<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_24_228237</id>
	<title>Cygwin 1.7 Released</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1261674000000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>jensend writes <i>"The 1.7 branch of <a href="http://www.cygwin.com/">Cygwin</a>, the Unix-like environment for Windows, <a href="http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-announce/2009-12/msg00027.html">has reached stable status</a> after about 3 1/2 years of effort. Among many other changes, this release drops support for Windows 9x. Since the NT API and NT-based versions of Windows are more capable and somewhat less of a mismatch with POSIX (for instance, they include a security model), this has allowed for code path simplifications, better performance (particularly noticeable with pipe I/O), better security, and better POSIX compatibility."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>jensend writes " The 1.7 branch of Cygwin , the Unix-like environment for Windows , has reached stable status after about 3 1/2 years of effort .
Among many other changes , this release drops support for Windows 9x .
Since the NT API and NT-based versions of Windows are more capable and somewhat less of a mismatch with POSIX ( for instance , they include a security model ) , this has allowed for code path simplifications , better performance ( particularly noticeable with pipe I/O ) , better security , and better POSIX compatibility .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>jensend writes "The 1.7 branch of Cygwin, the Unix-like environment for Windows, has reached stable status after about 3 1/2 years of effort.
Among many other changes, this release drops support for Windows 9x.
Since the NT API and NT-based versions of Windows are more capable and somewhat less of a mismatch with POSIX (for instance, they include a security model), this has allowed for code path simplifications, better performance (particularly noticeable with pipe I/O), better security, and better POSIX compatibility.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549384</id>
	<title>Re:Does this do something SFU doesn't?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261679940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, but Services For Unix seem to be coming to an end. The download says it won't work on Vista or 7, and the Wikipedia page says it will stop being downloadable at the end of 2009.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , but Services For Unix seem to be coming to an end .
The download says it wo n't work on Vista or 7 , and the Wikipedia page says it will stop being downloadable at the end of 2009 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, but Services For Unix seem to be coming to an end.
The download says it won't work on Vista or 7, and the Wikipedia page says it will stop being downloadable at the end of 2009.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550162</id>
	<title>Re:makes windows marginally bearable</title>
	<author>cbhacking</author>
	<datestamp>1261741680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While it requires the higher editions of Windows (XP Pro, Vista/7 Enterprise or Ultimate, any Server edition), you must have missed the presence of the POSIX subsystem in NT (it's been there since the first releases of the OS, incidentally). Called the Subsystem for UNIX Applications (SUA) on recent versions, or Services For UNIX (SFU) on XP and before, the POSIX subsystem is free on supported Windows and includes a decent operating environment called Interix.</p><p>Interix includes a few hundred libraries and utilities, mostly BSD derived or SVR5-derived (you can choose which lineage you want at install) but also including things like the GNU build toolchain (gcc 3 and 4, with support for at least C, C++, and Fortran; I haven't tried any others). Additionally, you can install a package manager and an expanded/updated collection of tools and software from <a href="http://suacommunity.com/sua.aspx" title="suacommunity.com">http://suacommunity.com/sua.aspx</a> [suacommunity.com]. Manpages are also included (both for bundled software and Interix packages).</p><p>Bash (along with other shells such as zsh) is available from suacommunity. Interix ships with csh and ksh. I use Interix bash as my standard Windows command line these days, including running Windows CLI utilities. I also run Python and Ruby interpreters from within Interix (suacommunity packages). You can even run graphical applications if you have an X server such as xming (the suacommunity bootstrapper will offer to install it).</p><p>If you have a version of Windows that supports the POSIX subsystem (businesses mostly will), I recommend it over Cygwin. For one thing, you get true *NIX behavior - executables are marked by permissions bits, not by extensions, the filesystem is case-sensitive (technically an install option for Interix, but one you definitely want), and you get UNIX-style permissions including working setUID and setGID (having a working sudo makes using the command line on a non-Administrator Windows session much more pleasant).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While it requires the higher editions of Windows ( XP Pro , Vista/7 Enterprise or Ultimate , any Server edition ) , you must have missed the presence of the POSIX subsystem in NT ( it 's been there since the first releases of the OS , incidentally ) .
Called the Subsystem for UNIX Applications ( SUA ) on recent versions , or Services For UNIX ( SFU ) on XP and before , the POSIX subsystem is free on supported Windows and includes a decent operating environment called Interix.Interix includes a few hundred libraries and utilities , mostly BSD derived or SVR5-derived ( you can choose which lineage you want at install ) but also including things like the GNU build toolchain ( gcc 3 and 4 , with support for at least C , C + + , and Fortran ; I have n't tried any others ) .
Additionally , you can install a package manager and an expanded/updated collection of tools and software from http : //suacommunity.com/sua.aspx [ suacommunity.com ] .
Manpages are also included ( both for bundled software and Interix packages ) .Bash ( along with other shells such as zsh ) is available from suacommunity .
Interix ships with csh and ksh .
I use Interix bash as my standard Windows command line these days , including running Windows CLI utilities .
I also run Python and Ruby interpreters from within Interix ( suacommunity packages ) .
You can even run graphical applications if you have an X server such as xming ( the suacommunity bootstrapper will offer to install it ) .If you have a version of Windows that supports the POSIX subsystem ( businesses mostly will ) , I recommend it over Cygwin .
For one thing , you get true * NIX behavior - executables are marked by permissions bits , not by extensions , the filesystem is case-sensitive ( technically an install option for Interix , but one you definitely want ) , and you get UNIX-style permissions including working setUID and setGID ( having a working sudo makes using the command line on a non-Administrator Windows session much more pleasant ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While it requires the higher editions of Windows (XP Pro, Vista/7 Enterprise or Ultimate, any Server edition), you must have missed the presence of the POSIX subsystem in NT (it's been there since the first releases of the OS, incidentally).
Called the Subsystem for UNIX Applications (SUA) on recent versions, or Services For UNIX (SFU) on XP and before, the POSIX subsystem is free on supported Windows and includes a decent operating environment called Interix.Interix includes a few hundred libraries and utilities, mostly BSD derived or SVR5-derived (you can choose which lineage you want at install) but also including things like the GNU build toolchain (gcc 3 and 4, with support for at least C, C++, and Fortran; I haven't tried any others).
Additionally, you can install a package manager and an expanded/updated collection of tools and software from http://suacommunity.com/sua.aspx [suacommunity.com].
Manpages are also included (both for bundled software and Interix packages).Bash (along with other shells such as zsh) is available from suacommunity.
Interix ships with csh and ksh.
I use Interix bash as my standard Windows command line these days, including running Windows CLI utilities.
I also run Python and Ruby interpreters from within Interix (suacommunity packages).
You can even run graphical applications if you have an X server such as xming (the suacommunity bootstrapper will offer to install it).If you have a version of Windows that supports the POSIX subsystem (businesses mostly will), I recommend it over Cygwin.
For one thing, you get true *NIX behavior - executables are marked by permissions bits, not by extensions, the filesystem is case-sensitive (technically an install option for Interix, but one you definitely want), and you get UNIX-style permissions including working setUID and setGID (having a working sudo makes using the command line on a non-Administrator Windows session much more pleasant).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549280</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30551460</id>
	<title>Re:makes windows marginally bearable</title>
	<author>ClosedSource</author>
	<datestamp>1261763820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The standard cmd.exe is too limited, and Powershell isn't a good interactive shell, it's more like typing at a Python or Ruby interpreter"</p><p>Well, it sounds like you simply like the UNIX command line and define it as command-line "goodness". No problem with that, but some people consider the UNIX command line to not be powerful enough and prefer Powershell.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The standard cmd.exe is too limited , and Powershell is n't a good interactive shell , it 's more like typing at a Python or Ruby interpreter " Well , it sounds like you simply like the UNIX command line and define it as command-line " goodness " .
No problem with that , but some people consider the UNIX command line to not be powerful enough and prefer Powershell .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The standard cmd.exe is too limited, and Powershell isn't a good interactive shell, it's more like typing at a Python or Ruby interpreter"Well, it sounds like you simply like the UNIX command line and define it as command-line "goodness".
No problem with that, but some people consider the UNIX command line to not be powerful enough and prefer Powershell.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549280</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549478</id>
	<title>Re:Does this do something SFU doesn't?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261681200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One big advantage is that you are not depending on Microsoft to provide the layer. But more often than not it's not your decision as Cygwin is a compile dependency.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One big advantage is that you are not depending on Microsoft to provide the layer .
But more often than not it 's not your decision as Cygwin is a compile dependency .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One big advantage is that you are not depending on Microsoft to provide the layer.
But more often than not it's not your decision as Cygwin is a compile dependency.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549314</id>
	<title>Re:Does this do something SFU doesn't?</title>
	<author>Dwedit</author>
	<datestamp>1261678800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I once tried out Services For Unix.  I then attempted to build GNU Tar, but couldn't figure out how to make the integrated Unzip part of it work, so I gave up.  That's too bad, since Cygwin royally sucks at fork.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I once tried out Services For Unix .
I then attempted to build GNU Tar , but could n't figure out how to make the integrated Unzip part of it work , so I gave up .
That 's too bad , since Cygwin royally sucks at fork .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I once tried out Services For Unix.
I then attempted to build GNU Tar, but couldn't figure out how to make the integrated Unzip part of it work, so I gave up.
That's too bad, since Cygwin royally sucks at fork.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549640</id>
	<title>Re:makes windows marginally bearable</title>
	<author>osu-neko</author>
	<datestamp>1261771800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are people who say always use the command line.  Then there are people who say always use the GUI.  All of these people are idiots.  Use whatever works best for the task at hand.  Sometimes a command line-based solution works best.  Sometimes a nice GUI does.  You can have more than one tool in a toolbox...</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are people who say always use the command line .
Then there are people who say always use the GUI .
All of these people are idiots .
Use whatever works best for the task at hand .
Sometimes a command line-based solution works best .
Sometimes a nice GUI does .
You can have more than one tool in a toolbox.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are people who say always use the command line.
Then there are people who say always use the GUI.
All of these people are idiots.
Use whatever works best for the task at hand.
Sometimes a command line-based solution works best.
Sometimes a nice GUI does.
You can have more than one tool in a toolbox...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550946</id>
	<title>Re:Does this do something SFU doesn't?</title>
	<author>SharpFang</author>
	<datestamp>1261757460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A couple thousands of binaries of Linux apps installable with a couple of clicks, integrating with the system and each other?</p><p>How long, since you decide you want to, until you can start writing, compiling and running GCC, perl, python and such apps, on "Services for Unix"? On Cygwin it's about 20 minutes from which 15 you spend drinking coffee watching the progress bars.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A couple thousands of binaries of Linux apps installable with a couple of clicks , integrating with the system and each other ? How long , since you decide you want to , until you can start writing , compiling and running GCC , perl , python and such apps , on " Services for Unix " ?
On Cygwin it 's about 20 minutes from which 15 you spend drinking coffee watching the progress bars .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A couple thousands of binaries of Linux apps installable with a couple of clicks, integrating with the system and each other?How long, since you decide you want to, until you can start writing, compiling and running GCC, perl, python and such apps, on "Services for Unix"?
