<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_27_2222202</id>
	<title>What's Happened In Mobile Over the Past 10 Years</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1261910340000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>andylim writes <i>"recombu.com has an article examining <a href="http://recombu.com/news/decade-of-mobile-from-the-first-camera-phone-to-the-iphone-3gs\_M11271.html">what's happened in mobile over the past ten years</a>, including BlackBerry launching its first smart phone in 2002, Motorola launching the Razr in 2004 and Apple launching the iPhone in 2007. As a commenter points out, the first camera phone (Sharp J-SH04), which was released in 2000, featured a 110,000-pixel (0.11MP) CMOS image sensor, and a 256-colour (8 bit) display."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>andylim writes " recombu.com has an article examining what 's happened in mobile over the past ten years , including BlackBerry launching its first smart phone in 2002 , Motorola launching the Razr in 2004 and Apple launching the iPhone in 2007 .
As a commenter points out , the first camera phone ( Sharp J-SH04 ) , which was released in 2000 , featured a 110,000-pixel ( 0.11MP ) CMOS image sensor , and a 256-colour ( 8 bit ) display .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>andylim writes "recombu.com has an article examining what's happened in mobile over the past ten years, including BlackBerry launching its first smart phone in 2002, Motorola launching the Razr in 2004 and Apple launching the iPhone in 2007.
As a commenter points out, the first camera phone (Sharp J-SH04), which was released in 2000, featured a 110,000-pixel (0.11MP) CMOS image sensor, and a 256-colour (8 bit) display.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567204</id>
	<title>Re:The inevitable Slashdot response...</title>
	<author>Penguin Programmer</author>
	<datestamp>1261922700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The slashdot crowd sits in front of a computer.  All day.  Every day.  Why have a phone that does stuff other than making calls when you have a computer in front of you all the time?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The slashdot crowd sits in front of a computer .
All day .
Every day .
Why have a phone that does stuff other than making calls when you have a computer in front of you all the time ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The slashdot crowd sits in front of a computer.
All day.
Every day.
Why have a phone that does stuff other than making calls when you have a computer in front of you all the time?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566686</id>
	<title>Still haven't sold me</title>
	<author>Sporkinum</author>
	<datestamp>1261918320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They still haven't sold me on needing one. I have a work phone, and if I lost use of it tomorrow, I doubt I would replace it. Possibly with the cheapest prepaid phone service I could find if it was guaranteed to work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They still have n't sold me on needing one .
I have a work phone , and if I lost use of it tomorrow , I doubt I would replace it .
Possibly with the cheapest prepaid phone service I could find if it was guaranteed to work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They still haven't sold me on needing one.
I have a work phone, and if I lost use of it tomorrow, I doubt I would replace it.
Possibly with the cheapest prepaid phone service I could find if it was guaranteed to work.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567476</id>
	<title>Re:The inevitable Slashdot response...</title>
	<author>AbRASiON</author>
	<datestamp>1261925220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We may be geeks with PC's and gadgets but the issues with smartphones are excess physical size, weight, cost and so on.<br>I bet most people saying they don't want a camera on their phone have a 'proper' camera - hence the comments.<br>For many many years I didn't want a damn camera on my phone, they weren't worth a crap. Then I got an iphone 3G - still kinda crap, upgraded to a 3GS and now I finally have a camera which is at least 'acceptable' and doesn't protrude from the rear, making it<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.5 -&gt; 2mm thicker, unlike many other phones.</p><p>Some<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.'ers probably have a good mp3 player too and don't need mp3 playback - they just want a good, reliable, high quality phone with good signal strength and long battery life. Frankly I don't know where to turn anymore if I wanted such a thing, I don't know if it exists anymore.</p><p>I mean I am happy with my iphone but I went from a 7 year old Sony Ericsson T-630 to an iphone, I skipped many many phones to do this, there was a lot of crap inbetween, that's likely what they are referring to.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We may be geeks with PC 's and gadgets but the issues with smartphones are excess physical size , weight , cost and so on.I bet most people saying they do n't want a camera on their phone have a 'proper ' camera - hence the comments.For many many years I did n't want a damn camera on my phone , they were n't worth a crap .
Then I got an iphone 3G - still kinda crap , upgraded to a 3GS and now I finally have a camera which is at least 'acceptable ' and does n't protrude from the rear , making it .5 - &gt; 2mm thicker , unlike many other phones.Some / .
'ers probably have a good mp3 player too and do n't need mp3 playback - they just want a good , reliable , high quality phone with good signal strength and long battery life .
Frankly I do n't know where to turn anymore if I wanted such a thing , I do n't know if it exists anymore.I mean I am happy with my iphone but I went from a 7 year old Sony Ericsson T-630 to an iphone , I skipped many many phones to do this , there was a lot of crap inbetween , that 's likely what they are referring to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We may be geeks with PC's and gadgets but the issues with smartphones are excess physical size, weight, cost and so on.I bet most people saying they don't want a camera on their phone have a 'proper' camera - hence the comments.For many many years I didn't want a damn camera on my phone, they weren't worth a crap.
Then I got an iphone 3G - still kinda crap, upgraded to a 3GS and now I finally have a camera which is at least 'acceptable' and doesn't protrude from the rear, making it .5 -&gt; 2mm thicker, unlike many other phones.Some /.
'ers probably have a good mp3 player too and don't need mp3 playback - they just want a good, reliable, high quality phone with good signal strength and long battery life.
Frankly I don't know where to turn anymore if I wanted such a thing, I don't know if it exists anymore.I mean I am happy with my iphone but I went from a 7 year old Sony Ericsson T-630 to an iphone, I skipped many many phones to do this, there was a lot of crap inbetween, that's likely what they are referring to.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567502</id>
	<title>Re:The inevitable Slashdot response...</title>
	<author>Just Some Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1261925340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>'All I want is a phone that makes calls.'</p></div><p>That kind of mirrors the Unix philosophy: do one thing and do it well. Are you surprised to hear that sentiment on Slashdot? Like others have mentioned, until recently, multi-function cell phones pretty well sucked at everything. Even if I never get an iPhone, I'm glad that they elevated the public's expectation of how a cell phone should work. Contrast with my old RAZR where the browser was a complete freakin' joke and all the extra half-assed features only served to clutter up the menus so that it was harder to get to the stuff I actually wanted to use.</p><p>Even today, a top-of-the-line phone is much worse than a decent netbook for many things. If I already have my music and pictures on the netbook in my bag, why duplicate so much of the functionality (poorly) on my phone?</p><p>I'm not a Luddite, and the iPhone and Droid are looking pretty attractive. I can definitely understand the "just a phone" sentiment, though, and it has nothing to do with a fear of technology.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>'All I want is a phone that makes calls .
'That kind of mirrors the Unix philosophy : do one thing and do it well .
Are you surprised to hear that sentiment on Slashdot ?
Like others have mentioned , until recently , multi-function cell phones pretty well sucked at everything .
Even if I never get an iPhone , I 'm glad that they elevated the public 's expectation of how a cell phone should work .
Contrast with my old RAZR where the browser was a complete freakin ' joke and all the extra half-assed features only served to clutter up the menus so that it was harder to get to the stuff I actually wanted to use.Even today , a top-of-the-line phone is much worse than a decent netbook for many things .
If I already have my music and pictures on the netbook in my bag , why duplicate so much of the functionality ( poorly ) on my phone ? I 'm not a Luddite , and the iPhone and Droid are looking pretty attractive .
I can definitely understand the " just a phone " sentiment , though , and it has nothing to do with a fear of technology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'All I want is a phone that makes calls.
'That kind of mirrors the Unix philosophy: do one thing and do it well.
Are you surprised to hear that sentiment on Slashdot?
Like others have mentioned, until recently, multi-function cell phones pretty well sucked at everything.
Even if I never get an iPhone, I'm glad that they elevated the public's expectation of how a cell phone should work.
Contrast with my old RAZR where the browser was a complete freakin' joke and all the extra half-assed features only served to clutter up the menus so that it was harder to get to the stuff I actually wanted to use.Even today, a top-of-the-line phone is much worse than a decent netbook for many things.
If I already have my music and pictures on the netbook in my bag, why duplicate so much of the functionality (poorly) on my phone?I'm not a Luddite, and the iPhone and Droid are looking pretty attractive.
I can definitely understand the "just a phone" sentiment, though, and it has nothing to do with a fear of technology.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30570446</id>
	<title>Re:The inevitable Slashdot response...</title>
	<author>Inda</author>
	<datestamp>1262011860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And all those posts just show that people are uneducated and market driven sheep. Cheap phones that only make calls have always been available.<br><br>http://direct.tesco.com/q/R.207-4006.aspx</htmltext>
<tokenext>And all those posts just show that people are uneducated and market driven sheep .
Cheap phones that only make calls have always been available.http : //direct.tesco.com/q/R.207-4006.aspx</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And all those posts just show that people are uneducated and market driven sheep.
Cheap phones that only make calls have always been available.http://direct.tesco.com/q/R.207-4006.aspx</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566540</id>
	<title>Re:In other news...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261917060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, the nice thing about mobile technologies is that they've got a relatively low infrastructure cost compared to wired technologies. The spiderweb of cable needed is significantly less dense, and it can piggy-back on existing data telcom lines.</p><p>Cellular tech also benefited in much of the world because they didn't have the initial 'heavy' cellular infrastructure to contend with - the legacy analog cellular crap. They also had fiber optics at their disposal, making the line cost significantly lower if anything did need to be laid.</p><p>And most countries, particularly much of the European ones, have the advantage of having higher population density and smaller area. Even in countries like Albania (which I doubt has much for any connectivity) getting the whole country covered with modern data cellular would be much easier.</p><p>Even still, it's possible to get a cellular connection of one sort or another pretty much anywhere in the US. I'm in one of the least sparsely covered parts of the US (from all carriers), which also happens to be one of the least populated. I can be tens of miles from the nearest person (forgive the hyperbole, but 1+ miles) or 30+ miles from the nearest town over 500 people and still get an SMS (or maybe a phone call) out. That's impressive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , the nice thing about mobile technologies is that they 've got a relatively low infrastructure cost compared to wired technologies .
The spiderweb of cable needed is significantly less dense , and it can piggy-back on existing data telcom lines.Cellular tech also benefited in much of the world because they did n't have the initial 'heavy ' cellular infrastructure to contend with - the legacy analog cellular crap .
They also had fiber optics at their disposal , making the line cost significantly lower if anything did need to be laid.And most countries , particularly much of the European ones , have the advantage of having higher population density and smaller area .
Even in countries like Albania ( which I doubt has much for any connectivity ) getting the whole country covered with modern data cellular would be much easier.Even still , it 's possible to get a cellular connection of one sort or another pretty much anywhere in the US .
I 'm in one of the least sparsely covered parts of the US ( from all carriers ) , which also happens to be one of the least populated .
I can be tens of miles from the nearest person ( forgive the hyperbole , but 1 + miles ) or 30 + miles from the nearest town over 500 people and still get an SMS ( or maybe a phone call ) out .
That 's impressive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, the nice thing about mobile technologies is that they've got a relatively low infrastructure cost compared to wired technologies.
The spiderweb of cable needed is significantly less dense, and it can piggy-back on existing data telcom lines.Cellular tech also benefited in much of the world because they didn't have the initial 'heavy' cellular infrastructure to contend with - the legacy analog cellular crap.
