illegal. Having one monopoly, then using bundling with that monopoly to gain a second monopoly, and to prop up your monopolies via mutual lock-in IS illegal. A monopoly isn't 100\% of a market; it's a large enough share such that it is utterly dominant. 90\% of the market is more than sufficent in microsoft's case.</p><p>Apple does not have a monopoly in the desktop OS market, nor is safari a browser monopoly so bundling is ok. Neither paint or notepad have a monopoly in the image editing or document editing markets, so again bundling is A-OK. Free market competition is not threatened by them at this point.</p><p>Microsoft have a desktop monopoly. By bundling IE as the default 'free' browser (i.e. the price is included in windows) they gained a monopoly in the browser market. This in itself is not nececessarily a problem, but given microsoft's habit of also including custom extensions to the spec that promote lock-in, i.e. ActiveX it becomes a problem. Take a real world example; in Korea, online banking almost invariably requires activex, because 'everybody' has it. By having activex tied to the IE monopoly, which is tied to the windows monopoly, it means in order to do online banking there, you need to buy windows. Browser competitors and OS competitors are almost entirely locked out of the market, damaging customer choice and competition. And with no competition, microsoft can charge what the hell they like.</p><p>The same applies to the proprietary codecs bundled as part of media player; there was a real danger a few years ago that streaming video and audio online would gravitate to the WMV and WMA standards, which defacto only work in windows (patents providing lock-in), and mainly in IE. So by bundling media player's proprietary codecs with windows 'for free' there was a danger that microsoft would also gain a monopoly in the streaming video/audio market, and again harm competition and ultimately prices. As it happened, flash ended up winning, but it could have gone very differently, and may still if agreement cannot be reached with HTML5 for cross-platform support.</p><p>Providing a popup choice at first install may not be my preferred solution, but at least it means microsoft don't get an automatic free ride from customers with windows and IE who don't bother to look into the alternatives because they already have a bundled solution.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And yet again , someone misunderstands antitrust laws .
If you accept that a free market is a good thing , then you also need to accept that regulation is required to keep it free .
Without competition , free markets can not function ; monopolies are dangerous and anti-competitive , and mean prices rise for customers in the long run.Having a monopoly is n't illegal .
Having two monopolies is n't illegal .
Bundling is n't illegal .
Having one monopoly , then using bundling with that monopoly to gain a second monopoly , and to prop up your monopolies via mutual lock-in IS illegal .
A monopoly is n't 100 \ % of a market ; it 's a large enough share such that it is utterly dominant .
90 \ % of the market is more than sufficent in microsoft 's case.Apple does not have a monopoly in the desktop OS market , nor is safari a browser monopoly so bundling is ok. Neither paint or notepad have a monopoly in the image editing or document editing markets , so again bundling is A-OK. Free market competition is not threatened by them at this point.Microsoft have a desktop monopoly .
By bundling IE as the default 'free ' browser ( i.e .
the price is included in windows ) they gained a monopoly in the browser market .
This in itself is not nececessarily a problem , but given microsoft 's habit of also including custom extensions to the spec that promote lock-in , i.e .
ActiveX it becomes a problem .
Take a real world example ; in Korea , online banking almost invariably requires activex , because 'everybody ' has it .
By having activex tied to the IE monopoly , which is tied to the windows monopoly , it means in order to do online banking there , you need to buy windows .
Browser competitors and OS competitors are almost entirely locked out of the market , damaging customer choice and competition .
And with no competition , microsoft can charge what the hell they like.The same applies to the proprietary codecs bundled as part of media player ; there was a real danger a few years ago that streaming video and audio online would gravitate to the WMV and WMA standards , which defacto only work in windows ( patents providing lock-in ) , and mainly in IE .
So by bundling media player 's proprietary codecs with windows 'for free ' there was a danger that microsoft would also gain a monopoly in the streaming video/audio market , and again harm competition and ultimately prices .
As it happened , flash ended up winning , but it could have gone very differently , and may still if agreement can not be reached with HTML5 for cross-platform support.Providing a popup choice at first install may not be my preferred solution , but at least it means microsoft do n't get an automatic free ride from customers with windows and IE who do n't bother to look into the alternatives because they already have a bundled solution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And yet again, someone misunderstands antitrust laws.
If you accept that a free market is a good thing, then you also need to accept that regulation is required to keep it free.
Without competition, free markets cannot function; monopolies are dangerous and anti-competitive, and mean prices rise for customers in the long run.Having a monopoly isn't illegal.
Having two monopolies isn't illegal.
Bundling isn't illegal.
Having one monopoly, then using bundling with that monopoly to gain a second monopoly, and to prop up your monopolies via mutual lock-in IS illegal.
A monopoly isn't 100\% of a market; it's a large enough share such that it is utterly dominant.
90\% of the market is more than sufficent in microsoft's case.Apple does not have a monopoly in the desktop OS market, nor is safari a browser monopoly so bundling is ok. Neither paint or notepad have a monopoly in the image editing or document editing markets, so again bundling is A-OK. Free market competition is not threatened by them at this point.Microsoft have a desktop monopoly.
By bundling IE as the default 'free' browser (i.e.
the price is included in windows) they gained a monopoly in the browser market.
This in itself is not nececessarily a problem, but given microsoft's habit of also including custom extensions to the spec that promote lock-in, i.e.
ActiveX it becomes a problem.
Take a real world example; in Korea, online banking almost invariably requires activex, because 'everybody' has it.
By having activex tied to the IE monopoly, which is tied to the windows monopoly, it means in order to do online banking there, you need to buy windows.
Browser competitors and OS competitors are almost entirely locked out of the market, damaging customer choice and competition.
And with no competition, microsoft can charge what the hell they like.The same applies to the proprietary codecs bundled as part of media player; there was a real danger a few years ago that streaming video and audio online would gravitate to the WMV and WMA standards, which defacto only work in windows (patents providing lock-in), and mainly in IE.
So by bundling media player's proprietary codecs with windows 'for free' there was a danger that microsoft would also gain a monopoly in the streaming video/audio market, and again harm competition and ultimately prices.
As it happened, flash ended up winning, but it could have gone very differently, and may still if agreement cannot be reached with HTML5 for cross-platform support.Providing a popup choice at first install may not be my preferred solution, but at least it means microsoft don't get an automatic free ride from customers with windows and IE who don't bother to look into the alternatives because they already have a bundled solution.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484052</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30496782</id>
	<title>Re:Quit making it so complicated</title>
	<author>YuriBCN</author>
	<datestamp>1261161480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is one issue that doesn't seem to be cleared up by those advocating for the removability of IE: how do you download and thence install new apps online if there is no browser?
Unlike Linux, Windows does not have an apps package manager, like Debian &amp; Ubuntu's Synaptic/Aptitude via which applications can be downloaded and installed.
If the browsers are removed, Windows is capped as far as downloading apps packages is concerned. If online functionality, essential today, is to be maintained, something like Synaptic would have to replace IE in order to make the OS idiot-proof (in case the user ends up removing all browsers).</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is one issue that does n't seem to be cleared up by those advocating for the removability of IE : how do you download and thence install new apps online if there is no browser ?
Unlike Linux , Windows does not have an apps package manager , like Debian &amp; Ubuntu 's Synaptic/Aptitude via which applications can be downloaded and installed .
If the browsers are removed , Windows is capped as far as downloading apps packages is concerned .
If online functionality , essential today , is to be maintained , something like Synaptic would have to replace IE in order to make the OS idiot-proof ( in case the user ends up removing all browsers ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is one issue that doesn't seem to be cleared up by those advocating for the removability of IE: how do you download and thence install new apps online if there is no browser?
Unlike Linux, Windows does not have an apps package manager, like Debian &amp; Ubuntu's Synaptic/Aptitude via which applications can be downloaded and installed.
If the browsers are removed, Windows is capped as far as downloading apps packages is concerned.
If online functionality, essential today, is to be maintained, something like Synaptic would have to replace IE in order to make the OS idiot-proof (in case the user ends up removing all browsers).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483982</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484566</id>
	<title>Re:more to the point, is this really necessary?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261128480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>My computer experience tells me you've got two kinds of users.  Idiots and non-idiots.</p></div><p>This is a common mental mistake of Slashdotters. Of course there is a scale of various levels of knowledge. Perhaps even more importantly, a person can be an expert in some subjects and an idiot in others.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>My computer experience tells me you 've got two kinds of users .
Idiots and non-idiots.This is a common mental mistake of Slashdotters .
Of course there is a scale of various levels of knowledge .
Perhaps even more importantly , a person can be an expert in some subjects and an idiot in others .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My computer experience tells me you've got two kinds of users.
Idiots and non-idiots.This is a common mental mistake of Slashdotters.
Of course there is a scale of various levels of knowledge.
Perhaps even more importantly, a person can be an expert in some subjects and an idiot in others.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30487796</id>
	<title>Re:more to the point, is this really necessary?</title>
	<author>msimm</author>
	<datestamp>1261154280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>...a person can be an expert in some subjects and an idiot in others.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Something most slashdotters should be intimately familiar with (myself l;sdkjfaiosuoas included).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...a person can be an expert in some subjects and an idiot in others .