On Cygwin it's about 20 minutes from which 15 you spend drinking coffee watching the progress bars.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550724</id>
	<title>Re:I wonder if Cygwin really has much of a future</title>
	<author>Eravnrekaree</author>
	<datestamp>1261754340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The compatability issues with Cygwin never really doing things very well with supporting POSIX is a big problem, it seems like Cygwin that somewhat defective is good enough. if they could just go a little bit further they could make most stuff work out of the box, they have gone almost 100\% there why they stop at 95\% i dont know.</p><p>It also is a serious problem that Cygwin does not support case sensitive file names which can screw up some Unix stuff. There are ways they could do this by doing a simple filesystem layer that would store the case sensitive names in cygwins own directory files.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The compatability issues with Cygwin never really doing things very well with supporting POSIX is a big problem , it seems like Cygwin that somewhat defective is good enough .
if they could just go a little bit further they could make most stuff work out of the box , they have gone almost 100 \ % there why they stop at 95 \ % i dont know.It also is a serious problem that Cygwin does not support case sensitive file names which can screw up some Unix stuff .
There are ways they could do this by doing a simple filesystem layer that would store the case sensitive names in cygwins own directory files .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The compatability issues with Cygwin never really doing things very well with supporting POSIX is a big problem, it seems like Cygwin that somewhat defective is good enough.
if they could just go a little bit further they could make most stuff work out of the box, they have gone almost 100\% there why they stop at 95\% i dont know.It also is a serious problem that Cygwin does not support case sensitive file names which can screw up some Unix stuff.
There are ways they could do this by doing a simple filesystem layer that would store the case sensitive names in cygwins own directory files.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30551086</id>
	<title>Recommended alternative terminal program?</title>
	<author>Dwedit</author>
	<datestamp>1261760160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Windows command interpreter sucks as a terminal program.  What's a good alternative for use with Cygwin?  I'd prefer Unicode support, so I don't see question marks on all non-ascii filenames.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Windows command interpreter sucks as a terminal program .
What 's a good alternative for use with Cygwin ?
I 'd prefer Unicode support , so I do n't see question marks on all non-ascii filenames .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Windows command interpreter sucks as a terminal program.
What's a good alternative for use with Cygwin?
I'd prefer Unicode support, so I don't see question marks on all non-ascii filenames.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550680</id>
	<title>Re:One question remains...</title>
	<author>digitalaudiorock</author>
	<datestamp>1261753500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Yes, Cygwin does run under WINE. And WINE runs under Cygwin. It can be an amusing stress test.</p></div><p>...now mix that with a dialup modem connection over VOIP and we'll really be getting somewhere.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , Cygwin does run under WINE .
And WINE runs under Cygwin .
It can be an amusing stress test....now mix that with a dialup modem connection over VOIP and we 'll really be getting somewhere .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, Cygwin does run under WINE.
And WINE runs under Cygwin.
It can be an amusing stress test....now mix that with a dialup modem connection over VOIP and we'll really be getting somewhere.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30554060</id>
	<title>Re:makes windows marginally bearable</title>
	<author>Sigma 7</author>
	<datestamp>1261761060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The gnu toolset can compiled natively on Windows</p></div><p>At one time, I tried compiling Bash under MinGW.   Step 1 required running<nobr> <wbr></nobr>./configure, which required bash to already be compiled.  It's easier just using either MSYS or Cygwin, since downloading the binary package is generally faster than figuring out the correct method of compiling if bash is not yet installed.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The gnu toolset can compiled natively on WindowsAt one time , I tried compiling Bash under MinGW .
Step 1 required running ./configure , which required bash to already be compiled .
It 's easier just using either MSYS or Cygwin , since downloading the binary package is generally faster than figuring out the correct method of compiling if bash is not yet installed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The gnu toolset can compiled natively on WindowsAt one time, I tried compiling Bash under MinGW.
Step 1 required running ./configure, which required bash to already be compiled.
It's easier just using either MSYS or Cygwin, since downloading the binary package is generally faster than figuring out the correct method of compiling if bash is not yet installed.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549716</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549716</id>
	<title>Re:makes windows marginally bearable</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261774020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The gnu toolset can compiled natively on Windows so why would you want to use cygwin as a shell?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The gnu toolset can compiled natively on Windows so why would you want to use cygwin as a shell ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The gnu toolset can compiled natively on Windows so why would you want to use cygwin as a shell?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549280</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30563260</id>
	<title>Re:makes windows marginally bearable</title>
	<author>Thundersnatch</author>
	<datestamp>1261930860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or you can write perhaps five lines of VBA inside Excel and accomplish the same task with one tool. You could be shot for even enabling VBA of course, but whatver negative things you want to say about Excel, it does have <i>lots</i> of functionality.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or you can write perhaps five lines of VBA inside Excel and accomplish the same task with one tool .
You could be shot for even enabling VBA of course , but whatver negative things you want to say about Excel , it does have lots of functionality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or you can write perhaps five lines of VBA inside Excel and accomplish the same task with one tool.
You could be shot for even enabling VBA of course, but whatver negative things you want to say about Excel, it does have lots of functionality.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549956</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30551836</id>
	<title>Re:makes windows marginally bearable</title>
	<author>FrankieBaby1986</author>
	<datestamp>1261768740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Show me how to do <br> <br>

$mkdir Project\ {1..10} <br> <br>

In a GUI. As one excruciatingly simple example of how a CLI can be much more useful and expressive than a GUI.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Show me how to do $ mkdir Project \ { 1..10 } In a GUI .
As one excruciatingly simple example of how a CLI can be much more useful and expressive than a GUI .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Show me how to do  

$mkdir Project\ {1..10}  

In a GUI.
As one excruciatingly simple example of how a CLI can be much more useful and expressive than a GUI.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550208</id>
	<title>Re:Does this do something SFU doesn't?</title>
	<author>cbhacking</author>
	<datestamp>1261742820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You missed the part of the Wikipedia page that pointed out the Subsystem for UNIX Applications (SUA) which is the same feature on Vista, Win7, Server 2003 - 2008 R2, and presumeably future releases. There's no sign of it going away soon.</p><p>I use SUA (which, aside from install mechanic, is functionally identical to SFU plus some new features) all the time on Win7. My main CLI shell is bash (pinned to my taskbar), I use ssh more often than remote desktop, I use subversion in Interix rather than something like TortoiseSVN, and I once completed a substantial programming project (involving a multi-threaded, multi-process, networked program for embedded Linux) by developing (and testing) on Interix before (testing and) deploying on Linux. It was substantially easier than rebooting, virtualizing, or working remotely on my school's Linux servers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You missed the part of the Wikipedia page that pointed out the Subsystem for UNIX Applications ( SUA ) which is the same feature on Vista , Win7 , Server 2003 - 2008 R2 , and presumeably future releases .
There 's no sign of it going away soon.I use SUA ( which , aside from install mechanic , is functionally identical to SFU plus some new features ) all the time on Win7 .
My main CLI shell is bash ( pinned to my taskbar ) , I use ssh more often than remote desktop , I use subversion in Interix rather than something like TortoiseSVN , and I once completed a substantial programming project ( involving a multi-threaded , multi-process , networked program for embedded Linux ) by developing ( and testing ) on Interix before ( testing and ) deploying on Linux .
It was substantially easier than rebooting , virtualizing , or working remotely on my school 's Linux servers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You missed the part of the Wikipedia page that pointed out the Subsystem for UNIX Applications (SUA) which is the same feature on Vista, Win7, Server 2003 - 2008 R2, and presumeably future releases.
There's no sign of it going away soon.I use SUA (which, aside from install mechanic, is functionally identical to SFU plus some new features) all the time on Win7.
My main CLI shell is bash (pinned to my taskbar), I use ssh more often than remote desktop, I use subversion in Interix rather than something like TortoiseSVN, and I once completed a substantial programming project (involving a multi-threaded, multi-process, networked program for embedded Linux) by developing (and testing) on Interix before (testing and) deploying on Linux.
It was substantially easier than rebooting, virtualizing, or working remotely on my school's Linux servers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549384</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549406</id>
	<title>Re:Does this do something SFU doesn't?</title>
	<author>R.Mo\_Robert</author>
	<datestamp>1261680120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The biggest--perhaps only--reason I install Cygwin on Windows is because so many cross-platform applications require it for compilation (Mozilla, I'm looking at you). Of course, whether they coud ue MinGW and/or the Windows "Services for Unix" layer to accomplish something similar is another story, but until they decide to change and support it, Cygwin it is.</p><p>And personally, having had to install Cygwin, I've never even paid attention to the POSIX layer for Windows, but it looks like it might be worth looking into. I think part of the reason some projects use Cygwin owes to their current or not-to-far-in-the-past support of Windows 9x/Me (the POSIX layer, of course, is only for the NT  family) and probably no benefit (or perhaps even more problems, having to work out compatibility issues with yet another set of tools) from changing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The biggest--perhaps only--reason I install Cygwin on Windows is because so many cross-platform applications require it for compilation ( Mozilla , I 'm looking at you ) .
Of course , whether they coud ue MinGW and/or the Windows " Services for Unix " layer to accomplish something similar is another story , but until they decide to change and support it , Cygwin it is.And personally , having had to install Cygwin , I 've never even paid attention to the POSIX layer for Windows , but it looks like it might be worth looking into .
I think part of the reason some projects use Cygwin owes to their current or not-to-far-in-the-past support of Windows 9x/Me ( the POSIX layer , of course , is only for the NT family ) and probably no benefit ( or perhaps even more problems , having to work out compatibility issues with yet another set of tools ) from changing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The biggest--perhaps only--reason I install Cygwin on Windows is because so many cross-platform applications require it for compilation (Mozilla, I'm looking at you).
Of course, whether they coud ue MinGW and/or the Windows "Services for Unix" layer to accomplish something similar is another story, but until they decide to change and support it, Cygwin it is.And personally, having had to install Cygwin, I've never even paid attention to the POSIX layer for Windows, but it looks like it might be worth looking into.
I think part of the reason some projects use Cygwin owes to their current or not-to-far-in-the-past support of Windows 9x/Me (the POSIX layer, of course, is only for the NT  family) and probably no benefit (or perhaps even more problems, having to work out compatibility issues with yet another set of tools) from changing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550062</id>
	<title>makes windows marginally interactive.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261738680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Even after all these years, Microsoft has nothing equivalent to the UNIX command line. The standard cmd.exe is too limited, and Powershell isn't a good interactive shell, it's more like typing at a Python or Ruby interpreter."</p><p>Well as Lisp has taught us, sometimes that's all you need.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Even after all these years , Microsoft has nothing equivalent to the UNIX command line .
The standard cmd.exe is too limited , and Powershell is n't a good interactive shell , it 's more like typing at a Python or Ruby interpreter .
" Well as Lisp has taught us , sometimes that 's all you need .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Even after all these years, Microsoft has nothing equivalent to the UNIX command line.
The standard cmd.exe is too limited, and Powershell isn't a good interactive shell, it's more like typing at a Python or Ruby interpreter.