They also had fiber optics at their disposal, making the line cost significantly lower if anything did need to be laid.And most countries, particularly much of the European ones, have the advantage of having higher population density and smaller area.
Even in countries like Albania (which I doubt has much for any connectivity) getting the whole country covered with modern data cellular would be much easier.Even still, it's possible to get a cellular connection of one sort or another pretty much anywhere in the US.
I'm in one of the least sparsely covered parts of the US (from all carriers), which also happens to be one of the least populated.
I can be tens of miles from the nearest person (forgive the hyperbole, but 1+ miles) or 30+ miles from the nearest town over 500 people and still get an SMS (or maybe a phone call) out.
That's impressive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566406</id>
	<title>Re:Smartphones and Flip Format</title>
	<author>Ethanol-fueled</author>
	<datestamp>1261915860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Flip phones == more fragile moving parts for hinges and flip sensors or extra LCD on outer clamshell == break in two if dropped while open. Kind of a hassle when you open your phone and it dosen't even know it's open. Meanwhile my ugly slab has a cracked screen but is otherwise fully serviceable and will stay that way for the forseeable future.<br> <br>

Agree with you 100\% on the battery life issue, though.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Flip phones = = more fragile moving parts for hinges and flip sensors or extra LCD on outer clamshell = = break in two if dropped while open .
Kind of a hassle when you open your phone and it dose n't even know it 's open .
Meanwhile my ugly slab has a cracked screen but is otherwise fully serviceable and will stay that way for the forseeable future .
Agree with you 100 \ % on the battery life issue , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Flip phones == more fragile moving parts for hinges and flip sensors or extra LCD on outer clamshell == break in two if dropped while open.
Kind of a hassle when you open your phone and it dosen't even know it's open.
Meanwhile my ugly slab has a cracked screen but is otherwise fully serviceable and will stay that way for the forseeable future.
Agree with you 100\% on the battery life issue, though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566286</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567006</id>
	<title>Re:Nokia N9000.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261920900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Interesting isn't it. I have been a fone geek since my my first in the trunk 3 watt analog radio shack branded Car phone. I have had at least one of every important cell phone as technology advanced. I never (before the N900) had one that would truly free me from a laptop.</p><p>The N900 IS the most advanced (mobile computer that also has cell and viop phone functions) of the decade.</p><p>I really do not understand why I am not seeing more about it.</p><p>The reviews I do see are done by iPhone fanbois that can't get past the capacitive screen multi-touch which is not all that great for everything.</p><p>I have chatted with many N900 users that after a month or so, are still finding new things.</p><p>And, the N900 has one thing you can't find any where else. Real freedom.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/rant off</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Interesting is n't it .
I have been a fone geek since my my first in the trunk 3 watt analog radio shack branded Car phone .
I have had at least one of every important cell phone as technology advanced .
I never ( before the N900 ) had one that would truly free me from a laptop.The N900 IS the most advanced ( mobile computer that also has cell and viop phone functions ) of the decade.I really do not understand why I am not seeing more about it.The reviews I do see are done by iPhone fanbois that ca n't get past the capacitive screen multi-touch which is not all that great for everything.I have chatted with many N900 users that after a month or so , are still finding new things.And , the N900 has one thing you ca n't find any where else .
Real freedom .
/rant off</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interesting isn't it.
I have been a fone geek since my my first in the trunk 3 watt analog radio shack branded Car phone.
I have had at least one of every important cell phone as technology advanced.
I never (before the N900) had one that would truly free me from a laptop.The N900 IS the most advanced (mobile computer that also has cell and viop phone functions) of the decade.I really do not understand why I am not seeing more about it.The reviews I do see are done by iPhone fanbois that can't get past the capacitive screen multi-touch which is not all that great for everything.I have chatted with many N900 users that after a month or so, are still finding new things.And, the N900 has one thing you can't find any where else.
Real freedom.
/rant off</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566578</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568646</id>
	<title>Re:The inevitable Slashdot response...</title>
	<author>thePsychologist</author>
	<datestamp>1261940760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Before the very recent N900 and some other fringe phones, mobile phones were like Windows, only worse: locked and you really can't do anything with them, and half the features cost an arm and a leg when they should be free. Hence, most people don't want them. Imagine if all phones were unlocked, texts, caller ID, and other features which don't cost the phone company any money were free. I think phones would have more positive rep then.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Before the very recent N900 and some other fringe phones , mobile phones were like Windows , only worse : locked and you really ca n't do anything with them , and half the features cost an arm and a leg when they should be free .
Hence , most people do n't want them .
Imagine if all phones were unlocked , texts , caller ID , and other features which do n't cost the phone company any money were free .
I think phones would have more positive rep then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Before the very recent N900 and some other fringe phones, mobile phones were like Windows, only worse: locked and you really can't do anything with them, and half the features cost an arm and a leg when they should be free.
Hence, most people don't want them.
Imagine if all phones were unlocked, texts, caller ID, and other features which don't cost the phone company any money were free.
I think phones would have more positive rep then.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568370</id>
	<title>Re:In other news...</title>
	<author>jonwil</author>
	<datestamp>1261936320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here in Australia, I have relatives on a sheep station half a days drive away from the nearest town and they can get a stable HSPA data connection through Telstra NextG (with an external antenna) and if they stand in the right place, they can even get a call out with a NextG handset.</p><p>If Telstra can get service to somewhere with so little population density, there is NO excuse for the poor state of cellular service in the US.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here in Australia , I have relatives on a sheep station half a days drive away from the nearest town and they can get a stable HSPA data connection through Telstra NextG ( with an external antenna ) and if they stand in the right place , they can even get a call out with a NextG handset.If Telstra can get service to somewhere with so little population density , there is NO excuse for the poor state of cellular service in the US .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here in Australia, I have relatives on a sheep station half a days drive away from the nearest town and they can get a stable HSPA data connection through Telstra NextG (with an external antenna) and if they stand in the right place, they can even get a call out with a NextG handset.If Telstra can get service to somewhere with so little population density, there is NO excuse for the poor state of cellular service in the US.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30570126</id>
	<title>Re:The inevitable Slashdot response...</title>
	<author>ShakaUVM</author>
	<datestamp>1262009700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>'All I want is a phone that makes calls.'</p><p>I've never quite got my head around a tech site like Slashdot, where the demographic is almost certainly interested in new technology having such a negative response to technological advances in what our phones can do. You rarely [never?] hear this with other technology on this site:</p><p>'I wish Windows 7 had less features. All I want is the ability to write a letter'</p></div></blockquote><p>I have a Droid, and while I love it (it's actually quite nice), it's a worse phone than my old flip phone. The dialpad isn't accessible, and the face recognition engine (which turns off the screen when an object is near it) means that I time out when going through tech support hell because while it's good at turning off the screen, it sucks at waking back up. I also had close to 20 speed dial settings on my flip phone. On the Droid, the closest you can do is set shortcuts to dial people, which means using up screen real estate, and/or having to flip to the left home screen where I keep all my shortcuts (less than 20, that's for sure) and risking accidentally dialing someone when it interprets a drag as a click. Which happened today, actually.</p><p>Long story short, mobile phones actually are better phones than smartphones. It just comes with the territory. I got a smartphone because I actually need one for my job (I run a small company, and am on the road all the time), not because I thought it's be a good <i>phone</i>.</p><p>As far as Windows 7, yeah I wish it had less features. If it had the XP UI (which you can't enable entirely, only some parts of it) on top of the Win7 internals, I'd buy it. As it is, I'm sticking with XP until something compels me out of it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>'All I want is a phone that makes calls .
'I 've never quite got my head around a tech site like Slashdot , where the demographic is almost certainly interested in new technology having such a negative response to technological advances in what our phones can do .
You rarely [ never ?
] hear this with other technology on this site : 'I wish Windows 7 had less features .
All I want is the ability to write a letter'I have a Droid , and while I love it ( it 's actually quite nice ) , it 's a worse phone than my old flip phone .
The dialpad is n't accessible , and the face recognition engine ( which turns off the screen when an object is near it ) means that I time out when going through tech support hell because while it 's good at turning off the screen , it sucks at waking back up .
I also had close to 20 speed dial settings on my flip phone .
On the Droid , the closest you can do is set shortcuts to dial people , which means using up screen real estate , and/or having to flip to the left home screen where I keep all my shortcuts ( less than 20 , that 's for sure ) and risking accidentally dialing someone when it interprets a drag as a click .
Which happened today , actually.Long story short , mobile phones actually are better phones than smartphones .
It just comes with the territory .
I got a smartphone because I actually need one for my job ( I run a small company , and am on the road all the time ) , not because I thought it 's be a good phone.As far as Windows 7 , yeah I wish it had less features .
If it had the XP UI ( which you ca n't enable entirely , only some parts of it ) on top of the Win7 internals , I 'd buy it .
As it is , I 'm sticking with XP until something compels me out of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'All I want is a phone that makes calls.
'I've never quite got my head around a tech site like Slashdot, where the demographic is almost certainly interested in new technology having such a negative response to technological advances in what our phones can do.
You rarely [never?
] hear this with other technology on this site:'I wish Windows 7 had less features.
All I want is the ability to write a letter'I have a Droid, and while I love it (it's actually quite nice), it's a worse phone than my old flip phone.
The dialpad isn't accessible, and the face recognition engine (which turns off the screen when an object is near it) means that I time out when going through tech support hell because while it's good at turning off the screen, it sucks at waking back up.
I also had close to 20 speed dial settings on my flip phone.
On the Droid, the closest you can do is set shortcuts to dial people, which means using up screen real estate, and/or having to flip to the left home screen where I keep all my shortcuts (less than 20, that's for sure) and risking accidentally dialing someone when it interprets a drag as a click.
Which happened today, actually.Long story short, mobile phones actually are better phones than smartphones.
It just comes with the territory.
I got a smartphone because I actually need one for my job (I run a small company, and am on the road all the time), not because I thought it's be a good phone.As far as Windows 7, yeah I wish it had less features.
If it had the XP UI (which you can't enable entirely, only some parts of it) on top of the Win7 internals, I'd buy it.
As it is, I'm sticking with XP until something compels me out of it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567892</id>
	<title>Re:Don't underestimate the difficulty involved</title>
	<author>Darkness404</author>
	<datestamp>1261929480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think the main problem is the fact that there is nearly no real competition among the big cell phone providers. Look at AT&amp;T, yeah, they are willing to do smear ad campaigns against Verizon and Verizon is willing to do the same to AT&amp;T yet both seem more hell-bent to screw their customers more than actually change anything. Verizon seems to insist on castrating their phones, yeah, things have gotten better, yeah, they got the Droid which is perhaps one of the best phones of the year and one of the most open phones, but at the same time they screw their BlackBerry customers by trying to integrate Bing in there rather than whatever search provider the customer wants ( see <a href="http://jkontherun.com/2009/12/17/verizon-bing-make-google-go-boom-on-blackberry/" title="jkontherun.com">http://jkontherun.com/2009/12/17/verizon-bing-make-google-go-boom-on-blackberry/</a> [jkontherun.com] ) <br> <br>

If a single telecom could get A) Amazing coverage B) Fast networks C) Good phones D) Openness it would be great. But instead we get AT&amp;T the overpriced carrier with good coverage, a fast 3G network and decent phones. Verizon, another overpriced network with good coverage, a -huge- 3G network, and phones that are castrated. T-Mobile which has good support (look at how they supported unlocked iPhones <a href="http://www.ismashphone.com/2009/05/tmobile-tech-support-hearts-unlocked-iphones.html" title="ismashphone.com">http://www.ismashphone.com/2009/05/tmobile-tech-support-hearts-unlocked-iphones.html</a> [ismashphone.com] ), open phones, but has a tiny 3G network and generally spotty coverage. And Sprint which is nice and cheap and has unlimited plans, has decent phones, but coverage just isn't quite there yet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the main problem is the fact that there is nearly no real competition among the big cell phone providers .