Something most slashdotters should be intimately familiar with ( myself l ; sdkjfaiosuoas included ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...a person can be an expert in some subjects and an idiot in others.
Something most slashdotters should be intimately familiar with (myself l;sdkjfaiosuoas included).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484566</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484402</id>
	<title>Re:How about the same - for computers?</title>
	<author>should\_be\_linear</author>
	<datestamp>1261168260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They cant fix everything at once. So far they fixed Samba documentation and browser thing AFAIK, Thats more then other countries combined</htmltext>
<tokenext>They cant fix everything at once .
So far they fixed Samba documentation and browser thing AFAIK , Thats more then other countries combined</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They cant fix everything at once.
So far they fixed Samba documentation and browser thing AFAIK, Thats more then other countries combined</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484118</id>
	<title>Re:Waiting for</title>
	<author>pjtp</author>
	<datestamp>1261078020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>In Soviet Russia, the joke waits for you!</htmltext>
<tokenext>In Soviet Russia , the joke waits for you !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Soviet Russia, the joke waits for you!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483952</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484594</id>
	<title>Waste of Time</title>
	<author>Toreo asesino</author>
	<datestamp>1261128900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...for most users I'd imagine. The number of people I've seen close Norton/McAfee messages that say "For Gods' sake man, you're trial-ware virus subscription have expired - your computer could literally be ass-raped any minute!" leads me to think most users won't give a shit about other browsers.</p><p>What happens if you close the ballot screen? Nothing I suspect. This'll just be a case of all but mildly technically curious people closing it and clicking the blue "E" anyway.</p><p>Anyway, after all this I think it's for the good. If nothing else it makes Apple seem a little more evil; I hope all the fanbois realise the same shake-down will happen to their beloved MacOS X should ever come close to the domination it apparently deserves.. Anyway, I for one don't miss the days of pure IE domination &amp; 'marque' tags floating around, so again this is a good thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...for most users I 'd imagine .
The number of people I 've seen close Norton/McAfee messages that say " For Gods ' sake man , you 're trial-ware virus subscription have expired - your computer could literally be ass-raped any minute !
" leads me to think most users wo n't give a shit about other browsers.What happens if you close the ballot screen ?
Nothing I suspect .
This 'll just be a case of all but mildly technically curious people closing it and clicking the blue " E " anyway.Anyway , after all this I think it 's for the good .
If nothing else it makes Apple seem a little more evil ; I hope all the fanbois realise the same shake-down will happen to their beloved MacOS X should ever come close to the domination it apparently deserves.. Anyway , I for one do n't miss the days of pure IE domination &amp; 'marque ' tags floating around , so again this is a good thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...for most users I'd imagine.
The number of people I've seen close Norton/McAfee messages that say "For Gods' sake man, you're trial-ware virus subscription have expired - your computer could literally be ass-raped any minute!
" leads me to think most users won't give a shit about other browsers.What happens if you close the ballot screen?
Nothing I suspect.
This'll just be a case of all but mildly technically curious people closing it and clicking the blue "E" anyway.Anyway, after all this I think it's for the good.
If nothing else it makes Apple seem a little more evil; I hope all the fanbois realise the same shake-down will happen to their beloved MacOS X should ever come close to the domination it apparently deserves.. Anyway, I for one don't miss the days of pure IE domination &amp; 'marque' tags floating around, so again this is a good thing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30486102</id>
	<title>Please make it more complicated</title>
	<author>xzvf</author>
	<datestamp>1261146420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This shows how government works.  This issue was important when Netscape had significant market share and MS just brought out IE.  They used their OS dominance to kill Netscape as a company, and that is when the anti-monopoly police should have stepped in and taken swift action.  Of course they have used the monopoly to dominate the office suite market and to horn in Exchange, MSSQL and now Sharepoint.  The original DOJ solution of breaking up MS and forcing the OS and the office suite to stand on their own was the real solution to this issue.  I would have added a third company specializing in enterprise software to the mix.

What I really want is to separate the purchase of hardware from the purchase of software.  When I buy a computer I don't want to chose between twelve versions of windows, I want some Linux options, or a least a no OS option.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This shows how government works .
This issue was important when Netscape had significant market share and MS just brought out IE .
They used their OS dominance to kill Netscape as a company , and that is when the anti-monopoly police should have stepped in and taken swift action .
Of course they have used the monopoly to dominate the office suite market and to horn in Exchange , MSSQL and now Sharepoint .
The original DOJ solution of breaking up MS and forcing the OS and the office suite to stand on their own was the real solution to this issue .
I would have added a third company specializing in enterprise software to the mix .
What I really want is to separate the purchase of hardware from the purchase of software .
When I buy a computer I do n't want to chose between twelve versions of windows , I want some Linux options , or a least a no OS option .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This shows how government works.
This issue was important when Netscape had significant market share and MS just brought out IE.
They used their OS dominance to kill Netscape as a company, and that is when the anti-monopoly police should have stepped in and taken swift action.
Of course they have used the monopoly to dominate the office suite market and to horn in Exchange, MSSQL and now Sharepoint.
The original DOJ solution of breaking up MS and forcing the OS and the office suite to stand on their own was the real solution to this issue.
I would have added a third company specializing in enterprise software to the mix.
What I really want is to separate the purchase of hardware from the purchase of software.
When I buy a computer I don't want to chose between twelve versions of windows, I want some Linux options, or a least a no OS option.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483982</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484866</id>
	<title>Re:more to the point, is this really necessary?</title>
	<author>Xest</author>
	<datestamp>1261131900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or more importantly, it's not necessary because Netscape failed because it was crap, not because of Microsoft's situation, and Firefox is killing Microsoft's marketshare even though IE has the same supposed advantage over it that it had over netscape.</p><p>Opera are pushing this because their browser is in the non-factor segment of the market when the real solution is to just do as Firefox did- build a better browser, and spend some time convincing people to adopt it.</p><p>I actually feel sorry for Microsoft because this is a waste of their time and a waste of our time, Firefox has proven that all along it's just about building better software and marketing it and the sooner other browser vendors realise this the better because otherwise, even with this screen, they will still remain non-factors.</p><p>What next, a ballot screen for alternatives to calculator? notepad?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or more importantly , it 's not necessary because Netscape failed because it was crap , not because of Microsoft 's situation , and Firefox is killing Microsoft 's marketshare even though IE has the same supposed advantage over it that it had over netscape.Opera are pushing this because their browser is in the non-factor segment of the market when the real solution is to just do as Firefox did- build a better browser , and spend some time convincing people to adopt it.I actually feel sorry for Microsoft because this is a waste of their time and a waste of our time , Firefox has proven that all along it 's just about building better software and marketing it and the sooner other browser vendors realise this the better because otherwise , even with this screen , they will still remain non-factors.What next , a ballot screen for alternatives to calculator ?
notepad ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or more importantly, it's not necessary because Netscape failed because it was crap, not because of Microsoft's situation, and Firefox is killing Microsoft's marketshare even though IE has the same supposed advantage over it that it had over netscape.Opera are pushing this because their browser is in the non-factor segment of the market when the real solution is to just do as Firefox did- build a better browser, and spend some time convincing people to adopt it.I actually feel sorry for Microsoft because this is a waste of their time and a waste of our time, Firefox has proven that all along it's just about building better software and marketing it and the sooner other browser vendors realise this the better because otherwise, even with this screen, they will still remain non-factors.What next, a ballot screen for alternatives to calculator?
notepad?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30493924</id>
	<title>Re:more to the point, is this really necessary?</title>
	<author>SanityInAnarchy</author>
	<datestamp>1261134360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The former category is a lost cause and will just use IE anyway because that's what they know.</p></div><p>Want to bet?</p><p>Ever since XP, there has been a prominent link on the Start Menu to "The Internet", which opens the current default browser. It's far bigger and more obvious than "Internet Explorer".</p><p>No, these users aren't going to have a clue what a browser is, the words "Internet Explorer" will likely mean nothing to them. They might just pick IE because it sounds right -- but they might as easily pick Google Chrome because they know they use Google.</p><p>However, I suspect it's far more likely that they'll try to figure out how to get rid of that annoying popup, rather than bothering to actually read it. So, sadly, they might end up with IE just by figuring out that they can close the ballot screen by clicking the X in the upper right.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The former category is a lost cause and will just use IE anyway because that 's what they know.Want to bet ? Ever since XP , there has been a prominent link on the Start Menu to " The Internet " , which opens the current default browser .
It 's far bigger and more obvious than " Internet Explorer " .No , these users are n't going to have a clue what a browser is , the words " Internet Explorer " will likely mean nothing to them .
They might just pick IE because it sounds right -- but they might as easily pick Google Chrome because they know they use Google.However , I suspect it 's far more likely that they 'll try to figure out how to get rid of that annoying popup , rather than bothering to actually read it .