"Well as Lisp has taught us, sometimes that's all you need.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549280</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549788</id>
	<title>Re:I was never really impressed</title>
	<author>RAMMS+EIN</author>
	<datestamp>1261732740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't think Cygwin is "meant to be an interactive method of accessing a Windows machine by Unix commands" so much as it is a Unix/POSIX/GNU compatibility layer for Windows, similar to how WINE is a Windows compatibility layer for *nix. Both of them allow you, to a limited extent, to run software written for the other set of APIs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think Cygwin is " meant to be an interactive method of accessing a Windows machine by Unix commands " so much as it is a Unix/POSIX/GNU compatibility layer for Windows , similar to how WINE is a Windows compatibility layer for * nix .
Both of them allow you , to a limited extent , to run software written for the other set of APIs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think Cygwin is "meant to be an interactive method of accessing a Windows machine by Unix commands" so much as it is a Unix/POSIX/GNU compatibility layer for Windows, similar to how WINE is a Windows compatibility layer for *nix.
Both of them allow you, to a limited extent, to run software written for the other set of APIs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549742</id>
	<title>Re:Merry Fucking Christmas!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261731660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>What are you trolls doing still working??<br>
<br>
Isn't there some kind of troll Christmas party or something??<br>
<br>
Oh wait a minute. Trolls are Jews. That explains everything.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What are you trolls doing still working ? ?
Is n't there some kind of troll Christmas party or something ? ?
Oh wait a minute .
Trolls are Jews .
That explains everything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What are you trolls doing still working??
Isn't there some kind of troll Christmas party or something??
Oh wait a minute.
Trolls are Jews.
That explains everything.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549264</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549578</id>
	<title>Re:Does this do something SFU doesn't?</title>
	<author>AlexLibman</author>
	<datestamp>1261683540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cigwin has traditionally been slower than SFU, but it's MUCH easier to install lots of packages without having to figure out how to fix pkgsrc compilation problems and so on.  I find that having an actual UNIX box to ssh to (physical or emulated) is the best solution of all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cigwin has traditionally been slower than SFU , but it 's MUCH easier to install lots of packages without having to figure out how to fix pkgsrc compilation problems and so on .
I find that having an actual UNIX box to ssh to ( physical or emulated ) is the best solution of all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cigwin has traditionally been slower than SFU, but it's MUCH easier to install lots of packages without having to figure out how to fix pkgsrc compilation problems and so on.
I find that having an actual UNIX box to ssh to (physical or emulated) is the best solution of all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549456</id>
	<title>Re:Does this do something SFU doesn't?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261680900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Which is correct. Windows Server 2003 R2, Vista Enterprise and higher editions have the successor Subsystem for UNIX-based Applications (SUA) available as optional install that replaces SFU.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Which is correct .
Windows Server 2003 R2 , Vista Enterprise and higher editions have the successor Subsystem for UNIX-based Applications ( SUA ) available as optional install that replaces SFU .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which is correct.
Windows Server 2003 R2, Vista Enterprise and higher editions have the successor Subsystem for UNIX-based Applications (SUA) available as optional install that replaces SFU.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549384</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549330</id>
	<title>Do we finally have unicode support?</title>
	<author>Dwedit</author>
	<datestamp>1261678980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For a while, I've been using a <a href="http://www.okisoft.co.jp/esc/utf8-cygwin/" title="okisoft.co.jp">modified version of Cygwin</a> [okisoft.co.jp] in order to get proper UTF-8 support.  Does the new version finally integrate a similar feature?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For a while , I 've been using a modified version of Cygwin [ okisoft.co.jp ] in order to get proper UTF-8 support .
Does the new version finally integrate a similar feature ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For a while, I've been using a modified version of Cygwin [okisoft.co.jp] in order to get proper UTF-8 support.
Does the new version finally integrate a similar feature?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549480</id>
	<title>Re:Does this do something SFU doesn't?</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1261681200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Its called something else now, in typical MS style.  Can't remember the new name off the top of my head.</p><p>They also dropped the NIS or NFS server, perhaps both.  Added an ssh server maybe?  I can't remember exactly, I haven't dealt with it recently.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Its called something else now , in typical MS style .
Ca n't remember the new name off the top of my head.They also dropped the NIS or NFS server , perhaps both .
Added an ssh server maybe ?
I ca n't remember exactly , I have n't dealt with it recently .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its called something else now, in typical MS style.
Can't remember the new name off the top of my head.They also dropped the NIS or NFS server, perhaps both.
Added an ssh server maybe?
I can't remember exactly, I haven't dealt with it recently.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549384</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549580</id>
	<title>Re:Merry Fucking Christmas!</title>
	<author>tyrione</author>
	<datestamp>1261683600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What are you nerds doing still working??</p><p>Isn't there some kind of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. Santa tracker or something??</p><p>Oh wait a minute. Slashdot is run by Jews. That explains everything.</p></div><p>Marduk has them all on a short leash.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What are you nerds doing still working ?
? Is n't there some kind of / .
Santa tracker or something ?
? Oh wait a minute .
Slashdot is run by Jews .
That explains everything.Marduk has them all on a short leash .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What are you nerds doing still working?
?Isn't there some kind of /.
Santa tracker or something?
?Oh wait a minute.
Slashdot is run by Jews.
That explains everything.Marduk has them all on a short leash.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549264</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30558072</id>
	<title>span nine</title>
	<author>epine</author>
	<datestamp>1261819680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>they have gone almost 100\% there why they stop at 95\% i dont know.</p></div></blockquote><p>In your case, the other 5\% would be adding an apostrophe, a comma, and a well timed tap on the shift key, and would have cost you another 300ms (apologies for that remark if you lost both pinkies in a wheat-field bailer accident).</p><p>In their case, as we all know, "the first ninety percent of the task takes ninety percent of the time, and the last ten percent takes the other ninety percent", so they're well into exponential innings already.</p><p>And finally, a tip of the hat to Corinna Vinschen, who answered my emails about problems with services under Cygwin as far back 2000.  That's a long run shepherding the near-sighted stepchild into some semblance of functional adulthood.</p><p>I know many younger Linux people whose devotion to a software download rarely exceeds ten minutes if the first spin doesn't immediately express preconceived gratification mojo.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>they have gone almost 100 \ % there why they stop at 95 \ % i dont know.In your case , the other 5 \ % would be adding an apostrophe , a comma , and a well timed tap on the shift key , and would have cost you another 300ms ( apologies for that remark if you lost both pinkies in a wheat-field bailer accident ) .In their case , as we all know , " the first ninety percent of the task takes ninety percent of the time , and the last ten percent takes the other ninety percent " , so they 're well into exponential innings already.And finally , a tip of the hat to Corinna Vinschen , who answered my emails about problems with services under Cygwin as far back 2000 .
That 's a long run shepherding the near-sighted stepchild into some semblance of functional adulthood.I know many younger Linux people whose devotion to a software download rarely exceeds ten minutes if the first spin does n't immediately express preconceived gratification mojo .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they have gone almost 100\% there why they stop at 95\% i dont know.In your case, the other 5\% would be adding an apostrophe, a comma, and a well timed tap on the shift key, and would have cost you another 300ms (apologies for that remark if you lost both pinkies in a wheat-field bailer accident).In their case, as we all know, "the first ninety percent of the task takes ninety percent of the time, and the last ten percent takes the other ninety percent", so they're well into exponential innings already.And finally, a tip of the hat to Corinna Vinschen, who answered my emails about problems with services under Cygwin as far back 2000.
That's a long run shepherding the near-sighted stepchild into some semblance of functional adulthood.I know many younger Linux people whose devotion to a software download rarely exceeds ten minutes if the first spin doesn't immediately express preconceived gratification mojo.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550724</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549872</id>
	<title>Re:makes windows marginally bearable</title>
	<author>bvankuik</author>
	<datestamp>1261733940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you think about it, it is almost unbelievable that Microsoft would release a new shell, then mak it not POSIX compliant. Almos defy OS for the last couple of decades has aimed for POSIX compliancy. Then when they build a shell, they ignore that and go on their own way. I wonder what would have happened if they just tried to conform.</p><p>A lot of sysadmins who are fluent with shell scripting, could have jumped in and have a huge advantage administering Windows machines. A lot of free utilities could easily be ported. And Windows admins could just pick up any of the gajillion resources on Shell scripting, or visit a local Unix user group to pick up tricks.</p><p>I know Powershell has lots of hooks that apps can hook into; that's basically the equivalent of Linux' D-Bus system.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you think about it , it is almost unbelievable that Microsoft would release a new shell , then mak it not POSIX compliant .
Almos defy OS for the last couple of decades has aimed for POSIX compliancy .
Then when they build a shell , they ignore that and go on their own way .
I wonder what would have happened if they just tried to conform.A lot of sysadmins who are fluent with shell scripting , could have jumped in and have a huge advantage administering Windows machines .
A lot of free utilities could easily be ported .
And Windows admins could just pick up any of the gajillion resources on Shell scripting , or visit a local Unix user group to pick up tricks.I know Powershell has lots of hooks that apps can hook into ; that 's basically the equivalent of Linux ' D-Bus system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you think about it, it is almost unbelievable that Microsoft would release a new shell, then mak it not POSIX compliant.
Almos defy OS for the last couple of decades has aimed for POSIX compliancy.
Then when they build a shell, they ignore that and go on their own way.
I wonder what would have happened if they just tried to conform.A lot of sysadmins who are fluent with shell scripting, could have jumped in and have a huge advantage administering Windows machines.
A lot of free utilities could easily be ported.
And Windows admins could just pick up any of the gajillion resources on Shell scripting, or visit a local Unix user group to pick up tricks.I know Powershell has lots of hooks that apps can hook into; that's basically the equivalent of Linux' D-Bus system.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549280</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30552788</id>
	<title>Cygwin kicks butt</title>
	<author>linuxguy</author>
	<datestamp>1261738080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am surprised that there are so many Cygwin haters out here.  I install it on every Windows machine I own.  Life would be very difficult without it.  I did find the Windows command console that Cygwin uses, very limiting.  Cut-n-paste is extremely painful.  However I discovered puttycyg  <a href="http://code.google.com/p/puttycyg/" title="google.com">http://code.google.com/p/puttycyg/</a> [google.com] that provides the putty interface for Cygwin.  And now I don't have much to complain about.</p><p>For those talking about Services For Unix, does SFU provide all the tools (latest version of Subversion client/server, SSH client/server etc) that Cygwin provides?  I don't think so.<br>Is SFU under continuous development, like Cygwin?  I don't think so.</p><p>Cygwin is an excellent piece of software, specially when used with puttycyg.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am surprised that there are so many Cygwin haters out here .
I install it on every Windows machine I own .
Life would be very difficult without it .
I did find the Windows command console that Cygwin uses , very limiting .
Cut-n-paste is extremely painful .
However I discovered puttycyg http : //code.google.com/p/puttycyg/ [ google.com ] that provides the putty interface for Cygwin .
And now I do n't have much to complain about.For those talking about Services For Unix , does SFU provide all the tools ( latest version of Subversion client/server , SSH client/server etc ) that Cygwin provides ?
I do n't think so.Is SFU under continuous development , like Cygwin ?
I do n't think so.Cygwin is an excellent piece of software , specially when used with puttycyg .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am surprised that there are so many Cygwin haters out here.
I install it on every Windows machine I own.
Life would be very difficult without it.
I did find the Windows command console that Cygwin uses, very limiting.
Cut-n-paste is extremely painful.