Look at AT&amp;T , yeah , they are willing to do smear ad campaigns against Verizon and Verizon is willing to do the same to AT&amp;T yet both seem more hell-bent to screw their customers more than actually change anything .
Verizon seems to insist on castrating their phones , yeah , things have gotten better , yeah , they got the Droid which is perhaps one of the best phones of the year and one of the most open phones , but at the same time they screw their BlackBerry customers by trying to integrate Bing in there rather than whatever search provider the customer wants ( see http : //jkontherun.com/2009/12/17/verizon-bing-make-google-go-boom-on-blackberry/ [ jkontherun.com ] ) If a single telecom could get A ) Amazing coverage B ) Fast networks C ) Good phones D ) Openness it would be great .
But instead we get AT&amp;T the overpriced carrier with good coverage , a fast 3G network and decent phones .
Verizon , another overpriced network with good coverage , a -huge- 3G network , and phones that are castrated .
T-Mobile which has good support ( look at how they supported unlocked iPhones http : //www.ismashphone.com/2009/05/tmobile-tech-support-hearts-unlocked-iphones.html [ ismashphone.com ] ) , open phones , but has a tiny 3G network and generally spotty coverage .
And Sprint which is nice and cheap and has unlimited plans , has decent phones , but coverage just is n't quite there yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the main problem is the fact that there is nearly no real competition among the big cell phone providers.
Look at AT&amp;T, yeah, they are willing to do smear ad campaigns against Verizon and Verizon is willing to do the same to AT&amp;T yet both seem more hell-bent to screw their customers more than actually change anything.
Verizon seems to insist on castrating their phones, yeah, things have gotten better, yeah, they got the Droid which is perhaps one of the best phones of the year and one of the most open phones, but at the same time they screw their BlackBerry customers by trying to integrate Bing in there rather than whatever search provider the customer wants ( see http://jkontherun.com/2009/12/17/verizon-bing-make-google-go-boom-on-blackberry/ [jkontherun.com] )  

If a single telecom could get A) Amazing coverage B) Fast networks C) Good phones D) Openness it would be great.
But instead we get AT&amp;T the overpriced carrier with good coverage, a fast 3G network and decent phones.
Verizon, another overpriced network with good coverage, a -huge- 3G network, and phones that are castrated.
T-Mobile which has good support (look at how they supported unlocked iPhones http://www.ismashphone.com/2009/05/tmobile-tech-support-hearts-unlocked-iphones.html [ismashphone.com] ), open phones, but has a tiny 3G network and generally spotty coverage.
And Sprint which is nice and cheap and has unlimited plans, has decent phones, but coverage just isn't quite there yet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566602</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566316</id>
	<title>Hmm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261915020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>An article? Hah. More like "ten bulletpoints that will take you a good 20-30 seconds to skim, but get us several ad impressions", including "insights" such as:<blockquote><div><p>2003 The Windows Mobile brand is launched with Windows Mobile 2003. Windows Mobile is widely used by businesses to do work on the move.</p></div></blockquote><p>Wow. Or:</p><blockquote><div><p>2005 Sony Ericsson launches a superb new camera phone called the K750i and a great music phone called the W800i. These two handsets establish Sony Ericsson as a serious consumer player.</p></div></blockquote><p>Awesome. Just awesome. If you think there's more depth than this, there's not. That is the sum total of the analysis of those two years.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>An article ?
Hah. More like " ten bulletpoints that will take you a good 20-30 seconds to skim , but get us several ad impressions " , including " insights " such as : 2003 The Windows Mobile brand is launched with Windows Mobile 2003 .
Windows Mobile is widely used by businesses to do work on the move.Wow .
Or : 2005 Sony Ericsson launches a superb new camera phone called the K750i and a great music phone called the W800i .
These two handsets establish Sony Ericsson as a serious consumer player.Awesome .
Just awesome .
If you think there 's more depth than this , there 's not .
That is the sum total of the analysis of those two years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An article?
Hah. More like "ten bulletpoints that will take you a good 20-30 seconds to skim, but get us several ad impressions", including "insights" such as:2003 The Windows Mobile brand is launched with Windows Mobile 2003.
Windows Mobile is widely used by businesses to do work on the move.Wow.
Or:2005 Sony Ericsson launches a superb new camera phone called the K750i and a great music phone called the W800i.
These two handsets establish Sony Ericsson as a serious consumer player.Awesome.
Just awesome.
If you think there's more depth than this, there's not.
That is the sum total of the analysis of those two years.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567734</id>
	<title>Wow, that's a big decade in Mobile...</title>
	<author>dontmakemethink</author>
	<datestamp>1261927800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's an amazing amount of developments for a small city in Alabama.</p><p>But I thought Blackberries were Canadian...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's an amazing amount of developments for a small city in Alabama.But I thought Blackberries were Canadian.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's an amazing amount of developments for a small city in Alabama.But I thought Blackberries were Canadian...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566602</id>
	<title>Don't underestimate the difficulty involved</title>
	<author>LockeOnLogic</author>
	<datestamp>1261917540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The holdbacks you mention are definitely true. But many of the comparisons made with other countries fail to point out just how huge a country america is. Covering that much area is quite a difficult task and involves greater expense. And it isn't just covering blank areas of the map between urban centers. Our cities also have tons of urban sprawl to make the job harder. Don't get me wrong, it's a task that can be accomplished if the telecoms stop their massive massive fail/theft. But the problem to overcome in the states is harder than europe/south korea/japan ect...</htmltext>
<tokenext>The holdbacks you mention are definitely true .
But many of the comparisons made with other countries fail to point out just how huge a country america is .
Covering that much area is quite a difficult task and involves greater expense .
And it is n't just covering blank areas of the map between urban centers .
Our cities also have tons of urban sprawl to make the job harder .
Do n't get me wrong , it 's a task that can be accomplished if the telecoms stop their massive massive fail/theft .
But the problem to overcome in the states is harder than europe/south korea/japan ect.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The holdbacks you mention are definitely true.
But many of the comparisons made with other countries fail to point out just how huge a country america is.
Covering that much area is quite a difficult task and involves greater expense.
And it isn't just covering blank areas of the map between urban centers.
Our cities also have tons of urban sprawl to make the job harder.
Don't get me wrong, it's a task that can be accomplished if the telecoms stop their massive massive fail/theft.
But the problem to overcome in the states is harder than europe/south korea/japan ect...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648</id>
	<title>The inevitable Slashdot response...</title>
	<author>jregel</author>
	<datestamp>1261918020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Whenever mobile phones are mentioned on Slashdot, something akin to the following comment will inevitably appear:</p><p>'All I want is a phone that makes calls.'</p><p>I've never quite got my head around a tech site like Slashdot, where the demographic is almost certainly interested in new technology having such a negative response to technological advances in what our phones can do.  You rarely [never?] hear this with other technology on this site:</p><p>'I wish Windows 7 had less features. All I want is the ability to write a letter'<br>'This 4Ghz Core 2 Due Hyperfighting Special Edition is too fast for me. I want a 68030 at 25Mhz'... instead we get 'Imagine a Beowulf cluster of...'</p><p>Is it because the non-techie crowd have embraced mobile tech, in some instances more than us (given that some teenagers seem to text more than they speak) and we've been out done? Are the non-techies better at mobile tech than us?</p><p>(Yes, I know that Slashdot doesn't speak with one voice, but I bet the comment appears somewhere in this article).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Whenever mobile phones are mentioned on Slashdot , something akin to the following comment will inevitably appear : 'All I want is a phone that makes calls .
'I 've never quite got my head around a tech site like Slashdot , where the demographic is almost certainly interested in new technology having such a negative response to technological advances in what our phones can do .
You rarely [ never ?
] hear this with other technology on this site : 'I wish Windows 7 had less features .
All I want is the ability to write a letter''This 4Ghz Core 2 Due Hyperfighting Special Edition is too fast for me .
I want a 68030 at 25Mhz'... instead we get 'Imagine a Beowulf cluster of...'Is it because the non-techie crowd have embraced mobile tech , in some instances more than us ( given that some teenagers seem to text more than they speak ) and we 've been out done ?
Are the non-techies better at mobile tech than us ?
( Yes , I know that Slashdot does n't speak with one voice , but I bet the comment appears somewhere in this article ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whenever mobile phones are mentioned on Slashdot, something akin to the following comment will inevitably appear:'All I want is a phone that makes calls.
'I've never quite got my head around a tech site like Slashdot, where the demographic is almost certainly interested in new technology having such a negative response to technological advances in what our phones can do.
You rarely [never?
] hear this with other technology on this site:'I wish Windows 7 had less features.
All I want is the ability to write a letter''This 4Ghz Core 2 Due Hyperfighting Special Edition is too fast for me.
I want a 68030 at 25Mhz'... instead we get 'Imagine a Beowulf cluster of...'Is it because the non-techie crowd have embraced mobile tech, in some instances more than us (given that some teenagers seem to text more than they speak) and we've been out done?
Are the non-techies better at mobile tech than us?
(Yes, I know that Slashdot doesn't speak with one voice, but I bet the comment appears somewhere in this article).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30569960</id>
	<title>Re:Well, you heard it now.</title>
	<author>argent</author>
	<datestamp>1262007660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>You consider an mp3, camera and browser useless?</i></p><p>I don't consider them worth the cost in battery life. Having to charge every day means having to be prepared to charge it more often than every day, when you have a high usage day.</p><p>No, I don't carry around "four different pocket sized devices". I consider the ability to make a phone call when I need to more important. Especially after having my first semi-smart phone go dead on me when I was trying to call my insurance company after an accident.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You consider an mp3 , camera and browser useless ? I do n't consider them worth the cost in battery life .
Having to charge every day means having to be prepared to charge it more often than every day , when you have a high usage day.No , I do n't carry around " four different pocket sized devices " .
I consider the ability to make a phone call when I need to more important .
Especially after having my first semi-smart phone go dead on me when I was trying to call my insurance company after an accident .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You consider an mp3, camera and browser useless?I don't consider them worth the cost in battery life.
Having to charge every day means having to be prepared to charge it more often than every day, when you have a high usage day.No, I don't carry around "four different pocket sized devices".
I consider the ability to make a phone call when I need to more important.
Especially after having my first semi-smart phone go dead on me when I was trying to call my insurance company after an accident.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30569718</id>
	<title>Heel Tastic Review</title>
	<author>ruenei</author>
	<datestamp>1262004060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Heel Tastic is one those As Seen On TV health products that hit the scene hard after it's appearance on Pitchmen featuring Billy Mays. I'd seen it before under its previous name, Heel Stick and was pretty confident that nothing about it had changed much so I went a head and bought it.