So , sadly , they might end up with IE just by figuring out that they can close the ballot screen by clicking the X in the upper right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The former category is a lost cause and will just use IE anyway because that's what they know.Want to bet?Ever since XP, there has been a prominent link on the Start Menu to "The Internet", which opens the current default browser.
It's far bigger and more obvious than "Internet Explorer".No, these users aren't going to have a clue what a browser is, the words "Internet Explorer" will likely mean nothing to them.
They might just pick IE because it sounds right -- but they might as easily pick Google Chrome because they know they use Google.However, I suspect it's far more likely that they'll try to figure out how to get rid of that annoying popup, rather than bothering to actually read it.
So, sadly, they might end up with IE just by figuring out that they can close the ballot screen by clicking the X in the upper right.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30488320</id>
	<title>Re:Consumers do have a choice</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261156320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it's not about abysmal demand - it's about having an option to get a desired computer model without OS if you want. Now there are so many obstacles to get refund for preinstalled OS you don't need.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it 's not about abysmal demand - it 's about having an option to get a desired computer model without OS if you want .
Now there are so many obstacles to get refund for preinstalled OS you do n't need .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it's not about abysmal demand - it's about having an option to get a desired computer model without OS if you want.
Now there are so many obstacles to get refund for preinstalled OS you don't need.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484316</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484098</id>
	<title>Re:more to the point, is this really necessary?</title>
	<author>Heir Of The Mess</author>
	<datestamp>1261077720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>you've got two kinds of users. Idiots and non-idiots. The former category is a lost cause and will just use IE anyway because that's what they know.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Yep and if I was living in Europe all those idiots who I would've sneakily converted to Firefox will now get this ballot pop up and change themselves back to IE. Will be interesting to see the before and after browser popularity stats.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>you 've got two kinds of users .
Idiots and non-idiots .
The former category is a lost cause and will just use IE anyway because that 's what they know .
Yep and if I was living in Europe all those idiots who I would 've sneakily converted to Firefox will now get this ballot pop up and change themselves back to IE .
Will be interesting to see the before and after browser popularity stats .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you've got two kinds of users.
Idiots and non-idiots.
The former category is a lost cause and will just use IE anyway because that's what they know.
Yep and if I was living in Europe all those idiots who I would've sneakily converted to Firefox will now get this ballot pop up and change themselves back to IE.
Will be interesting to see the before and after browser popularity stats.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30485118</id>
	<title>Re:more to the point, is this really necessary?</title>
	<author>jonwil</author>
	<datestamp>1261135440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Depending on how its presented, there is a good chance people (who would normally only use IE) might see Google Chrome and go "I know Google, I use it to find stuff all the time, I am going to pick the Google option"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Depending on how its presented , there is a good chance people ( who would normally only use IE ) might see Google Chrome and go " I know Google , I use it to find stuff all the time , I am going to pick the Google option "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Depending on how its presented, there is a good chance people (who would normally only use IE) might see Google Chrome and go "I know Google, I use it to find stuff all the time, I am going to pick the Google option"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483978</id>
	<title>Re:Waiting for</title>
	<author>Shakrai</author>
	<datestamp>1261075920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ya know, if you are going to go for the cheap one line first post you might as well make the joke yourself.  At least that way you'll get a few funny mods on your way to the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/null of -1
</p><p>Let me try one: In Soviet Russia, EU anti-trusts YOU.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ya know , if you are going to go for the cheap one line first post you might as well make the joke yourself .
At least that way you 'll get a few funny mods on your way to the /dev/null of -1 Let me try one : In Soviet Russia , EU anti-trusts YOU .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ya know, if you are going to go for the cheap one line first post you might as well make the joke yourself.
At least that way you'll get a few funny mods on your way to the /dev/null of -1
Let me try one: In Soviet Russia, EU anti-trusts YOU.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483952</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30485778</id>
	<title>Re:Quit making it so complicated</title>
	<author>AmberBlackCat</author>
	<datestamp>1261144020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Default the startup page to a Google search for "web browsers" and let the user pick which link to follow and download.</p></div></blockquote><p>Then we'd need another "portable application" to let the user search for a search engine to use so the operating system wouldn't give an unfair advantage to Google.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Default the startup page to a Google search for " web browsers " and let the user pick which link to follow and download.Then we 'd need another " portable application " to let the user search for a search engine to use so the operating system would n't give an unfair advantage to Google .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Default the startup page to a Google search for "web browsers" and let the user pick which link to follow and download.Then we'd need another "portable application" to let the user search for a search engine to use so the operating system wouldn't give an unfair advantage to Google.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483982</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30485446</id>
	<title>word? what?</title>
	<author>molecular</author>
	<datestamp>1261140720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"How will it work? According to the Commitments document that was the basis of the agreement between Microsoft and the EU (download Word document)"</p><p>Download "Word document". wtf!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" How will it work ?
According to the Commitments document that was the basis of the agreement between Microsoft and the EU ( download Word document ) " Download " Word document " .
wtf !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"How will it work?
According to the Commitments document that was the basis of the agreement between Microsoft and the EU (download Word document)"Download "Word document".
wtf!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484444</id>
	<title>Re:The proper Solution:</title>
	<author>RoFLKOPTr</author>
	<datestamp>1261169520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Makers of x86 applications should have been mandated to produce a (Generic) Linux, Windows, and OSX port of all their software. That means Quicken, that means Adobe, that means, everyone else. Makers of hardware needed to be mandated to make a Windows, Linux, and OSX driver for their device.</p></div><p>I don't think that's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.... but it's damn close.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Makers of x86 applications should have been mandated to produce a ( Generic ) Linux , Windows , and OSX port of all their software .
That means Quicken , that means Adobe , that means , everyone else .
Makers of hardware needed to be mandated to make a Windows , Linux , and OSX driver for their device.I do n't think that 's the stupidest thing I 've ever heard.... but it 's damn close .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Makers of x86 applications should have been mandated to produce a (Generic) Linux, Windows, and OSX port of all their software.
That means Quicken, that means Adobe, that means, everyone else.
Makers of hardware needed to be mandated to make a Windows, Linux, and OSX driver for their device.I don't think that's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.... but it's damn close.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484002</id>
	<title>The proper Solution:</title>
	<author>Zombie Ryushu</author>
	<datestamp>1261076220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The proper solution would have been for Windows to go back to the while idea of there being a "Windows Explorer" and an "Internet Explorer". Like 95 had. Windows explorer (explorer.exe) just ran the GUI Shell. The Ballot screen would be a small program that downloads the programs and installs them.</p><p>But that really wouldn't have dented MS's near-monopoly.</p><p>If governments really wanted to give MS a run for its money, the following stigma would have had to be made:</p><p>Makers of x86 applications should have been mandated to produce a (Generic) Linux, Windows, and OSX port of all their software. That means Quicken, that means Adobe, that means, everyone else. Makers of hardware needed to be mandated to make a Windows, Linux, and OSX driver for their device. Before the fanboys who talk about how the Linux Kernel changes so much, Nvidia does this very well with the Dynamic Kernel Management (DKMS) Shim. And the rest of their driver stays closed source. So we know this works annd can be done.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The proper solution would have been for Windows to go back to the while idea of there being a " Windows Explorer " and an " Internet Explorer " .
Like 95 had .
Windows explorer ( explorer.exe ) just ran the GUI Shell .
The Ballot screen would be a small program that downloads the programs and installs them.But that really would n't have dented MS 's near-monopoly.If governments really wanted to give MS a run for its money , the following stigma would have had to be made : Makers of x86 applications should have been mandated to produce a ( Generic ) Linux , Windows , and OSX port of all their software .
That means Quicken , that means Adobe , that means , everyone else .
Makers of hardware needed to be mandated to make a Windows , Linux , and OSX driver for their device .
Before the fanboys who talk about how the Linux Kernel changes so much , Nvidia does this very well with the Dynamic Kernel Management ( DKMS ) Shim .
And the rest of their driver stays closed source .
So we know this works annd can be done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The proper solution would have been for Windows to go back to the while idea of there being a "Windows Explorer" and an "Internet Explorer".
Like 95 had.
Windows explorer (explorer.exe) just ran the GUI Shell.
The Ballot screen would be a small program that downloads the programs and installs them.But that really wouldn't have dented MS's near-monopoly.If governments really wanted to give MS a run for its money, the following stigma would have had to be made:Makers of x86 applications should have been mandated to produce a (Generic) Linux, Windows, and OSX port of all their software.
That means Quicken, that means Adobe, that means, everyone else.
Makers of hardware needed to be mandated to make a Windows, Linux, and OSX driver for their device.
Before the fanboys who talk about how the Linux Kernel changes so much, Nvidia does this very well with the Dynamic Kernel Management (DKMS) Shim.
And the rest of their driver stays closed source.