However I discovered puttycyg  http://code.google.com/p/puttycyg/ [google.com] that provides the putty interface for Cygwin.
And now I don't have much to complain about.For those talking about Services For Unix, does SFU provide all the tools (latest version of Subversion client/server, SSH client/server etc) that Cygwin provides?
I don't think so.Is SFU under continuous development, like Cygwin?
I don't think so.Cygwin is an excellent piece of software, specially when used with puttycyg.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550270</id>
	<title>Porting Unix applications to MS Windows</title>
	<author>Per Abrahamsen</author>
	<datestamp>1261744260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm pretty sure the main purpose is for porting Unix applications to MS Windows, and/or for maintaining a common build environment for the two platforms.  At least that is what I use it for.  I actually compile with MinGW as the application itself have very few OS dependencies, Cygwin "just" provides the pure build environment.</p><p>I also used to use Cygwin/X11 to provide a Unix like interactive programming environment, but as the MS version of GNU Emacs is quite good these days, and GNU Emacs itself provide most of the common environment I need, I don't bother with that anymore.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm pretty sure the main purpose is for porting Unix applications to MS Windows , and/or for maintaining a common build environment for the two platforms .
At least that is what I use it for .
I actually compile with MinGW as the application itself have very few OS dependencies , Cygwin " just " provides the pure build environment.I also used to use Cygwin/X11 to provide a Unix like interactive programming environment , but as the MS version of GNU Emacs is quite good these days , and GNU Emacs itself provide most of the common environment I need , I do n't bother with that anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm pretty sure the main purpose is for porting Unix applications to MS Windows, and/or for maintaining a common build environment for the two platforms.
At least that is what I use it for.
I actually compile with MinGW as the application itself have very few OS dependencies, Cygwin "just" provides the pure build environment.I also used to use Cygwin/X11 to provide a Unix like interactive programming environment, but as the MS version of GNU Emacs is quite good these days, and GNU Emacs itself provide most of the common environment I need, I don't bother with that anymore.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549576</id>
	<title>Re:min req windows</title>
	<author>compro01</author>
	<datestamp>1261683480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It works well using WINE.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It works well using WINE .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It works well using WINE.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549394</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549264</id>
	<title>Merry Fucking Christmas!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261677960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What are you nerds doing still working??</p><p>Isn't there some kind of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. Santa tracker or something??</p><p>Oh wait a minute. Slashdot is run by Jews. That explains everything.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What are you nerds doing still working ?
? Is n't there some kind of / .
Santa tracker or something ?
? Oh wait a minute .
Slashdot is run by Jews .
That explains everything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What are you nerds doing still working?
?Isn't there some kind of /.
Santa tracker or something?
?Oh wait a minute.
Slashdot is run by Jews.
That explains everything.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30558854</id>
	<title>Re:makes windows marginally bearable</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1261825920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They did for a while.. "unix services for windows".  Seems to still be around:</p><p><a href="http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=896C9688-601B-44F1-81A4-02878FF11778&amp;displaylang=en" title="microsoft.com">http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=896C9688-601B-44F1-81A4-02878FF11778&amp;displaylang=en</a> [microsoft.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They did for a while.. " unix services for windows " .
Seems to still be around : http : //www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx ? FamilyID = 896C9688-601B-44F1-81A4-02878FF11778&amp;displaylang = en [ microsoft.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They did for a while.. "unix services for windows".
Seems to still be around:http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=896C9688-601B-44F1-81A4-02878FF11778&amp;displaylang=en [microsoft.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549280</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549454</id>
	<title>Re:Do we finally have unicode support?</title>
	<author>s1lverg1ow</author>
	<datestamp>1261680840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The release announcement page says "Default character set is now UTF-8..."

Maybe you will install 1.7 and tell us how good the implementation is?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The release announcement page says " Default character set is now UTF-8... " Maybe you will install 1.7 and tell us how good the implementation is ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The release announcement page says "Default character set is now UTF-8..."

Maybe you will install 1.7 and tell us how good the implementation is?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549552</id>
	<title>Re:One question remains...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261682940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, Cygwin does run under WINE. And WINE runs under Cygwin. It can be an amusing stress test.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , Cygwin does run under WINE .
And WINE runs under Cygwin .
It can be an amusing stress test .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, Cygwin does run under WINE.
And WINE runs under Cygwin.
It can be an amusing stress test.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549844</id>
	<title>Re:I was never really impressed</title>
	<author>plasticsquirrel</author>
	<datestamp>1261733460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Cygwin isn't meant to give you all the Linux or Windows system features, just provide a full-featured POSIX emulation layer (at its core, just one DLL), and programs compiled for that. You may still need to use Windows utilities to access Windows-specific features that have no POSIX implementation. However, the important thing is that it basically gives Unix developers a common platform, so anything developed for general Unix systems will compile on Cygwin's POSIX emulation layer.<br> <br>Since Cygwin basically throws you into a command shell, it really does require an understanding of the fundamentals of Unix/Linux systems and how to work effectively in a shell. For example, I doubt many users of Slackware or NetBSD would have any substantial complaints about Cygwin. As someone who used Cygwin for years in a corporate environment where I could not use Linux, it was a godsend. I could spend my whole day working in Cygwin without having to mess with Windows development environments. Being able to throw together a bash script that uses grep, sed, awk, etc. is so nice for a stranded Linux user. However, many people do not learn the basic utilities anymore, even basic things such as customizing a login shell.<br> <br>If there is a weak point in the Cygwin interactive experience, in my opinion it comes from the fact that the default Windows terminal program is used, which is slow and generally terrible compared to the modern Linux terminal apps. Maybe someday there will be a fast and full-featured replacement. But as it is, the Windows terminal is basically sluggish early 90's cruft that just isn't up to the task. Not a fault of Cygwin, but still a problem when running any such programs on Windows.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Cygwin is n't meant to give you all the Linux or Windows system features , just provide a full-featured POSIX emulation layer ( at its core , just one DLL ) , and programs compiled for that .
You may still need to use Windows utilities to access Windows-specific features that have no POSIX implementation .
However , the important thing is that it basically gives Unix developers a common platform , so anything developed for general Unix systems will compile on Cygwin 's POSIX emulation layer .
Since Cygwin basically throws you into a command shell , it really does require an understanding of the fundamentals of Unix/Linux systems and how to work effectively in a shell .
For example , I doubt many users of Slackware or NetBSD would have any substantial complaints about Cygwin .
As someone who used Cygwin for years in a corporate environment where I could not use Linux , it was a godsend .
I could spend my whole day working in Cygwin without having to mess with Windows development environments .
Being able to throw together a bash script that uses grep , sed , awk , etc .
is so nice for a stranded Linux user .
However , many people do not learn the basic utilities anymore , even basic things such as customizing a login shell .
If there is a weak point in the Cygwin interactive experience , in my opinion it comes from the fact that the default Windows terminal program is used , which is slow and generally terrible compared to the modern Linux terminal apps .
Maybe someday there will be a fast and full-featured replacement .
But as it is , the Windows terminal is basically sluggish early 90 's cruft that just is n't up to the task .
Not a fault of Cygwin , but still a problem when running any such programs on Windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cygwin isn't meant to give you all the Linux or Windows system features, just provide a full-featured POSIX emulation layer (at its core, just one DLL), and programs compiled for that.
You may still need to use Windows utilities to access Windows-specific features that have no POSIX implementation.
However, the important thing is that it basically gives Unix developers a common platform, so anything developed for general Unix systems will compile on Cygwin's POSIX emulation layer.
Since Cygwin basically throws you into a command shell, it really does require an understanding of the fundamentals of Unix/Linux systems and how to work effectively in a shell.
For example, I doubt many users of Slackware or NetBSD would have any substantial complaints about Cygwin.
As someone who used Cygwin for years in a corporate environment where I could not use Linux, it was a godsend.
I could spend my whole day working in Cygwin without having to mess with Windows development environments.
Being able to throw together a bash script that uses grep, sed, awk, etc.
is so nice for a stranded Linux user.
However, many people do not learn the basic utilities anymore, even basic things such as customizing a login shell.
If there is a weak point in the Cygwin interactive experience, in my opinion it comes from the fact that the default Windows terminal program is used, which is slow and generally terrible compared to the modern Linux terminal apps.
Maybe someday there will be a fast and full-featured replacement.
But as it is, the Windows terminal is basically sluggish early 90's cruft that just isn't up to the task.
Not a fault of Cygwin, but still a problem when running any such programs on Windows.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549366</id>
	<title>sweet!</title>
	<author>yup2000</author>
	<datestamp>1261679580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is really great - I was setting up rsync and ssh on my parents computer a couple days ago as part of a backup system. I was having a problem with rsync hanging on a 2GB pst file, but the new cygwin brings rsync up to date, and whatdoya know... it works! Now my openbsd box happily backs up their stuff!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is really great - I was setting up rsync and ssh on my parents computer a couple days ago as part of a backup system .
I was having a problem with rsync hanging on a 2GB pst file , but the new cygwin brings rsync up to date , and whatdoya know... it works !
Now my openbsd box happily backs up their stuff !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is really great - I was setting up rsync and ssh on my parents computer a couple days ago as part of a backup system.
I was having a problem with rsync hanging on a 2GB pst file, but the new cygwin brings rsync up to date, and whatdoya know... it works!
Now my openbsd box happily backs up their stuff!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549956</id>
	<title>Re:makes windows marginally bearable</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261735920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I just can't see any reason myself or an average Windows user would need a UNIX command line</p></div> </blockquote><p>

If you are a developer or sysadmin who deals with data, then you use the command line. You can take several hundred log files, run them through 1 liner piped commands (find, grep, xargs, awk, sed, perl, sort, uniq, wc, head, tail, etc), output a CSV file, and pop it into Excel in about 10-20 minutes. Try doing that with only Excel and you'll be there all day.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I just ca n't see any reason myself or an average Windows user would need a UNIX command line If you are a developer or sysadmin who deals with data , then you use the command line .
You can take several hundred log files , run them through 1 liner piped commands ( find , grep , xargs , awk , sed , perl , sort , uniq , wc , head , tail , etc ) , output a CSV file , and pop it into Excel in about 10-20 minutes .
Try doing that with only Excel and you 'll be there all day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just can't see any reason myself or an average Windows user would need a UNIX command line 

If you are a developer or sysadmin who deals with data, then you use the command line.
You can take several hundred log files, run them through 1 liner piped commands (find, grep, xargs, awk, sed, perl, sort, uniq, wc, head, tail, etc), output a CSV file, and pop it into Excel in about 10-20 minutes.
Try doing that with only Excel and you'll be there all day.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30551862</id>
	<title>Re:One question remains...</title>
	<author>David Gerard</author>
	<datestamp>1261769100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cygwin <a href="http://wiki.winehq.org/CygwinSupport" title="winehq.org">does run in Wine</a> [winehq.org], but Wine doesn't actually run under Cygwin as yet, or <a href="http://wiki.winehq.org/WineOnWindows" title="winehq.org">even compile</a> [winehq.org]. Helpers wanted!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cygwin does run in Wine [ winehq.org ] , but Wine does n't actually run under Cygwin as yet , or even compile [ winehq.org ] .