<a href="http://ezinearticles.com/?Heel-Tastic-Review---Does-it-Work?&amp;id=2852393" title="ezinearticles.com" rel="nofollow">Heel Tastic</a> [ezinearticles.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Heel Tastic is one those As Seen On TV health products that hit the scene hard after it 's appearance on Pitchmen featuring Billy Mays .
I 'd seen it before under its previous name , Heel Stick and was pretty confident that nothing about it had changed much so I went a head and bought it .
Heel Tastic [ ezinearticles.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Heel Tastic is one those As Seen On TV health products that hit the scene hard after it's appearance on Pitchmen featuring Billy Mays.
I'd seen it before under its previous name, Heel Stick and was pretty confident that nothing about it had changed much so I went a head and bought it.
Heel Tastic [ezinearticles.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30570710</id>
	<title>Re:Smartphones and Flip Format</title>
	<author>aedan</author>
	<datestamp>1262013840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Flips are harder to use when you're on a bike. Ordinary ones I just have to pull out of my pocket and push the green button which I can do with one hand.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Flips are harder to use when you 're on a bike .
Ordinary ones I just have to pull out of my pocket and push the green button which I can do with one hand .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Flips are harder to use when you're on a bike.
Ordinary ones I just have to pull out of my pocket and push the green button which I can do with one hand.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566286</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568490</id>
	<title>Re:The inevitable Slashdot response...</title>
	<author>forkazoo</author>
	<datestamp>1261938180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Whenever mobile phones are mentioned on Slashdot, something akin to the following comment will inevitably appear:</p><p>'All I want is a phone that makes calls.'</p><p>I've never quite got my head around a tech site like Slashdot, where the demographic is almost certainly interested in new technology having such a negative response to technological advances in what our phones can do. You rarely [never?] hear this with other technology on this site:</p><p>'I wish Windows 7 had less features. All I want is the ability to write a letter'<br>'This 4Ghz Core 2 Due Hyperfighting Special Edition is too fast for me. I want a 68030 at 25Mhz'... instead we get 'Imagine a Beowulf cluster of...'</p><p>Is it because the non-techie crowd have embraced mobile tech, in some instances more than us (given that some teenagers seem to text more than they speak) and we've been out done? Are the non-techies better at mobile tech than us?</p><p>(Yes, I know that Slashdot doesn't speak with one voice, but I bet the comment appears somewhere in this article).</p></div></blockquote><p>Eight Megs And Constantly Swapping?  I don't need a whole damned OS like EMACS.  Dammit, all I want is a text editor that lets me edit text.</p><p>Who the hell thought all this useless visual bling was a good idea?  You shouldn't need a video card with pixel shader support just to boot a bloody OS without missing out on the standard display mode.  Installing Vista was a mistake, I just want an OS that I can use to run my apps.</p><p>Reliance on Flash harms the web.  You can't index it properly, you can't use it with text to speech easily.  I just want a web page that lets me read some text.</p><p>Many people on slashdot do love shiny new things at any cost.  Many others see enormous inherent value in something simple, sensible and reliable which embraces the UNIX Way of doing one thing well.  Personally, I edit in vi, my newest Windows box runs XP, and...  Oh, I just got my shiny new Nokia n900 a few days ago.</p><p>But, until I got the n900, I used an ancient little phone that worked great, had a black and white screen, and let me make phone calls.  At least my phone does run vi.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Whenever mobile phones are mentioned on Slashdot , something akin to the following comment will inevitably appear : 'All I want is a phone that makes calls .
'I 've never quite got my head around a tech site like Slashdot , where the demographic is almost certainly interested in new technology having such a negative response to technological advances in what our phones can do .
You rarely [ never ?
] hear this with other technology on this site : 'I wish Windows 7 had less features .
All I want is the ability to write a letter''This 4Ghz Core 2 Due Hyperfighting Special Edition is too fast for me .
I want a 68030 at 25Mhz'... instead we get 'Imagine a Beowulf cluster of...'Is it because the non-techie crowd have embraced mobile tech , in some instances more than us ( given that some teenagers seem to text more than they speak ) and we 've been out done ?
Are the non-techies better at mobile tech than us ?
( Yes , I know that Slashdot does n't speak with one voice , but I bet the comment appears somewhere in this article ) .Eight Megs And Constantly Swapping ?
I do n't need a whole damned OS like EMACS .
Dammit , all I want is a text editor that lets me edit text.Who the hell thought all this useless visual bling was a good idea ?
You should n't need a video card with pixel shader support just to boot a bloody OS without missing out on the standard display mode .
Installing Vista was a mistake , I just want an OS that I can use to run my apps.Reliance on Flash harms the web .
You ca n't index it properly , you ca n't use it with text to speech easily .
I just want a web page that lets me read some text.Many people on slashdot do love shiny new things at any cost .
Many others see enormous inherent value in something simple , sensible and reliable which embraces the UNIX Way of doing one thing well .
Personally , I edit in vi , my newest Windows box runs XP , and... Oh , I just got my shiny new Nokia n900 a few days ago.But , until I got the n900 , I used an ancient little phone that worked great , had a black and white screen , and let me make phone calls .
At least my phone does run vi .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whenever mobile phones are mentioned on Slashdot, something akin to the following comment will inevitably appear:'All I want is a phone that makes calls.
'I've never quite got my head around a tech site like Slashdot, where the demographic is almost certainly interested in new technology having such a negative response to technological advances in what our phones can do.
You rarely [never?
] hear this with other technology on this site:'I wish Windows 7 had less features.
All I want is the ability to write a letter''This 4Ghz Core 2 Due Hyperfighting Special Edition is too fast for me.
I want a 68030 at 25Mhz'... instead we get 'Imagine a Beowulf cluster of...'Is it because the non-techie crowd have embraced mobile tech, in some instances more than us (given that some teenagers seem to text more than they speak) and we've been out done?
Are the non-techies better at mobile tech than us?
(Yes, I know that Slashdot doesn't speak with one voice, but I bet the comment appears somewhere in this article).Eight Megs And Constantly Swapping?
I don't need a whole damned OS like EMACS.
Dammit, all I want is a text editor that lets me edit text.Who the hell thought all this useless visual bling was a good idea?
You shouldn't need a video card with pixel shader support just to boot a bloody OS without missing out on the standard display mode.
Installing Vista was a mistake, I just want an OS that I can use to run my apps.Reliance on Flash harms the web.
You can't index it properly, you can't use it with text to speech easily.
I just want a web page that lets me read some text.Many people on slashdot do love shiny new things at any cost.
Many others see enormous inherent value in something simple, sensible and reliable which embraces the UNIX Way of doing one thing well.
Personally, I edit in vi, my newest Windows box runs XP, and...  Oh, I just got my shiny new Nokia n900 a few days ago.But, until I got the n900, I used an ancient little phone that worked great, had a black and white screen, and let me make phone calls.
At least my phone does run vi.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30569898</id>
	<title>Re:In other news...</title>
	<author>skrolle2</author>
	<datestamp>1262006820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's been ten years, and people on Slashdot still trot out this stupid apologetic drivel. It goes like this, every time:</p><p>"The US is not #1 in mobile/broadband"<br>"But the US is so large, it's harder to build infrastructure here!"<br>"But  do it better, and they have even lower population density."<br>"Yeah, but all those countries have a highly concentrated population!"<br>"No,  are less urbane than the US and still do it better."<br>"But..."<br>"No, I'm sorry, the US is not #1 when it comes to this technology because your telcos aren't actually competing."<br>"But it's the free market, it must be better!"</p><p>Every single fucking time. It's so tiresome. It is understandable though, the big national lie in the US is that it is #1 in everything. It is the world leader in many things, but as soon as you point out one thing it is not, you get the apologetic hordes storming in to the rescue.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's been ten years , and people on Slashdot still trot out this stupid apologetic drivel .
It goes like this , every time : " The US is not # 1 in mobile/broadband " " But the US is so large , it 's harder to build infrastructure here !
" " But do it better , and they have even lower population density .
" " Yeah , but all those countries have a highly concentrated population !
" " No , are less urbane than the US and still do it better. " " But.. .
" " No , I 'm sorry , the US is not # 1 when it comes to this technology because your telcos are n't actually competing .
" " But it 's the free market , it must be better !
" Every single fucking time .
It 's so tiresome .
It is understandable though , the big national lie in the US is that it is # 1 in everything .
It is the world leader in many things , but as soon as you point out one thing it is not , you get the apologetic hordes storming in to the rescue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's been ten years, and people on Slashdot still trot out this stupid apologetic drivel.
It goes like this, every time:"The US is not #1 in mobile/broadband""But the US is so large, it's harder to build infrastructure here!
""But  do it better, and they have even lower population density.
""Yeah, but all those countries have a highly concentrated population!
""No,  are less urbane than the US and still do it better.""But...
""No, I'm sorry, the US is not #1 when it comes to this technology because your telcos aren't actually competing.
""But it's the free market, it must be better!
"Every single fucking time.
It's so tiresome.
It is understandable though, the big national lie in the US is that it is #1 in everything.
It is the world leader in many things, but as soon as you point out one thing it is not, you get the apologetic hordes storming in to the rescue.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30573002</id>
	<title>Re:Smartphones and Flip Format</title>
	<author>Patch86</author>
	<datestamp>1262024820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree, and I also own a Razr. I'd love to upgrade, but my carrier doesn't offer any flip-phone style devices at all except for the absolute cheapest entry level devices (the sort of thing that you give to kids for their first phone, all hard plastic and tiny screen).</p><p>My flip phone is much longer, when opened, than a brick making it easy to talk on. It's screen is huge (essentially the full length of the phone), and the screen is miraculously unscratched despite years of heavy use (no small feat for something that lives in the same pocket as my keys).</p><p>No bricks for me, thanks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree , and I also own a Razr .
I 'd love to upgrade , but my carrier does n't offer any flip-phone style devices at all except for the absolute cheapest entry level devices ( the sort of thing that you give to kids for their first phone , all hard plastic and tiny screen ) .My flip phone is much longer , when opened , than a brick making it easy to talk on .
It 's screen is huge ( essentially the full length of the phone ) , and the screen is miraculously unscratched despite years of heavy use ( no small feat for something that lives in the same pocket as my keys ) .No bricks for me , thanks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree, and I also own a Razr.
I'd love to upgrade, but my carrier doesn't offer any flip-phone style devices at all except for the absolute cheapest entry level devices (the sort of thing that you give to kids for their first phone, all hard plastic and tiny screen).My flip phone is much longer, when opened, than a brick making it easy to talk on.
It's screen is huge (essentially the full length of the phone), and the screen is miraculously unscratched despite years of heavy use (no small feat for something that lives in the same pocket as my keys).No bricks for me, thanks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566286</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566844</id>
	<title>Pet peeve</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261919820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The quality of a camera isn't measured in megapixels. It depends on the quality of the optics and the sensor. A 10MP camera in a cell phone is only going to give you huge, noisy images.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The quality of a camera is n't measured in megapixels .
It depends on the quality of the optics and the sensor .
A 10MP camera in a cell phone is only going to give you huge , noisy images .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The quality of a camera isn't measured in megapixels.