So we know this works annd can be done.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484106</id>
	<title>This just in from Opera</title>
	<author>iamapizza</author>
	<datestamp>1261077840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Opera is planning to launch another antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft for not making their browser the first item on the ballot screen.  Once the EU rules in their favor once more, they are planning another series of lawsuits that's going to unbundle Windows from Windows. I say this is a great day in the world of software - you can use lawsuits to hide your unpopularity. Wish I knew this when I was in school.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera is planning to launch another antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft for not making their browser the first item on the ballot screen .
Once the EU rules in their favor once more , they are planning another series of lawsuits that 's going to unbundle Windows from Windows .
I say this is a great day in the world of software - you can use lawsuits to hide your unpopularity .
Wish I knew this when I was in school .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera is planning to launch another antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft for not making their browser the first item on the ballot screen.
Once the EU rules in their favor once more, they are planning another series of lawsuits that's going to unbundle Windows from Windows.
I say this is a great day in the world of software - you can use lawsuits to hide your unpopularity.
Wish I knew this when I was in school.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30497788</id>
	<title>Re:The ballot screen is Europe only</title>
	<author>Pigskin-Referee</author>
	<datestamp>1261226460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The bad news is that, the screen is to appear only for users in Europe. I hope the US anti-trust takes hint a from their European counterparts and mandate in the US too.</p></div><p>I seriously hope not. In the US we believe in capitalism. While our president may be a socialist at heart, I hope that the concept does not take root in our economic structure also. Let Europe contend with the fascist/socialist EC. Then again, I cannot wait until they force some *nix product be ported to a Win32/64 platform at their own expense.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The bad news is that , the screen is to appear only for users in Europe .
I hope the US anti-trust takes hint a from their European counterparts and mandate in the US too.I seriously hope not .
In the US we believe in capitalism .
While our president may be a socialist at heart , I hope that the concept does not take root in our economic structure also .
Let Europe contend with the fascist/socialist EC .
Then again , I can not wait until they force some * nix product be ported to a Win32/64 platform at their own expense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The bad news is that, the screen is to appear only for users in Europe.
I hope the US anti-trust takes hint a from their European counterparts and mandate in the US too.I seriously hope not.
In the US we believe in capitalism.
While our president may be a socialist at heart, I hope that the concept does not take root in our economic structure also.
Let Europe contend with the fascist/socialist EC.
Then again, I cannot wait until they force some *nix product be ported to a Win32/64 platform at their own expense.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483990</id>
	<title>more to the point, is this really necessary?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261076040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My computer experience tells me you've got two kinds of users.  Idiots and non-idiots.  The former category is a lost cause and will just use IE anyway because that's what they know.  The latter category is already smart enough to procure an alternate browser without the help of a splash screen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My computer experience tells me you 've got two kinds of users .
Idiots and non-idiots .
The former category is a lost cause and will just use IE anyway because that 's what they know .
The latter category is already smart enough to procure an alternate browser without the help of a splash screen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My computer experience tells me you've got two kinds of users.
Idiots and non-idiots.
The former category is a lost cause and will just use IE anyway because that's what they know.
The latter category is already smart enough to procure an alternate browser without the help of a splash screen.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484422</id>
	<title>Re:This just in from Opera</title>
	<author>sznupi</author>
	<datestamp>1261168740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...and yet you suddenly forget, <b>on Slashdot</b>, that other browsers had a hard time largely due to practices of MS.</p><p>And no, it isn't a case of "well, but only Opera has such pitiful market share of all the alternatives" BS. You seem to also forget that Europe is not US; there are countries here where Opera is far ahead of FF, for example. And Safari generally doesn't exist.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...and yet you suddenly forget , on Slashdot , that other browsers had a hard time largely due to practices of MS.And no , it is n't a case of " well , but only Opera has such pitiful market share of all the alternatives " BS .
You seem to also forget that Europe is not US ; there are countries here where Opera is far ahead of FF , for example .
And Safari generally does n't exist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and yet you suddenly forget, on Slashdot, that other browsers had a hard time largely due to practices of MS.And no, it isn't a case of "well, but only Opera has such pitiful market share of all the alternatives" BS.
You seem to also forget that Europe is not US; there are countries here where Opera is far ahead of FF, for example.
And Safari generally doesn't exist.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30485256</id>
	<title>Re:Not fair if Lynx is missing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261137480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>They should also be forced to include alternatives to Paint and Notepad.</p></div><p>Riiiight... because if you have Paint and Notepad, why on earth would you want any other graphics or wordprocessing software? Adobe must be quaking in their boots (and guess who pwn3s the wordprocessing market anyway).  Oh, plus, those apps were part of Windows since before Windows had any market share (pretty sure they were in Windows 1.0 in the late 80s). IE, however, was parachuted in circa Windows 95 when the MS monopoly was at its height and Netscape, Opera et. al. had established businesses producing web browsers.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>They may also want to look into rumors that Apple is bundling a single web browser into their own OS at the expense of other meritorious alternatives.</p></div><p>Oh ye gods and little fishes, how hard can it be? These are antitrust/monopoly abuse rulings - <b>Apple doesn't have a near-monopoly in the desktop operating systems market</b> so they can't use their OS monopoly to foist Safari on the masses.

</p><p>Oh, and FWIW if you fire up your Mac and go to "Apple Menu*" =&gt; "Mac OS Software" =&gt; "Internet Utilities" you'll find an <a href="http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/internet\_utilities/" title="apple.com">Apple-hosted page</a> [apple.com] which currently includes Firefox and Chrome on page 1 and Opera on page 2.
</p><p>(*Thats the OS X equivalent of the "Start" menu)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They should also be forced to include alternatives to Paint and Notepad.Riiiight... because if you have Paint and Notepad , why on earth would you want any other graphics or wordprocessing software ?
Adobe must be quaking in their boots ( and guess who pwn3s the wordprocessing market anyway ) .
Oh , plus , those apps were part of Windows since before Windows had any market share ( pretty sure they were in Windows 1.0 in the late 80s ) .
IE , however , was parachuted in circa Windows 95 when the MS monopoly was at its height and Netscape , Opera et .
al. had established businesses producing web browsers.They may also want to look into rumors that Apple is bundling a single web browser into their own OS at the expense of other meritorious alternatives.Oh ye gods and little fishes , how hard can it be ?
These are antitrust/monopoly abuse rulings - Apple does n't have a near-monopoly in the desktop operating systems market so they ca n't use their OS monopoly to foist Safari on the masses .
Oh , and FWIW if you fire up your Mac and go to " Apple Menu * " = &gt; " Mac OS Software " = &gt; " Internet Utilities " you 'll find an Apple-hosted page [ apple.com ] which currently includes Firefox and Chrome on page 1 and Opera on page 2 .
( * Thats the OS X equivalent of the " Start " menu )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They should also be forced to include alternatives to Paint and Notepad.Riiiight... because if you have Paint and Notepad, why on earth would you want any other graphics or wordprocessing software?
Adobe must be quaking in their boots (and guess who pwn3s the wordprocessing market anyway).
Oh, plus, those apps were part of Windows since before Windows had any market share (pretty sure they were in Windows 1.0 in the late 80s).
IE, however, was parachuted in circa Windows 95 when the MS monopoly was at its height and Netscape, Opera et.
al. had established businesses producing web browsers.They may also want to look into rumors that Apple is bundling a single web browser into their own OS at the expense of other meritorious alternatives.Oh ye gods and little fishes, how hard can it be?
These are antitrust/monopoly abuse rulings - Apple doesn't have a near-monopoly in the desktop operating systems market so they can't use their OS monopoly to foist Safari on the masses.
Oh, and FWIW if you fire up your Mac and go to "Apple Menu*" =&gt; "Mac OS Software" =&gt; "Internet Utilities" you'll find an Apple-hosted page [apple.com] which currently includes Firefox and Chrome on page 1 and Opera on page 2.
(*Thats the OS X equivalent of the "Start" menu)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484052</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483952</id>
	<title>Waiting for</title>
	<author>PixetaledPikachu</author>
	<datestamp>1261075500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>the "In Soviet Russia.." joke</htmltext>
<tokenext>the " In Soviet Russia.. " joke</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the "In Soviet Russia.." joke</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30485542</id>
	<title>Re:Quit making it so complicated</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261141740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And no sooner would this be implemented, than the Google bombing would begin. And why Google? Perhaps it should go to a Bing page (but why Bing?) with results for search engines. You pick a search engine, and it returns with a search for web browsers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And no sooner would this be implemented , than the Google bombing would begin .
And why Google ?
Perhaps it should go to a Bing page ( but why Bing ?
) with results for search engines .
You pick a search engine , and it returns with a search for web browsers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And no sooner would this be implemented, than the Google bombing would begin.
And why Google?
Perhaps it should go to a Bing page (but why Bing?
) with results for search engines.