Helpers wanted !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cygwin does run in Wine [winehq.org], but Wine doesn't actually run under Cygwin as yet, or even compile [winehq.org].
Helpers wanted!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30552150</id>
	<title>Re:Recommended alternative terminal program?</title>
	<author>schnablebg</author>
	<datestamp>1261772760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://sourceforge.net/projects/console/" title="sourceforge.net" rel="nofollow">Console</a> [sourceforge.net], a very nice application that has tabs, sane copy/paste functionality, and can be configured to launch bash or whatever you want.  Not sure about Unicode.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Console [ sourceforge.net ] , a very nice application that has tabs , sane copy/paste functionality , and can be configured to launch bash or whatever you want .
Not sure about Unicode .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Console [sourceforge.net], a very nice application that has tabs, sane copy/paste functionality, and can be configured to launch bash or whatever you want.
Not sure about Unicode.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30551086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30559856</id>
	<title>Re:Does this do something SFU doesn't?</title>
	<author>petermgreen</author>
	<datestamp>1261836120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>you just package Cygwin DLLs with your binaries, and that's it.</i><br>Then the user another app with a different version of the cygwin dll (or installs cygwin on thier system) and due to the way cygwin uses shared memory to emulate posix stuff things tend to start crashing when two versions of the dll are loaded at once.</p><p>Also iirc the license for the main cygwin library is GPL with a linking exception for other FOSS licenses so if your software is not FOSS then afaict you would need a special license to do what you propose in a compliant manner.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you just package Cygwin DLLs with your binaries , and that 's it.Then the user another app with a different version of the cygwin dll ( or installs cygwin on thier system ) and due to the way cygwin uses shared memory to emulate posix stuff things tend to start crashing when two versions of the dll are loaded at once.Also iirc the license for the main cygwin library is GPL with a linking exception for other FOSS licenses so if your software is not FOSS then afaict you would need a special license to do what you propose in a compliant manner .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you just package Cygwin DLLs with your binaries, and that's it.Then the user another app with a different version of the cygwin dll (or installs cygwin on thier system) and due to the way cygwin uses shared memory to emulate posix stuff things tend to start crashing when two versions of the dll are loaded at once.Also iirc the license for the main cygwin library is GPL with a linking exception for other FOSS licenses so if your software is not FOSS then afaict you would need a special license to do what you propose in a compliant manner.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549668</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549614</id>
	<title>Re:Merry Fucking Christmas!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261684680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> As a result of an overwhelming lack of requests, and with research<br>
&nbsp; help from that renowned scientific journal SPY magazine (January, 1990)<br>
&nbsp; --here is the annual scientific inquiry into Santa Claus.</p><p>
&nbsp; 1) No known species of reindeer can fly.  BUT there are 300,000 species<br>
&nbsp; of living organisms yet to be classified, and while most of these are<br>
&nbsp; insects and germs, this does not COMPLETELY rule out flying reindeer<br>
&nbsp; which only Santa has ever seen.</p><p>
&nbsp; 2) There are 2 billion children (persons under 18) in the world.  BUT<br>
&nbsp; since Santa doesn't (appear) to handle the Muslim, Hindu, Jewish and<br>
&nbsp; Buddhist children, that reduces the workload to 15\% of the total - 378<br>
&nbsp; million according to the Population Reference Reference Bureau.  At an<br>
&nbsp; average (census) rate of 3.5 children per household, that's 91.8 million<br>
&nbsp; homes.  One presumes there's at least one good child in each.</p><p>
&nbsp; 3)  Santa has 31 hours of Christmas to work with, thanks to the different<br>
&nbsp; time zones and the rotation of the earth, assuming he travels east to west<br>
&nbsp; (which seems logical).  This works out to 822.6 visits per second.  This is<br>
&nbsp; to say that for each Christian household with good children, Santa has<br>
&nbsp; 1/1000th of a second to park, hop out of the sleigh, jump down the chimney,<br>
&nbsp; fill the stockings, distribute the remaining presents under the tree, eat<br>
&nbsp; whatever snacks have been left, get back up the chimney, get back into the<br>
&nbsp; sleigh and move on to the next house.  Assuming that each of these 91.8<br>
&nbsp; millions stops are evenly distributed around the earth (which, of course,<br>
&nbsp; we know to be false but for the purposes of our calculations we will<br>
&nbsp; accept), we are now talking about<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.78 miles per household, a total trip of<br>
&nbsp; 75-1/2 million miles, not counting stops to do what most of us must do at<br>
&nbsp; least once every 31 hours, plus feeding and etc.</p><p>
&nbsp; This means that Santa's sleigh is moving at 650 miles per second, 3,000<br>
&nbsp; times the speed of sound.  For purposes of comparison, the fastest man-made<br>
&nbsp; vehicle on earth, the Ulysses space probe, moves at a poky 27.4 miles per<br>
&nbsp; second - a conventional reindeer can run, tops, 15 miles per hour.</p><p>
&nbsp; 4) The payload on the sleigh adds another interesting element.  Assuming<br>
&nbsp; that each child gets nothing more than a medium-sized lego set (2 pounds),<br>
&nbsp; the sleigh is carrying 321,300 tons, not counting Santa, who is invariably<br>
&nbsp; described as overweight.  On land, conventional reindeer can pull no more<br>
&nbsp; than 300 pounds.  Even granting that "flying reindeer" (see point #1) could<br>
&nbsp; pull TEN TIMES the normal amount, we cannot do the job with eight, or even<br>
&nbsp; nine.  We need 214,200 reindeer.  This increases the payload - not even<br>
&nbsp; counting the weight of the sleigh - to 353,430 tons.  Again, for<br>
&nbsp; comparison - this is four times the weight of the Queen Elizabeth.</p><p>
&nbsp; 5) 353,000 tons traveling at 650 miles per second creates enormous air<br>
&nbsp; resistance - this will heat the reindeer up in the same fashion as<br>
&nbsp; spacecraft re-entering the earth's atmosphere.  The lead pair of reindeer<br>
&nbsp; will absorb 14.3 QUINTILLION joules of energy.  Per second.  Each.  In<br>
&nbsp; short, they will burst into flame almost instantaneously, exposing the<br>
&nbsp; reindeer behind them, and create deafening sonic booms in their wake.  The<br>
&nbsp; entire reindeer team will be vaporized within 4.26 thousandths of a second.<br>
&nbsp; Santa, meanwhile, will be subjected to centrifugal forces 17,500.06 times<br>
&nbsp; greater than gravity.  A 250-pound Santa (which seems ludicrously slim)<br>
&nbsp; would be pinned to the back of his sleigh by 4,315,015 pounds of force.</p><p>
&nbsp; In conclusion - If Santa ever DID deliver presents on Christmas Eve, he's<br>
&nbsp; dead now. Merry X-mas.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a result of an overwhelming lack of requests , and with research   help from that renowned scientific journal SPY magazine ( January , 1990 )   --here is the annual scientific inquiry into Santa Claus .
  1 ) No known species of reindeer can fly .
BUT there are 300,000 species   of living organisms yet to be classified , and while most of these are   insects and germs , this does not COMPLETELY rule out flying reindeer   which only Santa has ever seen .
  2 ) There are 2 billion children ( persons under 18 ) in the world .
BUT   since Santa does n't ( appear ) to handle the Muslim , Hindu , Jewish and   Buddhist children , that reduces the workload to 15 \ % of the total - 378   million according to the Population Reference Reference Bureau .
At an   average ( census ) rate of 3.5 children per household , that 's 91.8 million   homes .
One presumes there 's at least one good child in each .
  3 ) Santa has 31 hours of Christmas to work with , thanks to the different   time zones and the rotation of the earth , assuming he travels east to west   ( which seems logical ) .
This works out to 822.6 visits per second .
This is   to say that for each Christian household with good children , Santa has   1/1000th of a second to park , hop out of the sleigh , jump down the chimney ,   fill the stockings , distribute the remaining presents under the tree , eat   whatever snacks have been left , get back up the chimney , get back into the   sleigh and move on to the next house .
Assuming that each of these 91.8   millions stops are evenly distributed around the earth ( which , of course ,   we know to be false but for the purposes of our calculations we will   accept ) , we are now talking about .78 miles per household , a total trip of   75-1/2 million miles , not counting stops to do what most of us must do at   least once every 31 hours , plus feeding and etc .
  This means that Santa 's sleigh is moving at 650 miles per second , 3,000   times the speed of sound .
For purposes of comparison , the fastest man-made   vehicle on earth , the Ulysses space probe , moves at a poky 27.4 miles per   second - a conventional reindeer can run , tops , 15 miles per hour .
  4 ) The payload on the sleigh adds another interesting element .
Assuming   that each child gets nothing more than a medium-sized lego set ( 2 pounds ) ,   the sleigh is carrying 321,300 tons , not counting Santa , who is invariably   described as overweight .
On land , conventional reindeer can pull no more   than 300 pounds .
Even granting that " flying reindeer " ( see point # 1 ) could   pull TEN TIMES the normal amount , we can not do the job with eight , or even   nine .
We need 214,200 reindeer .
This increases the payload - not even   counting the weight of the sleigh - to 353,430 tons .
Again , for   comparison - this is four times the weight of the Queen Elizabeth .
  5 ) 353,000 tons traveling at 650 miles per second creates enormous air   resistance - this will heat the reindeer up in the same fashion as   spacecraft re-entering the earth 's atmosphere .
The lead pair of reindeer   will absorb 14.3 QUINTILLION joules of energy .
Per second .
Each. In   short , they will burst into flame almost instantaneously , exposing the   reindeer behind them , and create deafening sonic booms in their wake .
The   entire reindeer team will be vaporized within 4.26 thousandths of a second .
  Santa , meanwhile , will be subjected to centrifugal forces 17,500.06 times   greater than gravity .
A 250-pound Santa ( which seems ludicrously slim )   would be pinned to the back of his sleigh by 4,315,015 pounds of force .
  In conclusion - If Santa ever DID deliver presents on Christmas Eve , he 's   dead now .
Merry X-mas .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> As a result of an overwhelming lack of requests, and with research
  help from that renowned scientific journal SPY magazine (January, 1990)
  --here is the annual scientific inquiry into Santa Claus.
  1) No known species of reindeer can fly.
BUT there are 300,000 species
  of living organisms yet to be classified, and while most of these are
  insects and germs, this does not COMPLETELY rule out flying reindeer
  which only Santa has ever seen.
  2) There are 2 billion children (persons under 18) in the world.
BUT
  since Santa doesn't (appear) to handle the Muslim, Hindu, Jewish and
  Buddhist children, that reduces the workload to 15\% of the total - 378
  million according to the Population Reference Reference Bureau.
At an
  average (census) rate of 3.5 children per household, that's 91.8 million
  homes.
One presumes there's at least one good child in each.
  3)  Santa has 31 hours of Christmas to work with, thanks to the different
  time zones and the rotation of the earth, assuming he travels east to west
  (which seems logical).
This works out to 822.6 visits per second.
This is
  to say that for each Christian household with good children, Santa has
  1/1000th of a second to park, hop out of the sleigh, jump down the chimney,
  fill the stockings, distribute the remaining presents under the tree, eat
  whatever snacks have been left, get back up the chimney, get back into the
  sleigh and move on to the next house.