It depends on the quality of the optics and the sensor.
A 10MP camera in a cell phone is only going to give you huge, noisy images.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566894</id>
	<title>Re:The inevitable Slashdot response...</title>
	<author>hitmark</author>
	<datestamp>1261920060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>could be that the commenter is neck deep in sysadmin tasks, and dreads a phone with the complexity of a desktop computer, and as such will need the same level of care and maintenance.</p><p>then there is the case that a phone have become something of a lifeline. It allows the summoning of all kinds of services. As such, one may not want some random feature to drain the battery while the phone is on standby in one pocket or bag, while on a extended outing away from a power grid socket, or some other source.</p><p>personally, i do not buy the "just a phone" request, tho i would love to see android, maemo or some other platform show up on cheaper phones that i would not worry about having the funds to replace if broken. Until then i go for a two device strategy, one phone and one other that can do the web and similar on a somewhat larger but still portable screen. But then i live in a nation where the operators no longer care about separating tethering from on device data access. To them, data is data, and i can use any random phone to tether a second device, as long as they can interface somehow.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>could be that the commenter is neck deep in sysadmin tasks , and dreads a phone with the complexity of a desktop computer , and as such will need the same level of care and maintenance.then there is the case that a phone have become something of a lifeline .
It allows the summoning of all kinds of services .
As such , one may not want some random feature to drain the battery while the phone is on standby in one pocket or bag , while on a extended outing away from a power grid socket , or some other source.personally , i do not buy the " just a phone " request , tho i would love to see android , maemo or some other platform show up on cheaper phones that i would not worry about having the funds to replace if broken .
Until then i go for a two device strategy , one phone and one other that can do the web and similar on a somewhat larger but still portable screen .
But then i live in a nation where the operators no longer care about separating tethering from on device data access .
To them , data is data , and i can use any random phone to tether a second device , as long as they can interface somehow .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>could be that the commenter is neck deep in sysadmin tasks, and dreads a phone with the complexity of a desktop computer, and as such will need the same level of care and maintenance.then there is the case that a phone have become something of a lifeline.
It allows the summoning of all kinds of services.
As such, one may not want some random feature to drain the battery while the phone is on standby in one pocket or bag, while on a extended outing away from a power grid socket, or some other source.personally, i do not buy the "just a phone" request, tho i would love to see android, maemo or some other platform show up on cheaper phones that i would not worry about having the funds to replace if broken.
Until then i go for a two device strategy, one phone and one other that can do the web and similar on a somewhat larger but still portable screen.
But then i live in a nation where the operators no longer care about separating tethering from on device data access.
To them, data is data, and i can use any random phone to tether a second device, as long as they can interface somehow.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566870</id>
	<title>UMTS and larger cells</title>
	<author>NeuralAbyss</author>
	<datestamp>1261919940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's also predominantly 3G networks in Australia - one of the national mobile carriers has bigger coverage on UMTS/HSPA than on GSM. For a rural example, the 300km stretch from Mildura to Broken Hill has absolutely no GSM or 3G coverage after leaving Mildura, but UMTS works for 2/3 of the way.</p><p>Cell density is required to be high in densely-populated areas with the current public appetite for data, but it doesn't mean that UMTS won't service large cells. People simply don't put the same demands on GSM cells because data throughput is awfully slow.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's also predominantly 3G networks in Australia - one of the national mobile carriers has bigger coverage on UMTS/HSPA than on GSM .
For a rural example , the 300km stretch from Mildura to Broken Hill has absolutely no GSM or 3G coverage after leaving Mildura , but UMTS works for 2/3 of the way.Cell density is required to be high in densely-populated areas with the current public appetite for data , but it does n't mean that UMTS wo n't service large cells .
People simply do n't put the same demands on GSM cells because data throughput is awfully slow .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's also predominantly 3G networks in Australia - one of the national mobile carriers has bigger coverage on UMTS/HSPA than on GSM.
For a rural example, the 300km stretch from Mildura to Broken Hill has absolutely no GSM or 3G coverage after leaving Mildura, but UMTS works for 2/3 of the way.Cell density is required to be high in densely-populated areas with the current public appetite for data, but it doesn't mean that UMTS won't service large cells.
People simply don't put the same demands on GSM cells because data throughput is awfully slow.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566414</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566708</id>
	<title>co3k</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261918560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">OS don't fear the FrreBSD at about 80 operatiNg systems If you have</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>OS do n't fear the FrreBSD at about 80 operatiNg systems If you have [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OS don't fear the FrreBSD at about 80 operatiNg systems If you have [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568562</id>
	<title>Re:The inevitable Slashdot response...</title>
	<author>MobileTatsu-NJG</author>
	<datestamp>1261939320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I've never quite got my head around a tech site like Slashdot, where the demographic is almost certainly interested in new technology having such a negative response to technological advances in what our phones can do. You rarely [never?] hear this with other technology on this site:</p></div><p>The moderation system is largely responsible for this sort of noise.   Lots of people raise popular-beat-to-death issues or post contrarian views just to get that +5 Insightful next to their name.</p><p>I know this because I'm guilty of it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've never quite got my head around a tech site like Slashdot , where the demographic is almost certainly interested in new technology having such a negative response to technological advances in what our phones can do .
You rarely [ never ?
] hear this with other technology on this site : The moderation system is largely responsible for this sort of noise .
Lots of people raise popular-beat-to-death issues or post contrarian views just to get that + 5 Insightful next to their name.I know this because I 'm guilty of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've never quite got my head around a tech site like Slashdot, where the demographic is almost certainly interested in new technology having such a negative response to technological advances in what our phones can do.
You rarely [never?
] hear this with other technology on this site:The moderation system is largely responsible for this sort of noise.
Lots of people raise popular-beat-to-death issues or post contrarian views just to get that +5 Insightful next to their name.I know this because I'm guilty of it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567546</id>
	<title>Re:Well, you heard it now.</title>
	<author>Pederson</author>
	<datestamp>1261925880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Really? You consider an mp3, camera and browser useless? I don't know about you, but I don't feel like carrying around 4 different pocket sized devices everywhere I go. If I have to charge my battery every night before bed instead of having to charge 4 devices every two or three days while having to carry them around plus their chargers, I'll make that sacrifice.

Slashdot is full of old guys whom just won't get with the times because they simply believe 'they're right'. Whatever, you'll be dead soon and we can get on with progress, thanks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Really ?
You consider an mp3 , camera and browser useless ?
I do n't know about you , but I do n't feel like carrying around 4 different pocket sized devices everywhere I go .
If I have to charge my battery every night before bed instead of having to charge 4 devices every two or three days while having to carry them around plus their chargers , I 'll make that sacrifice .
Slashdot is full of old guys whom just wo n't get with the times because they simply believe 'they 're right' .
Whatever , you 'll be dead soon and we can get on with progress , thanks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really?
You consider an mp3, camera and browser useless?
I don't know about you, but I don't feel like carrying around 4 different pocket sized devices everywhere I go.
If I have to charge my battery every night before bed instead of having to charge 4 devices every two or three days while having to carry them around plus their chargers, I'll make that sacrifice.
Slashdot is full of old guys whom just won't get with the times because they simply believe 'they're right'.
Whatever, you'll be dead soon and we can get on with progress, thanks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566804</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566286</id>
	<title>Smartphones and Flip Format</title>
	<author>DG</author>
	<datestamp>1261914660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey, mobile phone hardware designer types:</p><p>The flip format is by far the superior design for a phone, as it allows the phone to halve it's length when not in use and simultaneously protects the screen and user controls.</p><p>As much as I'd like to buy a cool phone like an iPhone or Blackberry, the "brick" format makes it a non-starter.</p><p>Until then, I'm sticking with my RAZR V9.</p><p>(Yes, the Blackberry Pearl is a flip - my wife has one - and that's not a bad phone at all. I *might* just jump at the next gen version of that)</p><p>The other big selling point for me is battery life. Notwithstanding the decent media features on my V9, I never use it as a music player because that chews pretty heavily into the battery, and a phone's primary purpose is communications first. Maybe make a phone that has two batteries, and separates the "phone" functions from the "media" functions...</p><p>DG</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey , mobile phone hardware designer types : The flip format is by far the superior design for a phone , as it allows the phone to halve it 's length when not in use and simultaneously protects the screen and user controls.As much as I 'd like to buy a cool phone like an iPhone or Blackberry , the " brick " format makes it a non-starter.Until then , I 'm sticking with my RAZR V9 .
( Yes , the Blackberry Pearl is a flip - my wife has one - and that 's not a bad phone at all .
I * might * just jump at the next gen version of that ) The other big selling point for me is battery life .
Notwithstanding the decent media features on my V9 , I never use it as a music player because that chews pretty heavily into the battery , and a phone 's primary purpose is communications first .
Maybe make a phone that has two batteries , and separates the " phone " functions from the " media " functions...DG</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey, mobile phone hardware designer types:The flip format is by far the superior design for a phone, as it allows the phone to halve it's length when not in use and simultaneously protects the screen and user controls.As much as I'd like to buy a cool phone like an iPhone or Blackberry, the "brick" format makes it a non-starter.Until then, I'm sticking with my RAZR V9.
(Yes, the Blackberry Pearl is a flip - my wife has one - and that's not a bad phone at all.
I *might* just jump at the next gen version of that)The other big selling point for me is battery life.
Notwithstanding the decent media features on my V9, I never use it as a music player because that chews pretty heavily into the battery, and a phone's primary purpose is communications first.
Maybe make a phone that has two batteries, and separates the "phone" functions from the "media" functions...DG</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568850</id>
	<title>An mp3 player in my cellphone?</title>
	<author>NoDude!</author>
	<datestamp>1261943940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What, no mention of the <a href="http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16875209145" title="newegg.ca" rel="nofollow">Motorola F3</a> [newegg.ca]? It made the biggest positive change for a mobile devices in the past 10 years. Namely, it dropped features - all of them, except for making calls. Give me a phone with a decent battery life and slim-enough to fit in a shirt pocket, I can bring my own damn camera. I can even bring a netbook if I feel withdraw symptoms from lack of youtube videos, I'm a man after all, I was made to haul stuff around. Get off my lawn!</htmltext>
<tokenext>What , no mention of the Motorola F3 [ newegg.ca ] ?
It made the biggest positive change for a mobile devices in the past 10 years .
Namely , it dropped features - all of them , except for making calls .
Give me a phone with a decent battery life and slim-enough to fit in a shirt pocket , I can bring my own damn camera .
I can even bring a netbook if I feel withdraw symptoms from lack of youtube videos , I 'm a man after all , I was made to haul stuff around .
Get off my lawn !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What, no mention of the Motorola F3 [newegg.ca]?
It made the biggest positive change for a mobile devices in the past 10 years.
Namely, it dropped features - all of them, except for making calls.
Give me a phone with a decent battery life and slim-enough to fit in a shirt pocket, I can bring my own damn camera.
I can even bring a netbook if I feel withdraw symptoms from lack of youtube videos, I'm a man after all, I was made to haul stuff around.