You pick a search engine, and it returns with a search for web browsers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484230</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484456</id>
	<title>Re:more to the point, is this really necessary?</title>
	<author>wvmarle</author>
	<datestamp>1261169820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The first category probably wouldn't even realise they are working with FF or Safari instead of IE.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The first category probably would n't even realise they are working with FF or Safari instead of IE .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first category probably wouldn't even realise they are working with FF or Safari instead of IE.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30495516</id>
	<title>Why do techies keep deriding users?</title>
	<author>jotaeleemeese</author>
	<datestamp>1261145700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People in the IT industry are the only ones I know that deride their users, the people that actually justify paying for IT services.</p><p>If people are closing anti-virus renewal enticements it is maybe because the price seems excessive, or the product is not working as expected, or the renewal process it too intrusive and cumbersome.</p><p>The user should always be the last person to be blamed, specially when general patterns of behaviour are recognized, which would point to an inability from the part of the service provider.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People in the IT industry are the only ones I know that deride their users , the people that actually justify paying for IT services.If people are closing anti-virus renewal enticements it is maybe because the price seems excessive , or the product is not working as expected , or the renewal process it too intrusive and cumbersome.The user should always be the last person to be blamed , specially when general patterns of behaviour are recognized , which would point to an inability from the part of the service provider .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People in the IT industry are the only ones I know that deride their users, the people that actually justify paying for IT services.If people are closing anti-virus renewal enticements it is maybe because the price seems excessive, or the product is not working as expected, or the renewal process it too intrusive and cumbersome.The user should always be the last person to be blamed, specially when general patterns of behaviour are recognized, which would point to an inability from the part of the service provider.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30485028</id>
	<title>Way Too Many Browsers</title>
	<author>rdnetto</author>
	<datestamp>1261134060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How many browsers will be on the ballot? Twelve altogether, but just five on the first page.<br>The first five are Apple's Safari, Google's Chrome, Microsoft's IE, Mozilla's Firefox and Opera. On a second screen, the ballot will list AOL, Maxthon, K-Meleon, Flock, Avant Browser, Sleipnir and SlimBrowser.</p></div><p>Seriously? They should just have stuck with the first five. Plus IE will *still* be installed by default, so this won't solve anything.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How many browsers will be on the ballot ?
Twelve altogether , but just five on the first page.The first five are Apple 's Safari , Google 's Chrome , Microsoft 's IE , Mozilla 's Firefox and Opera .
On a second screen , the ballot will list AOL , Maxthon , K-Meleon , Flock , Avant Browser , Sleipnir and SlimBrowser.Seriously ?
They should just have stuck with the first five .
Plus IE will * still * be installed by default , so this wo n't solve anything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many browsers will be on the ballot?
Twelve altogether, but just five on the first page.The first five are Apple's Safari, Google's Chrome, Microsoft's IE, Mozilla's Firefox and Opera.
On a second screen, the ballot will list AOL, Maxthon, K-Meleon, Flock, Avant Browser, Sleipnir and SlimBrowser.Seriously?
They should just have stuck with the first five.
Plus IE will *still* be installed by default, so this won't solve anything.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484114</id>
	<title>No Ad Version</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261077960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/print/9142416/FAQ\_How\_the\_IE\_ballot\_screen\_works?taxonomyName=Internet+Applications&amp;taxonomyId=168" title="computerworld.com" rel="nofollow">Printable ad free no-karma-whore link to the article</a> [computerworld.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Printable ad free no-karma-whore link to the article [ computerworld.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Printable ad free no-karma-whore link to the article [computerworld.com].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484000</id>
	<title>I Have a Great Big Cock!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261076220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><b>And big balls too!</b></htmltext>
<tokenext>And big balls too !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And big balls too!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483952</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484182</id>
	<title>Ballot?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261078980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ballot?  It's a menu.</p><p>Nice choice of words trying to spin this as a democratic / freedom / choice thing.<br>It's simply MS being forced to help their competition.</p><p>Whether or not you agree with the reasoning behind it is irrelevant - there's no reason to call a simple fucking menu a ballot.</p><p>I believe that IE should be the only browser provided by MS, and no menu should be forced upon them.  But IE should be completely removable (in Vista and 7 not XP; XP needs it for updates) via the ol' add/remove windows components thing.  Leave the files around by default, just uninstall the thing.  Hateful users can delete the actual files too, and then pop in the installation disc if they want to re-add it later.</p><p>Apps that die because they depend on IE being installed?  Well, you simply can't make everyone happy in this scenario.  Eventually that problem will go away.</p><p>But this is a menu.<br>Not a ballot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ballot ?
It 's a menu.Nice choice of words trying to spin this as a democratic / freedom / choice thing.It 's simply MS being forced to help their competition.Whether or not you agree with the reasoning behind it is irrelevant - there 's no reason to call a simple fucking menu a ballot.I believe that IE should be the only browser provided by MS , and no menu should be forced upon them .
But IE should be completely removable ( in Vista and 7 not XP ; XP needs it for updates ) via the ol ' add/remove windows components thing .
Leave the files around by default , just uninstall the thing .
Hateful users can delete the actual files too , and then pop in the installation disc if they want to re-add it later.Apps that die because they depend on IE being installed ?
Well , you simply ca n't make everyone happy in this scenario .
Eventually that problem will go away.But this is a menu.Not a ballot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ballot?
It's a menu.Nice choice of words trying to spin this as a democratic / freedom / choice thing.It's simply MS being forced to help their competition.Whether or not you agree with the reasoning behind it is irrelevant - there's no reason to call a simple fucking menu a ballot.I believe that IE should be the only browser provided by MS, and no menu should be forced upon them.
But IE should be completely removable (in Vista and 7 not XP; XP needs it for updates) via the ol' add/remove windows components thing.
Leave the files around by default, just uninstall the thing.
Hateful users can delete the actual files too, and then pop in the installation disc if they want to re-add it later.Apps that die because they depend on IE being installed?
Well, you simply can't make everyone happy in this scenario.
Eventually that problem will go away.But this is a menu.Not a ballot.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30491722</id>
	<title>Re:The ballot screen is Europe only</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1261168680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I disagree. The really bad news is that this let's microsoft off the hook completely for the mess they have created.</p></div><p>It was <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European\_Union\_Microsoft\_competition\_case" title="wikipedia.org">no fun</a> [wikipedia.org] dangling on that hook while it lasted, however:</p><p>"In March 2004, the EU ordered Microsoft to pay &euro;497 million ($794 million or &pound;381 million)"</p><p>"In December 2005 the EU announced that it believed Microsoft did not comply fully with the ruling, stating that the company did not disclose appropriate information about its server programs. The EU said that it would begin to fine Microsoft &euro;2 million (US$3.20 million or &pound;1.53 million) a day until it did so."</p><p>"On 12 July 2006, the EU fined Microsoft for an additional &euro;280.5 million (US$448.58 million), &euro;1.5 million (US$2.39 million) per day from 16 December 2005 to 20 June 2006. The EU threatened to increase the fine to &euro;3 million ($4.80 million) per day on 31 July 2006 if Microsoft did not comply by then."</p><p>"On 17 September 2007, Microsoft lost their appeal against the European Commission's case. The &euro;497 million fine was upheld, as were the requirements regarding server interoperability information and bundling of Media Player. In addition, Microsoft has to pay 80\% of the legal costs of the Commission, while the Commission has to pay 20\% of the legal costs by Microsoft."</p><p>"On 27 February 2008, the EU fined Microsoft an additional &euro;899 million (US$1.44 billion) for failure to comply with the March 2004 antitrust decision. This represents the largest penalty ever imposed in 50 years of EU competition policy. This latest decision follows a prior &euro;280.5 million fine for non-compliance, covering the period from June 21, 2006 until October 21, 2007."</p><p>Oh yes, and MS net income for 2009 was $14.5 billion; so fines made a fairly large dent in that, enough so for e.g. shareholders to pay a lot of attention to that.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I disagree .
The really bad news is that this let 's microsoft off the hook completely for the mess they have created.It was no fun [ wikipedia.org ] dangling on that hook while it lasted , however : " In March 2004 , the EU ordered Microsoft to pay    497 million ( $ 794 million or   381 million ) " " In December 2005 the EU announced that it believed Microsoft did not comply fully with the ruling , stating that the company did not disclose appropriate information about its server programs .
The EU said that it would begin to fine Microsoft    2 million ( US $ 3.20 million or   1.53 million ) a day until it did so .
" " On 12 July 2006 , the EU fined Microsoft for an additional    280.5 million ( US $ 448.58 million ) ,    1.5 million ( US $ 2.39 million ) per day from 16 December 2005 to 20 June 2006 .
The EU threatened to increase the fine to    3 million ( $ 4.80 million ) per day on 31 July 2006 if Microsoft did not comply by then .
" " On 17 September 2007 , Microsoft lost their appeal against the European Commission 's case .
The    497 million fine was upheld , as were the requirements regarding server interoperability information and bundling of Media Player .
In addition , Microsoft has to pay 80 \ % of the legal costs of the Commission , while the Commission has to pay 20 \ % of the legal costs by Microsoft .
" " On 27 February 2008 , the EU fined Microsoft an additional    899 million ( US $ 1.44 billion ) for failure to comply with the March 2004 antitrust decision .