Assuming that each of these 91.8
  millions stops are evenly distributed around the earth (which, of course,
  we know to be false but for the purposes of our calculations we will
  accept), we are now talking about .78 miles per household, a total trip of
  75-1/2 million miles, not counting stops to do what most of us must do at
  least once every 31 hours, plus feeding and etc.
  This means that Santa's sleigh is moving at 650 miles per second, 3,000
  times the speed of sound.
For purposes of comparison, the fastest man-made
  vehicle on earth, the Ulysses space probe, moves at a poky 27.4 miles per
  second - a conventional reindeer can run, tops, 15 miles per hour.
  4) The payload on the sleigh adds another interesting element.
Assuming
  that each child gets nothing more than a medium-sized lego set (2 pounds),
  the sleigh is carrying 321,300 tons, not counting Santa, who is invariably
  described as overweight.
On land, conventional reindeer can pull no more
  than 300 pounds.
Even granting that "flying reindeer" (see point #1) could
  pull TEN TIMES the normal amount, we cannot do the job with eight, or even
  nine.
We need 214,200 reindeer.
This increases the payload - not even
  counting the weight of the sleigh - to 353,430 tons.
Again, for
  comparison - this is four times the weight of the Queen Elizabeth.
  5) 353,000 tons traveling at 650 miles per second creates enormous air
  resistance - this will heat the reindeer up in the same fashion as
  spacecraft re-entering the earth's atmosphere.
The lead pair of reindeer
  will absorb 14.3 QUINTILLION joules of energy.
Per second.
Each.  In
  short, they will burst into flame almost instantaneously, exposing the
  reindeer behind them, and create deafening sonic booms in their wake.
The
  entire reindeer team will be vaporized within 4.26 thousandths of a second.
  Santa, meanwhile, will be subjected to centrifugal forces 17,500.06 times
  greater than gravity.
A 250-pound Santa (which seems ludicrously slim)
  would be pinned to the back of his sleigh by 4,315,015 pounds of force.
  In conclusion - If Santa ever DID deliver presents on Christmas Eve, he's
  dead now.
Merry X-mas.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549264</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549712</id>
	<title>Re:makes windows marginally bearable</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261773900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I just can't see any reason myself or an average Windows user would need a UNIX command line on their Windows computer.</i></p><p>Consider the task of converting a few thousand files from one format to another.  The average Windows user will spend hours doing it by hand or spend a lot of money on a special purpose tool to do such conversions.  If they're really smart, they may spend a lot of time and cobble something together in VisualBasic.  That's the Windows way: slow, cumbersome, and expensive.</p><p><i>In fact, I think the whole point of Windows is to get away from the command line.</i></p><p>The whole and entire point of Windows is to make money for Microsoft, to tie you inextricably to their platform, and to make sure that your thinking becomes so warped that you can't possibly use anything else.  I'd say they are succeeding.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just ca n't see any reason myself or an average Windows user would need a UNIX command line on their Windows computer.Consider the task of converting a few thousand files from one format to another .
The average Windows user will spend hours doing it by hand or spend a lot of money on a special purpose tool to do such conversions .
If they 're really smart , they may spend a lot of time and cobble something together in VisualBasic .
That 's the Windows way : slow , cumbersome , and expensive.In fact , I think the whole point of Windows is to get away from the command line.The whole and entire point of Windows is to make money for Microsoft , to tie you inextricably to their platform , and to make sure that your thinking becomes so warped that you ca n't possibly use anything else .
I 'd say they are succeeding .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just can't see any reason myself or an average Windows user would need a UNIX command line on their Windows computer.Consider the task of converting a few thousand files from one format to another.
The average Windows user will spend hours doing it by hand or spend a lot of money on a special purpose tool to do such conversions.
If they're really smart, they may spend a lot of time and cobble something together in VisualBasic.
That's the Windows way: slow, cumbersome, and expensive.In fact, I think the whole point of Windows is to get away from the command line.The whole and entire point of Windows is to make money for Microsoft, to tie you inextricably to their platform, and to make sure that your thinking becomes so warped that you can't possibly use anything else.
I'd say they are succeeding.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549394</id>
	<title>Re:min req windows</title>
	<author>BitterOak</author>
	<datestamp>1261680060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>who actually uses this... it REQUIRES windows?</p></div><p>I know.  I've been hoping for years they'll release a version for Linux, but they never do.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>who actually uses this... it REQUIRES windows ? I know .
I 've been hoping for years they 'll release a version for Linux , but they never do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>who actually uses this... it REQUIRES windows?I know.
I've been hoping for years they'll release a version for Linux, but they never do.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30566494</id>
	<title>Re:I wonder if Cygwin really has much of a future</title>
	<author>cgf</author>
	<datestamp>1261916580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We "stopped at 95\%" because we were supporting Window 9x.  Once we stopped doing that we could make use of the features available in more sophisticated versions of Windows.</p><p>But, of course, there are some things that are just very hard to do in Windows no matter what version.  That's why some things are not implemented.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We " stopped at 95 \ % " because we were supporting Window 9x .
Once we stopped doing that we could make use of the features available in more sophisticated versions of Windows.But , of course , there are some things that are just very hard to do in Windows no matter what version .
That 's why some things are not implemented .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We "stopped at 95\%" because we were supporting Window 9x.
Once we stopped doing that we could make use of the features available in more sophisticated versions of Windows.But, of course, there are some things that are just very hard to do in Windows no matter what version.
That's why some things are not implemented.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550724</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30556992</id>
	<title>Re:I wonder if Cygwin really has much of a future</title>
	<author>Daniel Serodio</author>
	<datestamp>1261853820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of the first things I install on a new work computer is Cygwin.<br>What's wrong with the install process? It's a pretty much standard "Next, Next, Next" Windows install.</p><p>Two things that I do after installation for better integration with the Windows environment is creating<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/c,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/d, etc symlinks to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/cygdrive/c, cygdrive/d, etc and making Cygwin's "/home" a symlink to C:\Documents and Settings or C:\Users</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the first things I install on a new work computer is Cygwin.What 's wrong with the install process ?
It 's a pretty much standard " Next , Next , Next " Windows install.Two things that I do after installation for better integration with the Windows environment is creating /c , /d , etc symlinks to /cygdrive/c , cygdrive/d , etc and making Cygwin 's " /home " a symlink to C : \ Documents and Settings or C : \ Users</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the first things I install on a new work computer is Cygwin.What's wrong with the install process?
It's a pretty much standard "Next, Next, Next" Windows install.Two things that I do after installation for better integration with the Windows environment is creating /c, /d, etc symlinks to /cygdrive/c, cygdrive/d, etc and making Cygwin's "/home" a symlink to C:\Documents and Settings or C:\Users</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549472</id>
	<title>I was never really impressed</title>
	<author>bsDaemon</author>
	<datestamp>1261681140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Let's be honest -- whether Linux or BSD is ready for the desktop, ready for the laptop is something slightly lacking, and I mostly have laptops these days.  I couldn't take it anymore with Linux or BSD on my laptop, so I bought Vista.  Of course, I can't live without a command line, because that's what I'm used to.  I remembered having used Cygwin years ago, back in the Win95 days, and so I tried to give it ago.<br><br>No dice -- it doesn't really integrate with the rest of the system very well, I find.  Maybe I'm just not doing it right, but whatever.  Then I gave up and grabbed SFU off of Microsoft's website.  It was OK, but not really stellar.  It's more for running batch jobs and giving something to code against than for interactive use, same as Cygwin I guess.<br><br>Eventually I got so pissed sick of it all that I just bought a MacBook Pro so that I could have a Unix-ish environment without having to worry about power management or weird wifi issues that I'd had with Fedora, CentOS, Ubuntu, Slackware, ZenWalk, Mint, FreeBSD, OpenBSD and PC-BSD on the Toshiba hardware.<br><br>So, I guess my question is -- is Cygwin meant for interactive use, or just to give the POSIX API and build environment so you can see whether or not your code will compile against a Unix machine?  Because it seems like they've been putting an awful lot of effort into this for a very long time for it to suck so bad if its meant to be an interactive method of accessing a Windows machine by Unix commands.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's be honest -- whether Linux or BSD is ready for the desktop , ready for the laptop is something slightly lacking , and I mostly have laptops these days .
I could n't take it anymore with Linux or BSD on my laptop , so I bought Vista .
Of course , I ca n't live without a command line , because that 's what I 'm used to .
I remembered having used Cygwin years ago , back in the Win95 days , and so I tried to give it ago.No dice -- it does n't really integrate with the rest of the system very well , I find .
Maybe I 'm just not doing it right , but whatever .
Then I gave up and grabbed SFU off of Microsoft 's website .
It was OK , but not really stellar .
It 's more for running batch jobs and giving something to code against than for interactive use , same as Cygwin I guess.Eventually I got so pissed sick of it all that I just bought a MacBook Pro so that I could have a Unix-ish environment without having to worry about power management or weird wifi issues that I 'd had with Fedora , CentOS , Ubuntu , Slackware , ZenWalk , Mint , FreeBSD , OpenBSD and PC-BSD on the Toshiba hardware.So , I guess my question is -- is Cygwin meant for interactive use , or just to give the POSIX API and build environment so you can see whether or not your code will compile against a Unix machine ?
Because it seems like they 've been putting an awful lot of effort into this for a very long time for it to suck so bad if its meant to be an interactive method of accessing a Windows machine by Unix commands .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's be honest -- whether Linux or BSD is ready for the desktop, ready for the laptop is something slightly lacking, and I mostly have laptops these days.
I couldn't take it anymore with Linux or BSD on my laptop, so I bought Vista.
Of course, I can't live without a command line, because that's what I'm used to.
I remembered having used Cygwin years ago, back in the Win95 days, and so I tried to give it ago.No dice -- it doesn't really integrate with the rest of the system very well, I find.
Maybe I'm just not doing it right, but whatever.
Then I gave up and grabbed SFU off of Microsoft's website.
It was OK, but not really stellar.
It's more for running batch jobs and giving something to code against than for interactive use, same as Cygwin I guess.Eventually I got so pissed sick of it all that I just bought a MacBook Pro so that I could have a Unix-ish environment without having to worry about power management or weird wifi issues that I'd had with Fedora, CentOS, Ubuntu, Slackware, ZenWalk, Mint, FreeBSD, OpenBSD and PC-BSD on the Toshiba hardware.So, I guess my question is -- is Cygwin meant for interactive use, or just to give the POSIX API and build environment so you can see whether or not your code will compile against a Unix machine?
Because it seems like they've been putting an awful lot of effort into this for a very long time for it to suck so bad if its meant to be an interactive method of accessing a Windows machine by Unix commands.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550584</id>
	<title>Re:I was never really impressed</title>
	<author>bsDaemon</author>
	<datestamp>1261751280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm quite proficient with tcsh and bash and many command-line utlitiies.  On a real *nix system, I'm extremely happy.  I think I just found there to be a lack of integration that was getting in my way and it was probably due to my perception of what it was supposed to be vs what it actually was.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm quite proficient with tcsh and bash and many command-line utlitiies .
On a real * nix system , I 'm extremely happy .