Get off my lawn!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566262</id>
	<title>In other news...</title>
	<author>djupedal</author>
	<datestamp>1261914360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>What's happened is that countries without legacy copper and overbearing telcos have leapfrogged the US in terms of, well....pretty much everything mobile.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's happened is that countries without legacy copper and overbearing telcos have leapfrogged the US in terms of , well....pretty much everything mobile .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's happened is that countries without legacy copper and overbearing telcos have leapfrogged the US in terms of, well....pretty much everything mobile.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566276</id>
	<title>featured a 110,000-pixel (0.11MP) CMOS image senso</title>
	<author>homey of my owney</author>
	<datestamp>1261914480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Which is still more than I need</htmltext>
<tokenext>Which is still more than I need</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which is still more than I need</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567470</id>
	<title>Re:The inevitable Slashdot response...</title>
	<author>rec9140</author>
	<datestamp>1261925160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>'All I want is a phone that makes calls.'</p><p>Its a phone.. what more does it need to do? ? ?</p><p>My favorite and would still be in use if the CMDA version was more widely released, the Original Motoroal 8000UH Brick phone. Thats what all phones should be made like, to this day.</p><p>If I need to send an email I will use the device for that,a COMPUTER. A computer equipped with a wireless data card of some sort.</p><p>The correct device for the activity at hand, so a phone for a phone, a computer for a computer task.</p><p>The more you add to a "phone" the more you get away from its core operation and need and its inability to keep up with that task.</p><p>How I use a cell phone.</p><p>1) As a phone. GASP! The horror, and "oh the humanity of it!"<br>2) As a alpha pager. SMS has pretty much run most of the paging carriers out of business except in some of the rural regions I go to where a POCSAG pager on 152.480 is all that will cut it, as even a cell phone is useless.</p><p>Any thing else I will pull out the correct device</p><p>1) Laptop with wireless data card for web, email, etc..<br>2) 2 Way radio for the various radio networks from analog conventional simplex to digital encrypted trunked.<br>3) 9mm Sig<br>4) 12 gauge S&amp;W</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>'All I want is a phone that makes calls .
'Its a phone.. what more does it need to do ?
? ? My favorite and would still be in use if the CMDA version was more widely released , the Original Motoroal 8000UH Brick phone .
Thats what all phones should be made like , to this day.If I need to send an email I will use the device for that,a COMPUTER .
A computer equipped with a wireless data card of some sort.The correct device for the activity at hand , so a phone for a phone , a computer for a computer task.The more you add to a " phone " the more you get away from its core operation and need and its inability to keep up with that task.How I use a cell phone.1 ) As a phone .
GASP ! The horror , and " oh the humanity of it !
" 2 ) As a alpha pager .
SMS has pretty much run most of the paging carriers out of business except in some of the rural regions I go to where a POCSAG pager on 152.480 is all that will cut it , as even a cell phone is useless.Any thing else I will pull out the correct device1 ) Laptop with wireless data card for web , email , etc..2 ) 2 Way radio for the various radio networks from analog conventional simplex to digital encrypted trunked.3 ) 9mm Sig4 ) 12 gauge S&amp;W</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'All I want is a phone that makes calls.
'Its a phone.. what more does it need to do?
? ?My favorite and would still be in use if the CMDA version was more widely released, the Original Motoroal 8000UH Brick phone.
Thats what all phones should be made like, to this day.If I need to send an email I will use the device for that,a COMPUTER.
A computer equipped with a wireless data card of some sort.The correct device for the activity at hand, so a phone for a phone, a computer for a computer task.The more you add to a "phone" the more you get away from its core operation and need and its inability to keep up with that task.How I use a cell phone.1) As a phone.
GASP! The horror, and "oh the humanity of it!
"2) As a alpha pager.
SMS has pretty much run most of the paging carriers out of business except in some of the rural regions I go to where a POCSAG pager on 152.480 is all that will cut it, as even a cell phone is useless.Any thing else I will pull out the correct device1) Laptop with wireless data card for web, email, etc..2) 2 Way radio for the various radio networks from analog conventional simplex to digital encrypted trunked.3) 9mm Sig4) 12 gauge S&amp;W</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566812</id>
	<title>Re:The inevitable Slashdot response...</title>
	<author>vadim\_t</author>
	<datestamp>1261919580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On my part, I used to be of the "All I want is a phone that makes calls" kind, but since then dropped that attitude.</p><p>Years back, a phone could have a web browser, and a camera, but it was very likely that both things were going to be very half assed. So you'd get an expensive phone with bad battery life that'd be a pain to do web browsing on, and which would make really horrible photos. Also they were quite closed, and often the only option you had is to use the included crappy software or nothing at all.</p><p>These days though, phones are shifting towards being a mini computer that just happens to make calls, such as the N900 for instance. And that is cool, and I'm looking forward to getting one.  The ability of being whatever I want to do with it, including using skype is a huge advantage, and couldn't be had at any price just a few years back.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On my part , I used to be of the " All I want is a phone that makes calls " kind , but since then dropped that attitude.Years back , a phone could have a web browser , and a camera , but it was very likely that both things were going to be very half assed .
So you 'd get an expensive phone with bad battery life that 'd be a pain to do web browsing on , and which would make really horrible photos .
Also they were quite closed , and often the only option you had is to use the included crappy software or nothing at all.These days though , phones are shifting towards being a mini computer that just happens to make calls , such as the N900 for instance .
And that is cool , and I 'm looking forward to getting one .
The ability of being whatever I want to do with it , including using skype is a huge advantage , and could n't be had at any price just a few years back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On my part, I used to be of the "All I want is a phone that makes calls" kind, but since then dropped that attitude.Years back, a phone could have a web browser, and a camera, but it was very likely that both things were going to be very half assed.
So you'd get an expensive phone with bad battery life that'd be a pain to do web browsing on, and which would make really horrible photos.
Also they were quite closed, and often the only option you had is to use the included crappy software or nothing at all.These days though, phones are shifting towards being a mini computer that just happens to make calls, such as the N900 for instance.
And that is cool, and I'm looking forward to getting one.
The ability of being whatever I want to do with it, including using skype is a huge advantage, and couldn't be had at any price just a few years back.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567124</id>
	<title>Re:The inevitable Slashdot response...</title>
	<author>awyeah</author>
	<datestamp>1261921980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>RIM (the people who make BlackBerry) already had that covered.  BlackBerrys were connected PDAs without phones at first.  See the <a href="http://www.mumoh.com/blog/?p=12" title="mumoh.com">RIM 957</a> [mumoh.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>RIM ( the people who make BlackBerry ) already had that covered .
BlackBerrys were connected PDAs without phones at first .
See the RIM 957 [ mumoh.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>RIM (the people who make BlackBerry) already had that covered.
BlackBerrys were connected PDAs without phones at first.
See the RIM 957 [mumoh.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566810</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30569050</id>
	<title>And that's a good thing</title>
	<author>sznupi</author>
	<datestamp>1262033820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you look at it in certain way. It's a testament to growing popularity of cellphones throughout the world.</p><p>In 2000 there were around 700 million subscribers globally. Now it's at 4.6 billion, and still growing rapidly. It's not about features, it's about phones that allow such numbers of connected people; <i>this</i> will be their most important impact on our civilization.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you look at it in certain way .
It 's a testament to growing popularity of cellphones throughout the world.In 2000 there were around 700 million subscribers globally .
Now it 's at 4.6 billion , and still growing rapidly .
It 's not about features , it 's about phones that allow such numbers of connected people ; this will be their most important impact on our civilization .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you look at it in certain way.
It's a testament to growing popularity of cellphones throughout the world.In 2000 there were around 700 million subscribers globally.
Now it's at 4.6 billion, and still growing rapidly.
It's not about features, it's about phones that allow such numbers of connected people; this will be their most important impact on our civilization.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566414</id>
	<title>Notable hardware</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261915920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>This deserves a mention, the legendary Nokia 6310i still has a thriving refurb market to this day. That thing is probably the highest quality mainstream phone ever made. <a href="http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2007/12/20/nokia\_breakthrough\_phone/" title="reghardware.co.uk">http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2007/12/20/nokia\_breakthrough\_phone/</a> [reghardware.co.uk] <br> <br>

3G (UMTS) turned out to be a bit of a disappointment with the required cell density there are only a few 3G-only networks in densely populated places like South Korea, 2G GSM is likely to stay around well into the LTE era.

<br> <br>
Satellite phone networks have also come a long way since the initial bankruptcies and unreliable services. There are now at least 4 Geosynchronous orbit satellite phone networks with handheld phones and the two LEO networks that went bankrupt both recovered and are planning to launch new satellites. The phones themselves also not half the size they used to be.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This deserves a mention , the legendary Nokia 6310i still has a thriving refurb market to this day .
That thing is probably the highest quality mainstream phone ever made .
http : //www.reghardware.co.uk/2007/12/20/nokia \ _breakthrough \ _phone/ [ reghardware.co.uk ] 3G ( UMTS ) turned out to be a bit of a disappointment with the required cell density there are only a few 3G-only networks in densely populated places like South Korea , 2G GSM is likely to stay around well into the LTE era .
Satellite phone networks have also come a long way since the initial bankruptcies and unreliable services .
There are now at least 4 Geosynchronous orbit satellite phone networks with handheld phones and the two LEO networks that went bankrupt both recovered and are planning to launch new satellites .
The phones themselves also not half the size they used to be .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This deserves a mention, the legendary Nokia 6310i still has a thriving refurb market to this day.
That thing is probably the highest quality mainstream phone ever made.
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2007/12/20/nokia\_breakthrough\_phone/ [reghardware.co.uk]  

3G (UMTS) turned out to be a bit of a disappointment with the required cell density there are only a few 3G-only networks in densely populated places like South Korea, 2G GSM is likely to stay around well into the LTE era.
Satellite phone networks have also come a long way since the initial bankruptcies and unreliable services.
There are now at least 4 Geosynchronous orbit satellite phone networks with handheld phones and the two LEO networks that went bankrupt both recovered and are planning to launch new satellites.
The phones themselves also not half the size they used to be.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567138</id>
	<title>Re:In other news...</title>
	<author>obarthelemy</author>
	<datestamp>1261922160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not quite true: I leave in France, where, when Al Gore invented the Internets, we where in a rather worse situation, telecoms-wise: single, nationally-owned carrier, high prices, quite good service, though.</p><p>What they did, as in much of the EU I think, is force deregulation by<br>- selling 3 nationwide GSM licenses, so there was competition right from the start<br>- forcing standardization and interoperability by enforcing the GSM standard for all carriers, which helped with coverage and provider switching<br>- Carriers also had to commit to cover an increasing percentage of the population, which is admittedly easier to do than in the US (France is a bit smaller than Texas, but has more than twice the population).<br>- later, forcing number portability (you can switch provider and keep the same number)<br>- above all, agreeing that the caller pays for calls, with mobile numbers set apart by a different prefix (06 = mobile, 01 = Paris, 04 = south east...). You used to be able to figure out which carrier someone was using by looking at the second couple of digits, but with number portability that is no longer 100\% true.</p><p>The one remaining issue, apart from Texts pricing, is pricing legibility: telcos are free to set up there tariffs as they wish, so it's very hard to come up with an apples-to-apples comparison.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not quite true : I leave in France , where , when Al Gore invented the Internets , we where in a rather worse situation , telecoms-wise : single , nationally-owned carrier , high prices , quite good service , though.What they did , as in much of the EU I think , is force deregulation by- selling 3 nationwide GSM licenses , so there was competition right from the start- forcing standardization and interoperability by enforcing the GSM standard for all carriers , which helped with coverage and provider switching- Carriers also had to commit to cover an increasing percentage of the population , which is admittedly easier to do than in the US ( France is a bit smaller than Texas , but has more than twice the population ) .- later , forcing number portability ( you can switch provider and keep the same number ) - above all , agreeing that the caller pays for calls , with mobile numbers set apart by a different prefix ( 06 = mobile , 01 = Paris , 04 = south east... ) .