This represents the largest penalty ever imposed in 50 years of EU competition policy .
This latest decision follows a prior    280.5 million fine for non-compliance , covering the period from June 21 , 2006 until October 21 , 2007 .
" Oh yes , and MS net income for 2009 was $ 14.5 billion ; so fines made a fairly large dent in that , enough so for e.g .
shareholders to pay a lot of attention to that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I disagree.
The really bad news is that this let's microsoft off the hook completely for the mess they have created.It was no fun [wikipedia.org] dangling on that hook while it lasted, however:"In March 2004, the EU ordered Microsoft to pay €497 million ($794 million or £381 million)""In December 2005 the EU announced that it believed Microsoft did not comply fully with the ruling, stating that the company did not disclose appropriate information about its server programs.
The EU said that it would begin to fine Microsoft €2 million (US$3.20 million or £1.53 million) a day until it did so.
""On 12 July 2006, the EU fined Microsoft for an additional €280.5 million (US$448.58 million), €1.5 million (US$2.39 million) per day from 16 December 2005 to 20 June 2006.
The EU threatened to increase the fine to €3 million ($4.80 million) per day on 31 July 2006 if Microsoft did not comply by then.
""On 17 September 2007, Microsoft lost their appeal against the European Commission's case.
The €497 million fine was upheld, as were the requirements regarding server interoperability information and bundling of Media Player.
In addition, Microsoft has to pay 80\% of the legal costs of the Commission, while the Commission has to pay 20\% of the legal costs by Microsoft.
""On 27 February 2008, the EU fined Microsoft an additional €899 million (US$1.44 billion) for failure to comply with the March 2004 antitrust decision.
This represents the largest penalty ever imposed in 50 years of EU competition policy.
This latest decision follows a prior €280.5 million fine for non-compliance, covering the period from June 21, 2006 until October 21, 2007.
"Oh yes, and MS net income for 2009 was $14.5 billion; so fines made a fairly large dent in that, enough so for e.g.
shareholders to pay a lot of attention to that.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484058</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484862</id>
	<title>It's quite easy:</title>
	<author>Errol backfiring</author>
	<datestamp>1261131840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Some program on the computer will fire up IE instead of the default browser, and IE makes itself the default browser like it always has.

Nothing's changed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Some program on the computer will fire up IE instead of the default browser , and IE makes itself the default browser like it always has .
Nothing 's changed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some program on the computer will fire up IE instead of the default browser, and IE makes itself the default browser like it always has.
Nothing's changed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483982</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30495486</id>
	<title>Your definitions are not correct.</title>
	<author>jotaeleemeese</author>
	<datestamp>1261145280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The two type of users are</p><p>- The ones that know they do not know much.<br>- The ones that think they know more than others, but know as little as the ones in the first group.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The two type of users are- The ones that know they do not know much.- The ones that think they know more than others , but know as little as the ones in the first group .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The two type of users are- The ones that know they do not know much.- The ones that think they know more than others, but know as little as the ones in the first group.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484852</id>
	<title>Re:more to the point, is this really necessary?</title>
	<author>houghi</author>
	<datestamp>1261131660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is not about the idiots making stupid choices. This is about the idiots having <b>the ability</b> to make a stupid choice. Perhaps there will be idiots who say "Finally I can have my IE back and not that firething my geeky neighbour forced down my throat."</p><p>This is not about forcing people to use alternative browsers. It is about giving people a selection to choose from. Just like you can select to eat in a fancy restaurant (or even cook your own food) does not mean McD is out of business any day soon. It means it is you can pick your own poison.</p><p>It would be great if the next step would be to have a selection of various operating systems to select from at first boot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is not about the idiots making stupid choices .
This is about the idiots having the ability to make a stupid choice .
Perhaps there will be idiots who say " Finally I can have my IE back and not that firething my geeky neighbour forced down my throat .
" This is not about forcing people to use alternative browsers .
It is about giving people a selection to choose from .
Just like you can select to eat in a fancy restaurant ( or even cook your own food ) does not mean McD is out of business any day soon .
It means it is you can pick your own poison.It would be great if the next step would be to have a selection of various operating systems to select from at first boot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is not about the idiots making stupid choices.
This is about the idiots having the ability to make a stupid choice.
Perhaps there will be idiots who say "Finally I can have my IE back and not that firething my geeky neighbour forced down my throat.
"This is not about forcing people to use alternative browsers.
It is about giving people a selection to choose from.
Just like you can select to eat in a fancy restaurant (or even cook your own food) does not mean McD is out of business any day soon.
It means it is you can pick your own poison.It would be great if the next step would be to have a selection of various operating systems to select from at first boot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30485452</id>
	<title>Re:more to the point, is this really necessary?</title>
	<author>jonbryce</author>
	<datestamp>1261140780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Ballot screen only appears for people who have IE as their default browser.  If you have switched them to Firefox, they won't see it.</p><p>In any case, I would expect most non-geeks to choose "Google".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Ballot screen only appears for people who have IE as their default browser .
If you have switched them to Firefox , they wo n't see it.In any case , I would expect most non-geeks to choose " Google " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Ballot screen only appears for people who have IE as their default browser.
If you have switched them to Firefox, they won't see it.In any case, I would expect most non-geeks to choose "Google".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484098</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484258</id>
	<title>Re:Quit making it so complicated</title>
	<author>Fourpole</author>
	<datestamp>1261166460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FTFA:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The ballot screen will include two links -- one reading "Install," the other "Information" -- under each browser's logo. The install link will take the user to "a vendor-managed distribution server, which, upon the user's confirmation, can directly download the installation package of the selected Web browser," according to the Commitments. The informational link will lead to the browser maker's site for more details about the application and other installation options.</p></div><p>I personally feel that the whole thing is a little silly, but this seems like a decent and fairly simple way to go about it.  No mention of what happens if you don't have access to the web when you log in for the first time though.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>FTFA : The ballot screen will include two links -- one reading " Install , " the other " Information " -- under each browser 's logo .
The install link will take the user to " a vendor-managed distribution server , which , upon the user 's confirmation , can directly download the installation package of the selected Web browser , " according to the Commitments .
The informational link will lead to the browser maker 's site for more details about the application and other installation options.I personally feel that the whole thing is a little silly , but this seems like a decent and fairly simple way to go about it .
No mention of what happens if you do n't have access to the web when you log in for the first time though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FTFA:The ballot screen will include two links -- one reading "Install," the other "Information" -- under each browser's logo.
The install link will take the user to "a vendor-managed distribution server, which, upon the user's confirmation, can directly download the installation package of the selected Web browser," according to the Commitments.
The informational link will lead to the browser maker's site for more details about the application and other installation options.I personally feel that the whole thing is a little silly, but this seems like a decent and fairly simple way to go about it.
No mention of what happens if you don't have access to the web when you log in for the first time though.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483982</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483974</id>
	<title>Where were you when the operating system was born?</title>
	<author>fotoguzzi</author>
	<datestamp>1261075860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why don't you just write the rest of it and not just one menu.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do n't you just write the rest of it and not just one menu .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why don't you just write the rest of it and not just one menu.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30487870</id>
	<title>How they choose</title>
	<author>fortapocalypse</author>
	<datestamp>1261154520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>"For each of the usage share sources listed in Annex D, web browser usage share will be determined semi-annually by averaging monthly usage share data for the previous six months for which such data is available, with shares for different released versions of the same vendor&rsquo;s browsers added together to determine a browser&rsquo;s total usage share (e.g., Firefox 2.0, 3.0, 3.5, etc. all count towards the total share for &ldquo;Mozilla Firefox&rdquo;). No more than one browser will be listed per vendor. Other than Internet Explorer, the Choice Screen may not contain any web browser which is based on Internet Explorer&rsquo;s rendering engine and the development or distribution of which is funded in whole or in substantial part by Microsoft."

so IE-engine based browsers are not an option. (+1 Microsoft)

<em>See: <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/presskits/eu-msft/docs/Microsoft\%20Commitments.doc" title="microsoft.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/presskits/eu-msft/docs/Microsoft\%20Commitments.doc</a> [microsoft.com] </em></htmltext>
<tokenext>" For each of the usage share sources listed in Annex D , web browser usage share will be determined semi-annually by averaging monthly usage share data for the previous six months for which such data is available , with shares for different released versions of the same vendor    s browsers added together to determine a browser    s total usage share ( e.g. , Firefox 2.0 , 3.0 , 3.5 , etc .
all count towards the total share for    Mozilla Firefox    ) .
No more than one browser will be listed per vendor .
Other than Internet Explorer , the Choice Screen may not contain any web browser which is based on Internet Explorer    s rendering engine and the development or distribution of which is funded in whole or in substantial part by Microsoft .
" so IE-engine based browsers are not an option .
( + 1 Microsoft ) See : http : //www.microsoft.com/presspass/presskits/eu-msft/docs/Microsoft \ % 20Commitments.doc [ microsoft.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"For each of the usage share sources listed in Annex D, web browser usage share will be determined semi-annually by averaging monthly usage share data for the previous six months for which such data is available, with shares for different released versions of the same vendor’s browsers added together to determine a browser’s total usage share (e.g., Firefox 2.0, 3.0, 3.5, etc.
all count towards the total share for “Mozilla Firefox”).