I think I just found there to be a lack of integration that was getting in my way and it was probably due to my perception of what it was supposed to be vs what it actually was .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm quite proficient with tcsh and bash and many command-line utlitiies.
On a real *nix system, I'm extremely happy.
I think I just found there to be a lack of integration that was getting in my way and it was probably due to my perception of what it was supposed to be vs what it actually was.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549370</id>
	<title>min req windows</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261679640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>who actually uses this... it REQUIRES windows?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>who actually uses this... it REQUIRES windows ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>who actually uses this... it REQUIRES windows?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549514</id>
	<title>Re:makes windows marginally bearable</title>
	<author>AmberBlackCat</author>
	<datestamp>1261682040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I just can't see any reason myself or an average Windows user would need a UNIX command line on their Windows computer. In fact, I think the whole point of Windows is to get away from the command line.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I just ca n't see any reason myself or an average Windows user would need a UNIX command line on their Windows computer .
In fact , I think the whole point of Windows is to get away from the command line .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just can't see any reason myself or an average Windows user would need a UNIX command line on their Windows computer.
In fact, I think the whole point of Windows is to get away from the command line.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549280</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549252</id>
	<title>One question remains...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261677840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>... Does it run under WINE?</htmltext>
<tokenext>... Does it run under WINE ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... Does it run under WINE?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549622</id>
	<title>Re:Do we finally have unicode support?</title>
	<author>OverlordQ</author>
	<datestamp>1261771200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>RTFA:</p><p><i>- Default character set is now UTF-8, but other character sets are<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; supported via an improved internationalization support.  See<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; <a href="http://cygwin.com/cygwin-ug-net/setup-locale.html" title="cygwin.com">http://cygwin.com/cygwin-ug-net/setup-locale.html</a> [cygwin.com]<br></i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>RTFA : - Default character set is now UTF-8 , but other character sets are     supported via an improved internationalization support .
See     http : //cygwin.com/cygwin-ug-net/setup-locale.html [ cygwin.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>RTFA:- Default character set is now UTF-8, but other character sets are
    supported via an improved internationalization support.
See
    http://cygwin.com/cygwin-ug-net/setup-locale.html [cygwin.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549668</id>
	<title>Re:Does this do something SFU doesn't?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261772940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>SFU (now called SUA, "Subsystem for Unix Applications") is rather good, but the problem with it is that it is only present in Enterprise and Ultimate editions of Vista/7, or in 2008. Since most people use Home or Professional, they can't get it. This is a problem when porting applications, since now your port requires Enterprise/Ultimate.</p><p>With Cygwin, a ported application not only runs on any version of Windows, but you don't require the user to install the runtime before running it - you just package Cygwin DLLs with your binaries, and that's it.</p><p>SUA is supposed to be used for porting "legacy" in-house Unix applications. It does also make for a decent Unix shell and basic tool set for Windows if you can afford it, but aside from that, it's in a rather different niche from Cygwin. They are complimentary.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>SFU ( now called SUA , " Subsystem for Unix Applications " ) is rather good , but the problem with it is that it is only present in Enterprise and Ultimate editions of Vista/7 , or in 2008 .
Since most people use Home or Professional , they ca n't get it .
This is a problem when porting applications , since now your port requires Enterprise/Ultimate.With Cygwin , a ported application not only runs on any version of Windows , but you do n't require the user to install the runtime before running it - you just package Cygwin DLLs with your binaries , and that 's it.SUA is supposed to be used for porting " legacy " in-house Unix applications .
It does also make for a decent Unix shell and basic tool set for Windows if you can afford it , but aside from that , it 's in a rather different niche from Cygwin .
They are complimentary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SFU (now called SUA, "Subsystem for Unix Applications") is rather good, but the problem with it is that it is only present in Enterprise and Ultimate editions of Vista/7, or in 2008.
Since most people use Home or Professional, they can't get it.
This is a problem when porting applications, since now your port requires Enterprise/Ultimate.With Cygwin, a ported application not only runs on any version of Windows, but you don't require the user to install the runtime before running it - you just package Cygwin DLLs with your binaries, and that's it.SUA is supposed to be used for porting "legacy" in-house Unix applications.
It does also make for a decent Unix shell and basic tool set for Windows if you can afford it, but aside from that, it's in a rather different niche from Cygwin.
They are complimentary.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549490</id>
	<title>I wonder if Cygwin really has much of a future</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261681380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It used to be if I wanted to run some Linux code under Windows I'd have to have a Linux box nearby, boot into Linux, or deal with Cygwin. I've never really enjoyed using Cygwin it's a pain to use, maintain, work with, and code for. There are lots of subtle differences in how your code behaves when you go from Linux to Cygwin (for example, re-writing someone's entire program because they liked to use lots of mallocs and Cygwin mallocs are unbelievably slow).</p><p>At this point though you can either run VMware, get a full Linux distro, and have easier access to your local Windows files (via a local share) than Cygwin's fun mapping scheme (/cygdrive what now?). Or you can even run an EC2 instance. Cygwin was never painless enough to make it worth while to use, if I needed to do something in Linux I'd rather use a real Linux box.</p><p>I don't think most people really miss the command line utilities enough to want to go through the hassle of using Cygwin (I hate the install process btw)... but then again I don't like using Linux as my desktop. I'd rather just use Windows or OS X and ssh into my Linux clusters as needed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It used to be if I wanted to run some Linux code under Windows I 'd have to have a Linux box nearby , boot into Linux , or deal with Cygwin .
I 've never really enjoyed using Cygwin it 's a pain to use , maintain , work with , and code for .
There are lots of subtle differences in how your code behaves when you go from Linux to Cygwin ( for example , re-writing someone 's entire program because they liked to use lots of mallocs and Cygwin mallocs are unbelievably slow ) .At this point though you can either run VMware , get a full Linux distro , and have easier access to your local Windows files ( via a local share ) than Cygwin 's fun mapping scheme ( /cygdrive what now ? ) .
Or you can even run an EC2 instance .
Cygwin was never painless enough to make it worth while to use , if I needed to do something in Linux I 'd rather use a real Linux box.I do n't think most people really miss the command line utilities enough to want to go through the hassle of using Cygwin ( I hate the install process btw ) ... but then again I do n't like using Linux as my desktop .
I 'd rather just use Windows or OS X and ssh into my Linux clusters as needed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It used to be if I wanted to run some Linux code under Windows I'd have to have a Linux box nearby, boot into Linux, or deal with Cygwin.
I've never really enjoyed using Cygwin it's a pain to use, maintain, work with, and code for.
There are lots of subtle differences in how your code behaves when you go from Linux to Cygwin (for example, re-writing someone's entire program because they liked to use lots of mallocs and Cygwin mallocs are unbelievably slow).At this point though you can either run VMware, get a full Linux distro, and have easier access to your local Windows files (via a local share) than Cygwin's fun mapping scheme (/cygdrive what now?).
Or you can even run an EC2 instance.
Cygwin was never painless enough to make it worth while to use, if I needed to do something in Linux I'd rather use a real Linux box.I don't think most people really miss the command line utilities enough to want to go through the hassle of using Cygwin (I hate the install process btw)... but then again I don't like using Linux as my desktop.
I'd rather just use Windows or OS X and ssh into my Linux clusters as needed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30551350</id>
	<title>Re:Does this do something SFU doesn't?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261762980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's Subsystem for Unix-based Applications.  There are two editions: a client edition (Vista, Windows 7) and a server edition (Server 2008).  The client edition contains, well, clients; the server edition contains servers.  This is probably where you got the idea that NIS and NFS servers are no longer supported: they are, but only in the server edition of SUA.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's Subsystem for Unix-based Applications .
There are two editions : a client edition ( Vista , Windows 7 ) and a server edition ( Server 2008 ) .
The client edition contains , well , clients ; the server edition contains servers .
This is probably where you got the idea that NIS and NFS servers are no longer supported : they are , but only in the server edition of SUA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's Subsystem for Unix-based Applications.
There are two editions: a client edition (Vista, Windows 7) and a server edition (Server 2008).
The client edition contains, well, clients; the server edition contains servers.
This is probably where you got the idea that NIS and NFS servers are no longer supported: they are, but only in the server edition of SUA.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549280</id>
	<title>makes windows marginally bearable</title>
	<author>pydev</author>
	<datestamp>1261678200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Even after all these years, Microsoft has nothing equivalent to the UNIX command line.  The standard cmd.exe is too limited, and Powershell isn't a good interactive shell, it's more like typing at a Python or Ruby interpreter.  Cygwin makes doing anything on Windows marginally tolerable and I install it on any Windows machine I happen to use.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Even after all these years , Microsoft has nothing equivalent to the UNIX command line .
The standard cmd.exe is too limited , and Powershell is n't a good interactive shell , it 's more like typing at a Python or Ruby interpreter .
Cygwin makes doing anything on Windows marginally tolerable and I install it on any Windows machine I happen to use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even after all these years, Microsoft has nothing equivalent to the UNIX command line.
The standard cmd.exe is too limited, and Powershell isn't a good interactive shell, it's more like typing at a Python or Ruby interpreter.
Cygwin makes doing anything on Windows marginally tolerable and I install it on any Windows machine I happen to use.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549792</id>
	<title>oh bollox - he uses amazon these days</title>
	<author>Barsteward</author>
	<datestamp>1261732800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>so his work load will be smaller and more manageable, and there are rumours that he's been  cloned</htmltext>
<tokenext>so his work load will be smaller and more manageable , and there are rumours that he 's been cloned</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so his work load will be smaller and more manageable, and there are rumours that he's been  cloned</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549614</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30552658</id>
	<title>Re:Does this do something SFU doesn't?</title>
	<author>higuita</author>
	<datestamp>1261736400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and it works like sh*t...</p><p>i used it to have nfs from a linux server and worked by several months... then one day the nfs stop worked...all others unix servers could work with the nfs, only the SFU one stop working...</p><p>after 2 days trying to debug and solve the problem, openned a service request at microsoft. 2 weeks later and after several tests, reinstalls, reboots and such still didnt work.</p><p>the MS support were always saying that they had little experience with SFU, that no one used it, etc, etc</p><p>i finally gave up and workaround with a samba server exporting a nfs share... ugly, but at least works</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and it works like sh * t...i used it to have nfs from a linux server and worked by several months... then one day the nfs stop worked...all others unix servers could work with the nfs , only the SFU one stop working...after 2 days trying to debug and solve the problem , openned a service request at microsoft .
2 weeks later and after several tests , reinstalls , reboots and such still didnt work.the MS support were always saying that they had little experience with SFU , that no one used it , etc , etci finally gave up and workaround with a samba server exporting a nfs share... ugly , but at least works</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and it works like sh*t...i used it to have nfs from a linux server and worked by several months... then one day the nfs stop worked...all others unix servers could work with the nfs, only the SFU one stop working...after 2 days trying to debug and solve the problem, openned a service request at microsoft.
2 weeks later and after several tests, reinstalls, reboots and such still didnt work.the MS support were always saying that they had little experience with SFU, that no one used it, etc, etci finally gave up and workaround with a samba server exporting a nfs share... ugly, but at least works</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549424</id>
	<title>So, it there an app...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261680420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...that can make Cygwin look and feel like Windows? I prefer the Windows look and feel instead.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...that can make Cygwin look and feel like Windows ?