You used to be able to figure out which carrier someone was using by looking at the second couple of digits , but with number portability that is no longer 100 \ % true.The one remaining issue , apart from Texts pricing , is pricing legibility : telcos are free to set up there tariffs as they wish , so it 's very hard to come up with an apples-to-apples comparison .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not quite true: I leave in France, where, when Al Gore invented the Internets, we where in a rather worse situation, telecoms-wise: single, nationally-owned carrier, high prices, quite good service, though.What they did, as in much of the EU I think, is force deregulation by- selling 3 nationwide GSM licenses, so there was competition right from the start- forcing standardization and interoperability by enforcing the GSM standard for all carriers, which helped with coverage and provider switching- Carriers also had to commit to cover an increasing percentage of the population, which is admittedly easier to do than in the US (France is a bit smaller than Texas, but has more than twice the population).- later, forcing number portability (you can switch provider and keep the same number)- above all, agreeing that the caller pays for calls, with mobile numbers set apart by a different prefix (06 = mobile, 01 = Paris, 04 = south east...).
You used to be able to figure out which carrier someone was using by looking at the second couple of digits, but with number portability that is no longer 100\% true.The one remaining issue, apart from Texts pricing, is pricing legibility: telcos are free to set up there tariffs as they wish, so it's very hard to come up with an apples-to-apples comparison.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30569580</id>
	<title>Re:Nokia N9000.</title>
	<author>Eunuchswear</author>
	<datestamp>1262001600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But, but, but... I'm just getting used to my N900 and you want me to buy a N9000!</p><p>Aaargh!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But , but , but... I 'm just getting used to my N900 and you want me to buy a N9000 ! Aaargh !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But, but, but... I'm just getting used to my N900 and you want me to buy a N9000!Aaargh!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566578</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568696</id>
	<title>Why must quality cost extra?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261941720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nokia was my first and last *good* cheap cell phone, back in 2002. It even came with a few free games and was indestructable. I get the basic phones because I don't want added features, music, etc. I started getting LG when i switched to verizon, and each time I get a new phone (often since I am apt to lose it), it has less customizable options, the camera seems to get worse, etc. After a few of these phones, I've concluded it must be a tactic to get me to spend money for a designer-brand phone. With Verizon, you sacrifice quality for coverage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nokia was my first and last * good * cheap cell phone , back in 2002 .
It even came with a few free games and was indestructable .
I get the basic phones because I do n't want added features , music , etc .
I started getting LG when i switched to verizon , and each time I get a new phone ( often since I am apt to lose it ) , it has less customizable options , the camera seems to get worse , etc .
After a few of these phones , I 've concluded it must be a tactic to get me to spend money for a designer-brand phone .
With Verizon , you sacrifice quality for coverage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nokia was my first and last *good* cheap cell phone, back in 2002.
It even came with a few free games and was indestructable.
I get the basic phones because I don't want added features, music, etc.
I started getting LG when i switched to verizon, and each time I get a new phone (often since I am apt to lose it), it has less customizable options, the camera seems to get worse, etc.
After a few of these phones, I've concluded it must be a tactic to get me to spend money for a designer-brand phone.
With Verizon, you sacrifice quality for coverage.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566480</id>
	<title>Re:Hmm</title>
	<author>Karganeth</author>
	<datestamp>1261916520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I own a K750i you insensitive clod!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I own a K750i you insensitive clod !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I own a K750i you insensitive clod!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566316</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30581102</id>
	<title>Re:Hmm</title>
	<author>noidentity</author>
	<datestamp>1262093940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Save your comments for the next article, "What's happened to web pages over the past 10 years", the primary thing being splitting a three-paragraph article into 10 pages, each with two sentences and none times as much filler around it. Sad indeed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Save your comments for the next article , " What 's happened to web pages over the past 10 years " , the primary thing being splitting a three-paragraph article into 10 pages , each with two sentences and none times as much filler around it .
Sad indeed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Save your comments for the next article, "What's happened to web pages over the past 10 years", the primary thing being splitting a three-paragraph article into 10 pages, each with two sentences and none times as much filler around it.
Sad indeed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566316</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566578</id>
	<title>Nokia N9000.</title>
	<author>Luarvic</author>
	<datestamp>1261917300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They missed the most important event of the year: launch of Nokia N900.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They missed the most important event of the year : launch of Nokia N900 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They missed the most important event of the year: launch of Nokia N900.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568276</id>
	<title>Re:In other news...</title>
	<author>PyroMosh</author>
	<datestamp>1261934580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To be fair, the reasons we are lagging behind now *did* give us connectivity half a century before most of the rest of the world.</p><p>We didn't spend bajillions of dollars through the 1900s to set up a nation wide telco infrastructure just so we could avoid setting up a 12G cell network in the early 2000s.</p><p>Relax.</p><p>The U.S. is slightly behind the rest of the world, because we were so far ahead for so long that now that they are investing in infrastructure, they're getting new *all* and shiny, because they had nothing prior.  We need to be content with piecemeal upgrades because we've got a LOT to replace and it's not feasible to do so quickly and economically.</p><p>This doesn't address the pricing concerns you cite, of course.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To be fair , the reasons we are lagging behind now * did * give us connectivity half a century before most of the rest of the world.We did n't spend bajillions of dollars through the 1900s to set up a nation wide telco infrastructure just so we could avoid setting up a 12G cell network in the early 2000s.Relax.The U.S. is slightly behind the rest of the world , because we were so far ahead for so long that now that they are investing in infrastructure , they 're getting new * all * and shiny , because they had nothing prior .
We need to be content with piecemeal upgrades because we 've got a LOT to replace and it 's not feasible to do so quickly and economically.This does n't address the pricing concerns you cite , of course .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To be fair, the reasons we are lagging behind now *did* give us connectivity half a century before most of the rest of the world.We didn't spend bajillions of dollars through the 1900s to set up a nation wide telco infrastructure just so we could avoid setting up a 12G cell network in the early 2000s.Relax.The U.S. is slightly behind the rest of the world, because we were so far ahead for so long that now that they are investing in infrastructure, they're getting new *all* and shiny, because they had nothing prior.
We need to be content with piecemeal upgrades because we've got a LOT to replace and it's not feasible to do so quickly and economically.This doesn't address the pricing concerns you cite, of course.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566324</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566554</id>
	<title>Re:Hmm</title>
	<author>andyjb</author>
	<datestamp>1261917120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>yes, petty poor in terms of insight. also a bit US centric really.

I'm pretty sure Nokia released a product before 2006, and that they've been more than just an entry level phone manufacturer before and since (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_Nokia\_products).

Of course this was before they seemed to stop bothering, or got stuck chasing apples tail depending on your point of view.

IMO windows has never released a noteworthy phone either.</htmltext>
<tokenext>yes , petty poor in terms of insight .
also a bit US centric really .
I 'm pretty sure Nokia released a product before 2006 , and that they 've been more than just an entry level phone manufacturer before and since ( http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List \ _of \ _Nokia \ _products ) .
Of course this was before they seemed to stop bothering , or got stuck chasing apples tail depending on your point of view .
IMO windows has never released a noteworthy phone either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yes, petty poor in terms of insight.
also a bit US centric really.
I'm pretty sure Nokia released a product before 2006, and that they've been more than just an entry level phone manufacturer before and since (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_Nokia\_products).
Of course this was before they seemed to stop bothering, or got stuck chasing apples tail depending on your point of view.
IMO windows has never released a noteworthy phone either.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566316</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30569358</id>
	<title>Re:An mp3 player in my cellphone?</title>
	<author>lamapper</author>
	<datestamp>1261997040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What, no mention of the Motorola F3? It made the biggest positive change for a mobile devices in the past 10 years. Namely, it dropped features - all of them, except for making calls. Give me a phone with a decent battery life and slim-enough to fit in a shirt pocket, I can bring my own damn camera. I can even bring a netbook if I feel withdraw symptoms from lack of youtube videos, I'm a man after all, I was made to haul stuff around. Get off my lawn!</p></div><p>Sorry, but that phone, with limited software application, with an itty bitty little screen is simply not that phenomenal.  Also, it was released this year....past 10 years, come on already.

</p><p>The Nokia N800 was released in 2006, the screen is about as small as I would ever want in the future.  Thanks to the full browser, you surf the web in the same manner as you would on a desktop, laptop, and net book.  This is a huge plus!  If you had City wide WiFi (admittedly very few places did/do) it was mobile.  Granted the GPS module would give you some interesting mobile tracking however you had to pay extra for that.

</p><p>Now that its younger sibling, the Nokia N900 has arrived and provides for cellular capability in addition to everything else one could want on a hand held computer / smart phone, the only device that comes close, will be released in the 1st quarter 2010, the Google Android ~ unlocked with Linux root access capability.  No tethering, no limitations, anything you can do on your netbook and laptop, except perhaps software development and video manipulation you will be able to do on this device.

</p><p>And why limit yourself to an MP3 Player when you can have a Music player that pulls in other resources, information, fan sites, tour schedules, recent releases, photos and more while you are listening to the music as you can with Amarok (Linux Music playing software).  Buy your music ONCE and listen to it on all your devices.  Blows a little ole MP3 player away.  Oh yea, you can watch H.264 codec formated high definition video on the device in addition to listening to music.

</p><p>Once you get a taste of the possibilities with a Nokia Nxxx (N770, N800, N810, N900) and soon Android Google phone you will not want to use other devices.  I mean I have a camera, I have a device that can do pretty much every thing else, why would I carry another phone, I would not.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What , no mention of the Motorola F3 ?
It made the biggest positive change for a mobile devices in the past 10 years .
Namely , it dropped features - all of them , except for making calls .
Give me a phone with a decent battery life and slim-enough to fit in a shirt pocket , I can bring my own damn camera .
I can even bring a netbook if I feel withdraw symptoms from lack of youtube videos , I 'm a man after all , I was made to haul stuff around .
Get off my lawn ! Sorry , but that phone , with limited software application , with an itty bitty little screen is simply not that phenomenal .
Also , it was released this year....past 10 years , come on already .
The Nokia N800 was released in 2006 , the screen is about as small as I would ever want in the future .
Thanks to the full browser , you surf the web in the same manner as you would on a desktop , laptop , and net book .
This is a huge plus !
If you had City wide WiFi ( admittedly very few places did/do ) it was mobile .
Granted the GPS module would give you some interesting mobile tracking however you had to pay extra for that .
Now that its younger sibling , the Nokia N900 has arrived and provides for cellular capability in addition to everything else one could want on a hand held computer / smart phone , the only device that comes close , will be released in the 1st quarter 2010 , the Google Android ~ unlocked with Linux root access capability .
No tethering , no limitations , anything you can do on your netbook and laptop , except perhaps software development and video manipulation you will be able to do on this device .