No more than one browser will be listed per vendor.
Other than Internet Explorer, the Choice Screen may not contain any web browser which is based on Internet Explorer’s rendering engine and the development or distribution of which is funded in whole or in substantial part by Microsoft.
"

so IE-engine based browsers are not an option.
(+1 Microsoft)

See: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/presskits/eu-msft/docs/Microsoft\%20Commitments.doc [microsoft.com] </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30485036</id>
	<title>Re:The proper Solution:</title>
	<author>grumbel</author>
	<datestamp>1261134180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Makers of x86 applications should have been mandated to produce a (Generic) Linux, Windows, and OSX port of all their software.</p></div><p>That would be a pretty shitty way to do it, as you would end up punishing everybody except Microsoft. A proper solution would simply be to force Microsoft to open up all their documentation or even source code, to make it easier for competing products to stay compatible.</p><p>In general I never really liked focusing so much on the browser, as Microsoft really isn't doing anything wrong there, they are just doing the same thing everybody else does, as a browser these days is simply expected to come bundled with the OS.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Makers of x86 applications should have been mandated to produce a ( Generic ) Linux , Windows , and OSX port of all their software.That would be a pretty shitty way to do it , as you would end up punishing everybody except Microsoft .
A proper solution would simply be to force Microsoft to open up all their documentation or even source code , to make it easier for competing products to stay compatible.In general I never really liked focusing so much on the browser , as Microsoft really is n't doing anything wrong there , they are just doing the same thing everybody else does , as a browser these days is simply expected to come bundled with the OS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Makers of x86 applications should have been mandated to produce a (Generic) Linux, Windows, and OSX port of all their software.That would be a pretty shitty way to do it, as you would end up punishing everybody except Microsoft.
A proper solution would simply be to force Microsoft to open up all their documentation or even source code, to make it easier for competing products to stay compatible.In general I never really liked focusing so much on the browser, as Microsoft really isn't doing anything wrong there, they are just doing the same thing everybody else does, as a browser these days is simply expected to come bundled with the OS.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30496924</id>
	<title>Re:more to the point, is this really necessary?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261163520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>My computer experience tells me you've got two kinds of users.  Idiots and non-idiots.</p></div><p>This is a common mental mistake of Slashdotters. Of course there is a scale of various levels of knowledge. Perhaps even more importantly, a person can be an expert in some subjects and an idiot in others.</p></div><p>Irresponsible use of Occam's Razor is probably responsible.<br>I personally never use that crafty pseudo-scientific creation.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>My computer experience tells me you 've got two kinds of users .
Idiots and non-idiots.This is a common mental mistake of Slashdotters .
Of course there is a scale of various levels of knowledge .
Perhaps even more importantly , a person can be an expert in some subjects and an idiot in others.Irresponsible use of Occam 's Razor is probably responsible.I personally never use that crafty pseudo-scientific creation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My computer experience tells me you've got two kinds of users.
Idiots and non-idiots.This is a common mental mistake of Slashdotters.
Of course there is a scale of various levels of knowledge.
Perhaps even more importantly, a person can be an expert in some subjects and an idiot in others.Irresponsible use of Occam's Razor is probably responsible.I personally never use that crafty pseudo-scientific creation.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484566</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484012</id>
	<title>How about the same - for computers?</title>
	<author>ThePromenader</author>
	<datestamp>1261076340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I really think the EU is missing the point in this "anti-trust" case: the fact that the consumer doesn't have a choice in what OS comes with his computer doesn't bother anyone?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I really think the EU is missing the point in this " anti-trust " case : the fact that the consumer does n't have a choice in what OS comes with his computer does n't bother anyone ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I really think the EU is missing the point in this "anti-trust" case: the fact that the consumer doesn't have a choice in what OS comes with his computer doesn't bother anyone?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484916</id>
	<title>Re:more to the point, is this really necessary?</title>
	<author>saintm</author>
	<datestamp>1261132320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, because knowledge about computing has everything to do with intelligence, eh?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , because knowledge about computing has everything to do with intelligence , eh ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, because knowledge about computing has everything to do with intelligence, eh?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30487058</id>
	<title>Re:more to the point, is this really necessary?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261151160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The ballot screen pops up ONLY if IE is the default.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The ballot screen pops up ONLY if IE is the default .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The ballot screen pops up ONLY if IE is the default.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484098</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484860</id>
	<title>The choice will be too late</title>
	<author>Alain Williams</author>
	<datestamp>1261131780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>At no point will Microsoft "slipstream" the ballot into a production version of Windows -- say, Windows 7 Service Pack 1, or Windows 8. The ballot will always be delivered as a Windows Update item.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
In other words the user will have already been using the machine for some time, they will have got used to clicking the IE icon and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... this pesky ballot appears<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... oh, well, these mysterious things happen, just wait for it to complete<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... go back to using IE as he was used to.
</p><p>
This should have been included at first boot time, along with asking you for your timezone, etc.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>At no point will Microsoft " slipstream " the ballot into a production version of Windows -- say , Windows 7 Service Pack 1 , or Windows 8 .
The ballot will always be delivered as a Windows Update item .
In other words the user will have already been using the machine for some time , they will have got used to clicking the IE icon and ... this pesky ballot appears ... oh , well , these mysterious things happen , just wait for it to complete ... go back to using IE as he was used to .
This should have been included at first boot time , along with asking you for your timezone , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At no point will Microsoft "slipstream" the ballot into a production version of Windows -- say, Windows 7 Service Pack 1, or Windows 8.
The ballot will always be delivered as a Windows Update item.
In other words the user will have already been using the machine for some time, they will have got used to clicking the IE icon and ... this pesky ballot appears ... oh, well, these mysterious things happen, just wait for it to complete ... go back to using IE as he was used to.
This should have been included at first boot time, along with asking you for your timezone, etc.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483982</id>
	<title>Quit making it so complicated</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261075920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Write a 'Portable Application" that is not integrated with Windows System files to web browse to any web site and download any file and then run it. Default the startup page to a Google search for "web browsers" and let the user pick which link to follow and download. Then the 'Portable Application" can be deleted if the user so desires.</p><p>I would suggest that the 'Portable Application" be a FOSS web browser like Firefox and licensed from the Mozilla Foundation to work as a one time downloader. Then all web browsers have that annoying feature to detect that it is not the "Default browser" and ask the user to make it default and sets the default to "Yes and never ask again" so the user picks a web browser, downloads it, make it default and then if they want they can download a different web browser later on.</p><p>The whole DOJ and EU problem with Windows is that IE is the built in default web browser that is integrated with Windows system files so it cannot be removed. Just make the Windows 7 N-edition versions with the temp 'Portable Application" web browser that can download whatever web browser the user wants and give a system message that a temp web browser will be loaded to find a suitable web browser the user can download and install and then set as default.</p><p>That is just about as simple as you can make it. If you make the third part web browsers part of the Windows 7 install DVD they will be old versions and prone to vulnerabilities and skip some FOSS web browsers and any other web browser that comes out after the Install DVD is made.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Write a 'Portable Application " that is not integrated with Windows System files to web browse to any web site and download any file and then run it .
Default the startup page to a Google search for " web browsers " and let the user pick which link to follow and download .
Then the 'Portable Application " can be deleted if the user so desires.I would suggest that the 'Portable Application " be a FOSS web browser like Firefox and licensed from the Mozilla Foundation to work as a one time downloader .
Then all web browsers have that annoying feature to detect that it is not the " Default browser " and ask the user to make it default and sets the default to " Yes and never ask again " so the user picks a web browser , downloads it , make it default and then if they want they can download a different web browser later on.The whole DOJ and EU problem with Windows is that IE is the built in default web browser that is integrated with Windows system files so it can not be removed .
Just make the Windows 7 N-edition versions with the temp 'Portable Application " web browser that can download whatever web browser the user wants and give a system message that a temp web browser will be loaded to find a suitable web browser the user can download and install and then set as default.That is just about as simple as you can make it .
If you make the third part web browsers part of the Windows 7 install DVD they will be old versions and prone to vulnerabilities and skip some FOSS web browsers and any other web browser that comes out after the Install DVD is made .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Write a 'Portable Application" that is not integrated with Windows System files to web browse to any web site and download any file and then run it.
Default the startup page to a Google search for "web browsers" and let the user pick which link to follow and download.
Then the 'Portable Application" can be deleted if the user so desires.I would suggest that the 'Portable Application" be a FOSS web browser like Firefox and licensed from the Mozilla Foundation to work as a one time downloader.
Then all web browsers have that annoying feature to detect that it is not the "Default browser" and ask the user to make it default and sets the default to "Yes and never ask again" so the user picks a web browser, downloads it, make it default and then if they want they can download a different web browser later on.The whole DOJ and EU problem with Windows is that IE is the built in default web browser that is integrated with Windows system files so it cannot be removed.