I prefer the Windows look and feel instead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...that can make Cygwin look and feel like Windows?
I prefer the Windows look and feel instead.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549270</id>
	<title>Does this do something SFU doesn't?</title>
	<author>SanityInAnarchy</author>
	<datestamp>1261678020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Windows has had a POSIX layer of its own for awhile now, as "Services for Unix".</p><p>On the lighter-weight end, mingw can give you the basics, and they usually run much faster (even bash!) than Cygwin did. Maybe Cygwin is better now, it's just that I don't really see what it has over, well, any other way of running POSIX apps on Windows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows has had a POSIX layer of its own for awhile now , as " Services for Unix " .On the lighter-weight end , mingw can give you the basics , and they usually run much faster ( even bash !
) than Cygwin did .
Maybe Cygwin is better now , it 's just that I do n't really see what it has over , well , any other way of running POSIX apps on Windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows has had a POSIX layer of its own for awhile now, as "Services for Unix".On the lighter-weight end, mingw can give you the basics, and they usually run much faster (even bash!
) than Cygwin did.
Maybe Cygwin is better now, it's just that I don't really see what it has over, well, any other way of running POSIX apps on Windows.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549414</id>
	<title>Re:Do we finally have unicode support?</title>
	<author>dj\_tla</author>
	<datestamp>1261680180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the <a href="http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-announce/2009-12/msg00027.html" title="cygwin.com">1.7 release announcement</a> [cygwin.com]:</p><p>- Default character set is now UTF-8, but other character sets are supported via an improved internationalization support.</p><p>Full of <a href="http://cygwin.com/cygwin-ug-net/ov-new1.7.html" title="cygwin.com">what's new / changed</a> [cygwin.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From the 1.7 release announcement [ cygwin.com ] : - Default character set is now UTF-8 , but other character sets are supported via an improved internationalization support.Full of what 's new / changed [ cygwin.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the 1.7 release announcement [cygwin.com]:- Default character set is now UTF-8, but other character sets are supported via an improved internationalization support.Full of what's new / changed [cygwin.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30552692</id>
	<title>Re:makes windows marginally bearable</title>
	<author>fm6</author>
	<datestamp>1261736700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not a Mac guy, but I seem to recall that Apple never provided a command line either. The one they have now came for free when they switched to using NextStep OS, which got it for free from the Mach OS, which got it for free from BSD.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not a Mac guy , but I seem to recall that Apple never provided a command line either .
The one they have now came for free when they switched to using NextStep OS , which got it for free from the Mach OS , which got it for free from BSD .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not a Mac guy, but I seem to recall that Apple never provided a command line either.
The one they have now came for free when they switched to using NextStep OS, which got it for free from the Mach OS, which got it for free from BSD.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549280</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549756</id>
	<title>Re:makes windows marginally bearable</title>
	<author>RAMMS+EIN</author>
	<datestamp>1261732020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I just can't see any reason myself or an average Windows user would need a UNIX command line on their Windows computer. In fact, I think the whole point of Windows is to get away from the command line.</p></div><p>I don't see it that way. I don't see a point in getting away from the command line. Some things are most easily or quickly done or explained with the command line, just as other things are most easily or quickly done or explained using windows, icons, menus and a pointer. It's good to have good support for both in your system.</p><p>The way I see it, the point of Windows, from a customer's perspective, is to run Windows applications. That is the one thing Windows does better than any other operating system out there.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I just ca n't see any reason myself or an average Windows user would need a UNIX command line on their Windows computer .
In fact , I think the whole point of Windows is to get away from the command line.I do n't see it that way .
I do n't see a point in getting away from the command line .
Some things are most easily or quickly done or explained with the command line , just as other things are most easily or quickly done or explained using windows , icons , menus and a pointer .
It 's good to have good support for both in your system.The way I see it , the point of Windows , from a customer 's perspective , is to run Windows applications .
That is the one thing Windows does better than any other operating system out there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just can't see any reason myself or an average Windows user would need a UNIX command line on their Windows computer.
In fact, I think the whole point of Windows is to get away from the command line.I don't see it that way.
I don't see a point in getting away from the command line.
Some things are most easily or quickly done or explained with the command line, just as other things are most easily or quickly done or explained using windows, icons, menus and a pointer.
It's good to have good support for both in your system.The way I see it, the point of Windows, from a customer's perspective, is to run Windows applications.
That is the one thing Windows does better than any other operating system out there.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549952</id>
	<title>Re:I was never really impressed</title>
	<author>onefriedrice</author>
	<datestamp>1261735680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>so that I could have a Unix-ish environment without having to worry about power management or weird wifi issues that I'd had with Fedora, CentOS, Ubuntu, Slackware, ZenWalk, Mint, FreeBSD, OpenBSD and PC-BSD...</p></div><p>No, I'm sorry.  The correct answer is "BeOS."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>so that I could have a Unix-ish environment without having to worry about power management or weird wifi issues that I 'd had with Fedora , CentOS , Ubuntu , Slackware , ZenWalk , Mint , FreeBSD , OpenBSD and PC-BSD...No , I 'm sorry .
The correct answer is " BeOS .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so that I could have a Unix-ish environment without having to worry about power management or weird wifi issues that I'd had with Fedora, CentOS, Ubuntu, Slackware, ZenWalk, Mint, FreeBSD, OpenBSD and PC-BSD...No, I'm sorry.
The correct answer is "BeOS.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550140</id>
	<title>Re:makes windows marginally bearable</title>
	<author>selven</author>
	<datestamp>1261741140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's with all this hatred of the command line? The command line is an interface, just like the graphical one, and it is a very powerful interface that can do things GUIs will never do (how do you even try to make a full (not just if x in the line sub y with z) GUI for sed without making it a textbox?)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's with all this hatred of the command line ?
The command line is an interface , just like the graphical one , and it is a very powerful interface that can do things GUIs will never do ( how do you even try to make a full ( not just if x in the line sub y with z ) GUI for sed without making it a textbox ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's with all this hatred of the command line?
The command line is an interface, just like the graphical one, and it is a very powerful interface that can do things GUIs will never do (how do you even try to make a full (not just if x in the line sub y with z) GUI for sed without making it a textbox?
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30552792</id>
	<title>Re:Recommended alternative terminal program?</title>
	<author>linuxguy</author>
	<datestamp>1261738140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>puttycyg</p><p><a href="http://code.google.com/p/puttycyg/" title="google.com">http://code.google.com/p/puttycyg/</a> [google.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>puttycyghttp : //code.google.com/p/puttycyg/ [ google.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>puttycyghttp://code.google.com/p/puttycyg/ [google.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30551086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30557552</id>
	<title>Microsoft may not, but 4NT has been around forever</title>
	<author>ClintJCL</author>
	<datestamp>1261858860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Except it was called 4DOS back in the 90s, and NDOS back in the 80s. It's a command-line that has seen over 20 yrs of development. It may be no bash, but in conjunction with cygwin, I can do a great deal of things that unix people can do on my windows machine. Which is my main reason for sticking with windows -- don't want to re-write my 1000+ scripts.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Except it was called 4DOS back in the 90s , and NDOS back in the 80s .
It 's a command-line that has seen over 20 yrs of development .
It may be no bash , but in conjunction with cygwin , I can do a great deal of things that unix people can do on my windows machine .
Which is my main reason for sticking with windows -- do n't want to re-write my 1000 + scripts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except it was called 4DOS back in the 90s, and NDOS back in the 80s.
It's a command-line that has seen over 20 yrs of development.
It may be no bash, but in conjunction with cygwin, I can do a great deal of things that unix people can do on my windows machine.
Which is my main reason for sticking with windows -- don't want to re-write my 1000+ scripts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549280</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30554582</id>
	<title>Re:makes windows marginally bearable</title>
	<author>IICV</author>
	<datestamp>1261857720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A real life example: someone at work asked me to get a list of all the files in a certain directory whose names contained the word "change". That was just "find -iname "change"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>./". How would you do that in Windows?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A real life example : someone at work asked me to get a list of all the files in a certain directory whose names contained the word " change " .
That was just " find -iname " change " ./ " .
How would you do that in Windows ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A real life example: someone at work asked me to get a list of all the files in a certain directory whose names contained the word "change".
That was just "find -iname "change" ./".
How would you do that in Windows?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549956</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550056</id>
	<title>Re:I wonder if Cygwin really has much of a future</title>
	<author>junglee\_iitk</author>
	<datestamp>1261738320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Running vim under xterm is awesome. And without using 1 thousand fifteen zillion megabyte of memory to run andLinux...</p><p>I have tried almost everything and always come back to cygwin. Virtualbox takes care of the remote cases.</p><p>Personally, I am not too excited about v1.7, since I had pretty bad experiences with the beta as late as 2-3 months ago.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Running vim under xterm is awesome .
And without using 1 thousand fifteen zillion megabyte of memory to run andLinux...I have tried almost everything and always come back to cygwin .
Virtualbox takes care of the remote cases.Personally , I am not too excited about v1.7 , since I had pretty bad experiences with the beta as late as 2-3 months ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Running vim under xterm is awesome.
And without using 1 thousand fifteen zillion megabyte of memory to run andLinux...I have tried almost everything and always come back to cygwin.
Virtualbox takes care of the remote cases.Personally, I am not too excited about v1.7, since I had pretty bad experiences with the beta as late as 2-3 months ago.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549358</id>
	<title>search!</title>
	<author>spongman</author>
	<datestamp>1261679460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>love the search feature in setup.exe !! long overdue, but welcome nonetheless.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>love the search feature in setup.exe ! !
long overdue , but welcome nonetheless .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>love the search feature in setup.exe !!
long overdue, but welcome nonetheless.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549578
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549580
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549264
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30556992
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549576
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549394
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549742
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549264
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549478
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30563260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549280
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549280
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30554060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549716
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549280
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30551862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549252
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549952
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549472
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30554582
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549280
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30566494
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550724
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549872
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549280
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549640
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549280
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549472
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30551350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549384
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549414
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549622
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30557552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549280
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549472
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549788
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549472
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30551836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549280
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30559856
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549668
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549280
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549264
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549756
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549280
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30558854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549280
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550162
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549280
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30551460
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549280
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550680
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549252
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30552150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30551086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30552658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550140
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549280
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549384
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549384
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549314
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30552692
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549280
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30558072
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550724
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_228237_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30552792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30551086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_228237.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549358
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_228237.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549252
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549552
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550680
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30551862
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_228237.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549370
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549394
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549576
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_228237.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549330
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549414
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549454
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549622
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_228237.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549280
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550062
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30552692
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30558854
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549514
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550140
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549956
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30563260
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30554582
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549756
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549640
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549712
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30551836
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30557552
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549716
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30554060
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550162
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549872
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30551460
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_228237.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549472
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549844
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550584
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550270
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549788
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549952
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_228237.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549264
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549580
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549742
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549614
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549792
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_228237.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30551086
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30552150
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30552792
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_228237.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549270
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549578
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550946
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549478
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549668
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30559856
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549384
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550208
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549456
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549480
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30551350
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549406
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30552658
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549314
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_228237.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549424
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_228237.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30549490
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550724
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30566494
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30558072
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30550056
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_228237.30556992
</commentlist>
</conversation>