Just make the Windows 7 N-edition versions with the temp 'Portable Application" web browser that can download whatever web browser the user wants and give a system message that a temp web browser will be loaded to find a suitable web browser the user can download and install and then set as default.That is just about as simple as you can make it.
If you make the third part web browsers part of the Windows 7 install DVD they will be old versions and prone to vulnerabilities and skip some FOSS web browsers and any other web browser that comes out after the Install DVD is made.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30492228</id>
	<title>Re:Consumers do have a choice</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261127220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Trying to get a "+5, Sarcasm"?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Trying to get a " + 5 , Sarcasm " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Trying to get a "+5, Sarcasm"?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484316</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30486484</id>
	<title>Re:Quit making it so complicated</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261148220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>web browser like Firefox </i></p><p>I vote Edward 'users are idiots' Lee to write this so the average schmo can take advantage of the Awesome Bar.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>web browser like Firefox I vote Edward 'users are idiots ' Lee to write this so the average schmo can take advantage of the Awesome Bar .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>web browser like Firefox I vote Edward 'users are idiots' Lee to write this so the average schmo can take advantage of the Awesome Bar.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483982</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484378</id>
	<title>Re:more to the point, is this really necessary?</title>
	<author>lemmywrap</author>
	<datestamp>1261168020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As a EU citizen, i'm in general very proud with the way the EU sues companies who don't play by the rules. Contrary to what the MS-trolls might claim, they don't target Microsoft specifically, they go after many different companies in various industries. As far as i can tell the EU maintain a fair approach in deciding who to sue.
<br> <br>
However, i agree with the parent's sentiment in that i find this compromise ridiculous and unnecessary. Most/all people who install an OS should be/are computer-literate enough to be able to put an installer on an USB stick or CD, so that they can install any software they need after they install the OS. Computer manufacturers like HP, Dell etc have no problem installing all sorts of crap programs with the PCs they deliver, adding a webbrowser to that should be no problem at all, and if MS illegaly tries to force these manufacturers to install IE instead of other browsers, the EU can sue them again.
<br> <br>
I see absolutely no reason why a web browser is so vital to a computer that it must be installed at the same time as the OS, especially with such a "ballot screen" which raises all sorts of valid questions mentioned in the summary</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a EU citizen , i 'm in general very proud with the way the EU sues companies who do n't play by the rules .
Contrary to what the MS-trolls might claim , they do n't target Microsoft specifically , they go after many different companies in various industries .
As far as i can tell the EU maintain a fair approach in deciding who to sue .
However , i agree with the parent 's sentiment in that i find this compromise ridiculous and unnecessary .
Most/all people who install an OS should be/are computer-literate enough to be able to put an installer on an USB stick or CD , so that they can install any software they need after they install the OS .
Computer manufacturers like HP , Dell etc have no problem installing all sorts of crap programs with the PCs they deliver , adding a webbrowser to that should be no problem at all , and if MS illegaly tries to force these manufacturers to install IE instead of other browsers , the EU can sue them again .
I see absolutely no reason why a web browser is so vital to a computer that it must be installed at the same time as the OS , especially with such a " ballot screen " which raises all sorts of valid questions mentioned in the summary</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a EU citizen, i'm in general very proud with the way the EU sues companies who don't play by the rules.
Contrary to what the MS-trolls might claim, they don't target Microsoft specifically, they go after many different companies in various industries.
As far as i can tell the EU maintain a fair approach in deciding who to sue.
However, i agree with the parent's sentiment in that i find this compromise ridiculous and unnecessary.
Most/all people who install an OS should be/are computer-literate enough to be able to put an installer on an USB stick or CD, so that they can install any software they need after they install the OS.
Computer manufacturers like HP, Dell etc have no problem installing all sorts of crap programs with the PCs they deliver, adding a webbrowser to that should be no problem at all, and if MS illegaly tries to force these manufacturers to install IE instead of other browsers, the EU can sue them again.
I see absolutely no reason why a web browser is so vital to a computer that it must be installed at the same time as the OS, especially with such a "ballot screen" which raises all sorts of valid questions mentioned in the summary</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30485486</id>
	<title>Re:Quit making it so complicated</title>
	<author>BenoitRen</author>
	<datestamp>1261141200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>If you make the third part web browsers part of the Windows 7 install DVD they will be old versions and prone to vulnerabilities and skip some FOSS web browsers and any other web browser that comes out after the Install DVD is made.</p></div> </blockquote><p>You obviously didn't read the article (oh, right, I'm on Slashdot). The ballot screen is pushed via Windows Update. It is <em>not</em> part of the installation. The ballot screen will let you download your chosen web browser from the vendor's server. So no, it will <em>not</em> be an old version.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you make the third part web browsers part of the Windows 7 install DVD they will be old versions and prone to vulnerabilities and skip some FOSS web browsers and any other web browser that comes out after the Install DVD is made .
You obviously did n't read the article ( oh , right , I 'm on Slashdot ) .
The ballot screen is pushed via Windows Update .
It is not part of the installation .
The ballot screen will let you download your chosen web browser from the vendor 's server .
So no , it will not be an old version .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you make the third part web browsers part of the Windows 7 install DVD they will be old versions and prone to vulnerabilities and skip some FOSS web browsers and any other web browser that comes out after the Install DVD is made.
You obviously didn't read the article (oh, right, I'm on Slashdot).
The ballot screen is pushed via Windows Update.
It is not part of the installation.
The ballot screen will let you download your chosen web browser from the vendor's server.
So no, it will not be an old version.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483982</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30493688</id>
	<title>Re:more to the point, is this really necessary?</title>
	<author>tsa</author>
	<datestamp>1261133160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ignorance doesn't equal idiocy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ignorance does n't equal idiocy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ignorance doesn't equal idiocy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484566</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484030</id>
	<title>Re:Quit making it so complicated</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261076640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google search? are you kidding?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google search ?
are you kidding ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google search?
are you kidding?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483982</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484058</id>
	<title>Re:The ballot screen is Europe only</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261077180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I disagree. The really bad news is that this let's microsoft off the hook completely for the mess they have created.</p><p>No matter which browser you choose on this ballot, IE is still going to be present on your machine and ready for internal idiots or external criminals to use. This changes nothing whatsoever.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I disagree .
The really bad news is that this let 's microsoft off the hook completely for the mess they have created.No matter which browser you choose on this ballot , IE is still going to be present on your machine and ready for internal idiots or external criminals to use .
This changes nothing whatsoever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I disagree.
The really bad news is that this let's microsoft off the hook completely for the mess they have created.No matter which browser you choose on this ballot, IE is still going to be present on your machine and ready for internal idiots or external criminals to use.
This changes nothing whatsoever.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30487366</id>
	<title>Re:The ballot screen is Europe only</title>
	<author>frankxcid</author>
	<datestamp>1261152540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wow, more mandates and more laws.  The real hint is to not do it since the Europeans have done this travesty!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , more mandates and more laws .
The real hint is to not do it since the Europeans have done this travesty !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, more mandates and more laws.
The real hint is to not do it since the Europeans have done this travesty!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484006</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483952
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30487332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484006
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30487366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484006
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30497788
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484006
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30486114
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484316
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484012
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30485486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483982
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30492228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484316
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484012
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30493688
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484566
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483990
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30485452
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484098
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483990
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483982
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30488320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484316
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484012
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30496924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484566
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483990
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30485542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484230
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483982
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30495516
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484594
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30491722
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484058
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484006
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30486290
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484002
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30485256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484052
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484106
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484002
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30486102
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483982
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30487796
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484566
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483990
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483990
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30486484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483982
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30493924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483990
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30495486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483990
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30494132
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484132
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30487058
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484098
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483990
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484984
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483990
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484118
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483952
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483990
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30485036
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484002
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483990
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30485778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483982
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483982
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484012
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30485158
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484052
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30496782
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483982
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30487798
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484594
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484000
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483952
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484378
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483990
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484030
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483982
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483990
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30486288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483952
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0210240_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30485118
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483990
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0210240.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484376
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0210240.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484106
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484422
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0210240.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484182
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0210240.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483952
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484118
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483978
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484000
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30486288
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0210240.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484006
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484058
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30491722
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30487332
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30497788
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30487366
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0210240.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483980
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0210240.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484132
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30494132
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0210240.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484012
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484316
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30492228
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30488320
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30486114
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484402
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0210240.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483990
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484984
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30493924
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484866
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484456
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484566
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30493688
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30496924
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30487796
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30485118
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484098
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30487058
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30485452
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484852
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30495486
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484378
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484916
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0210240.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484002
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30486290
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30485036
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484444
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0210240.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484594
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30495516
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30487798
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0210240.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484052
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30485158
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30485256
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0210240.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30483982
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30486102
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30485778
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30496782
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484230
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30485542
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484862
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30485486
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484258
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484030
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30486484
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0210240.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0210240.30484860
</commentlist>
</conversation>