And why limit yourself to an MP3 Player when you can have a Music player that pulls in other resources , information , fan sites , tour schedules , recent releases , photos and more while you are listening to the music as you can with Amarok ( Linux Music playing software ) .
Buy your music ONCE and listen to it on all your devices .
Blows a little ole MP3 player away .
Oh yea , you can watch H.264 codec formated high definition video on the device in addition to listening to music .
Once you get a taste of the possibilities with a Nokia Nxxx ( N770 , N800 , N810 , N900 ) and soon Android Google phone you will not want to use other devices .
I mean I have a camera , I have a device that can do pretty much every thing else , why would I carry another phone , I would not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What, no mention of the Motorola F3?
It made the biggest positive change for a mobile devices in the past 10 years.
Namely, it dropped features - all of them, except for making calls.
Give me a phone with a decent battery life and slim-enough to fit in a shirt pocket, I can bring my own damn camera.
I can even bring a netbook if I feel withdraw symptoms from lack of youtube videos, I'm a man after all, I was made to haul stuff around.
Get off my lawn!Sorry, but that phone, with limited software application, with an itty bitty little screen is simply not that phenomenal.
Also, it was released this year....past 10 years, come on already.
The Nokia N800 was released in 2006, the screen is about as small as I would ever want in the future.
Thanks to the full browser, you surf the web in the same manner as you would on a desktop, laptop, and net book.
This is a huge plus!
If you had City wide WiFi (admittedly very few places did/do) it was mobile.
Granted the GPS module would give you some interesting mobile tracking however you had to pay extra for that.
Now that its younger sibling, the Nokia N900 has arrived and provides for cellular capability in addition to everything else one could want on a hand held computer / smart phone, the only device that comes close, will be released in the 1st quarter 2010, the Google Android ~ unlocked with Linux root access capability.
No tethering, no limitations, anything you can do on your netbook and laptop, except perhaps software development and video manipulation you will be able to do on this device.
And why limit yourself to an MP3 Player when you can have a Music player that pulls in other resources, information, fan sites, tour schedules, recent releases, photos and more while you are listening to the music as you can with Amarok (Linux Music playing software).
Buy your music ONCE and listen to it on all your devices.
Blows a little ole MP3 player away.
Oh yea, you can watch H.264 codec formated high definition video on the device in addition to listening to music.
Once you get a taste of the possibilities with a Nokia Nxxx (N770, N800, N810, N900) and soon Android Google phone you will not want to use other devices.
I mean I have a camera, I have a device that can do pretty much every thing else, why would I carry another phone, I would not.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568850</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567118</id>
	<title>What's happened?</title>
	<author>CxDoo</author>
	<datestamp>1261921920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>10 years and the summary reads Blackberry, Motorola, Apple?<br>Well, keep wondering...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>10 years and the summary reads Blackberry , Motorola , Apple ? Well , keep wondering.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>10 years and the summary reads Blackberry, Motorola, Apple?Well, keep wondering...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568780</id>
	<title>Re:Nokia N9000.</title>
	<author>fm6</author>
	<datestamp>1261943040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I have been a fone geek since my my first in the trunk 3 watt analog radio shack branded Car phone.</p></div><p>Was that the one the was essentially a two-way radio that only connected you to a phone operator? You <i>do</i> go back!</p><p><div class="quote"><p>I never (before the N900) had one that would truly free me from a laptop.</p></div><p>That's a pretty subjective criterion. No palm-size device will every free most of us from a laptop. On the other hand, I've known people who claimed their Palm Vs did just that. OK, no networking. But upgrade to a Palm with a MMC slot (the V+ was the last Palm not to have one) and stick a bluetooth card in it...</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The N900 IS the most advanced (mobile computer that also has cell and viop phone functions) of the decade.</p></div><p>If you want a truly hackable phone, yea, it's pretty important. Most consumers will give it a big yawn. And calling it a "computer" is pure marketspeak &mdash; I must own a dozen cheap gadgets that would qualify as a "computer" if you looked at them the right way.</p><p>Which is not to trash the N900. It's pretty damn sexy. I'd run out right now and buy one if $400 wasn't such a nasty dent in my budget.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>I really do not understand why I am not seeing more about it.</p></div><p>Shouldn't be hard to understand. Most people equate "smart phone" with "iPhone". (This is the product that took "app" from programmer slang to household word.) If you're a serious geek you're maybe into Android (mainly because Google is perceived as less fascist to developers and users than Apple). WebOS trails behind, and the older platforms (Windows Mobile, PalmOS, Symbian) still have some following.</p><p>Even to the smallest of these, Maemo is tiny upstart. So far it's only been the basis for 3 devices, only one of which is a phone. Nokia's going to have to push this platform very hard if it's going to gain any traction. And from what I can see, Maemo is the poor stepbrother to Symbian in Nokia's product strategy.</p><p>That's how established businesses kill new technologies, even when it's clear that those new technologies are what the company needs to adapt and grow. Folks loyal to the old technologies starve the new guys of resources (marketing, R&amp;D, sales priorities) because they're in control. I speak from experience here, having worked in the x64 server branch of Sun.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>I have chatted with many N900 users that after a month or so, are still finding new things.</p></div><p>Which is why I want one. But I'm not going to plunk down that much cash until I know this platform has a future. So far, I've seen little to convince me it does.</p><p>Then again, the Great Recession might end next month and I'll go back to having too much disposable cash....</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have been a fone geek since my my first in the trunk 3 watt analog radio shack branded Car phone.Was that the one the was essentially a two-way radio that only connected you to a phone operator ?
You do go back ! I never ( before the N900 ) had one that would truly free me from a laptop.That 's a pretty subjective criterion .
No palm-size device will every free most of us from a laptop .
On the other hand , I 've known people who claimed their Palm Vs did just that .
OK , no networking .
But upgrade to a Palm with a MMC slot ( the V + was the last Palm not to have one ) and stick a bluetooth card in it...The N900 IS the most advanced ( mobile computer that also has cell and viop phone functions ) of the decade.If you want a truly hackable phone , yea , it 's pretty important .
Most consumers will give it a big yawn .
And calling it a " computer " is pure marketspeak    I must own a dozen cheap gadgets that would qualify as a " computer " if you looked at them the right way.Which is not to trash the N900 .
It 's pretty damn sexy .
I 'd run out right now and buy one if $ 400 was n't such a nasty dent in my budget.I really do not understand why I am not seeing more about it.Should n't be hard to understand .
Most people equate " smart phone " with " iPhone " .
( This is the product that took " app " from programmer slang to household word .
) If you 're a serious geek you 're maybe into Android ( mainly because Google is perceived as less fascist to developers and users than Apple ) .
WebOS trails behind , and the older platforms ( Windows Mobile , PalmOS , Symbian ) still have some following.Even to the smallest of these , Maemo is tiny upstart .
So far it 's only been the basis for 3 devices , only one of which is a phone .
Nokia 's going to have to push this platform very hard if it 's going to gain any traction .
And from what I can see , Maemo is the poor stepbrother to Symbian in Nokia 's product strategy.That 's how established businesses kill new technologies , even when it 's clear that those new technologies are what the company needs to adapt and grow .
Folks loyal to the old technologies starve the new guys of resources ( marketing , R&amp;D , sales priorities ) because they 're in control .
I speak from experience here , having worked in the x64 server branch of Sun.I have chatted with many N900 users that after a month or so , are still finding new things.Which is why I want one .
But I 'm not going to plunk down that much cash until I know this platform has a future .
So far , I 've seen little to convince me it does.Then again , the Great Recession might end next month and I 'll go back to having too much disposable cash... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have been a fone geek since my my first in the trunk 3 watt analog radio shack branded Car phone.Was that the one the was essentially a two-way radio that only connected you to a phone operator?
You do go back!I never (before the N900) had one that would truly free me from a laptop.That's a pretty subjective criterion.
No palm-size device will every free most of us from a laptop.
On the other hand, I've known people who claimed their Palm Vs did just that.
OK, no networking.
But upgrade to a Palm with a MMC slot (the V+ was the last Palm not to have one) and stick a bluetooth card in it...The N900 IS the most advanced (mobile computer that also has cell and viop phone functions) of the decade.If you want a truly hackable phone, yea, it's pretty important.
Most consumers will give it a big yawn.
And calling it a "computer" is pure marketspeak — I must own a dozen cheap gadgets that would qualify as a "computer" if you looked at them the right way.Which is not to trash the N900.
It's pretty damn sexy.
I'd run out right now and buy one if $400 wasn't such a nasty dent in my budget.I really do not understand why I am not seeing more about it.Shouldn't be hard to understand.
Most people equate "smart phone" with "iPhone".
(This is the product that took "app" from programmer slang to household word.
) If you're a serious geek you're maybe into Android (mainly because Google is perceived as less fascist to developers and users than Apple).
WebOS trails behind, and the older platforms (Windows Mobile, PalmOS, Symbian) still have some following.Even to the smallest of these, Maemo is tiny upstart.
So far it's only been the basis for 3 devices, only one of which is a phone.
Nokia's going to have to push this platform very hard if it's going to gain any traction.
And from what I can see, Maemo is the poor stepbrother to Symbian in Nokia's product strategy.That's how established businesses kill new technologies, even when it's clear that those new technologies are what the company needs to adapt and grow.
Folks loyal to the old technologies starve the new guys of resources (marketing, R&amp;D, sales priorities) because they're in control.
I speak from experience here, having worked in the x64 server branch of Sun.I have chatted with many N900 users that after a month or so, are still finding new things.Which is why I want one.
But I'm not going to plunk down that much cash until I know this platform has a future.
So far, I've seen little to convince me it does.Then again, the Great Recession might end next month and I'll go back to having too much disposable cash....
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567850</id>
	<title>Shipbuilding comeback</title>
	<author>fotoguzzi</author>
	<datestamp>1261929000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That has been the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile,\_Alabama#20th\_century" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">big thing</a> [wikipedia.org] in Mobile if you go by Wikipedia.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That has been the big thing [ wikipedia.org ] in Mobile if you go by Wikipedia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That has been the big thing [wikipedia.org] in Mobile if you go by Wikipedia.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30576016</id>
	<title>Re:In other news...</title>
	<author>Buelldozer</author>
	<datestamp>1261996560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here in Wyoming, in the United States of America, I can be on a piece of property that's half days drive from the nearest town and get a stable EVDO connection AND make calls WITHOUT an external antenna.</p><p>Apparently the guys over at Verizon are smarter than the ones at Telstra! They've engineered it so I don't have to lug around an external antenna!</p><p>Also, you're talking out of your hat. People piss and moan about cellular service in the USA but it's NOT that bad. You are probably not familiar with Wyoming so here's a wikipedia link: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyoming" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyoming</a> [wikipedia.org] . In short the only reason we're not THE lowest population density state is because Alaska is just so damn big.</p><p>Cellular service works here and it works surprisingly well considering how few people we have.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here in Wyoming , in the United States of America , I can be on a piece of property that 's half days drive from the nearest town and get a stable EVDO connection AND make calls WITHOUT an external antenna.Apparently the guys over at Verizon are smarter than the ones at Telstra !
They 've engineered it so I do n't have to lug around an external antenna ! Also , you 're talking out of your hat .
People piss and moan about cellular service in the USA but it 's NOT that bad .
You are probably not familiar with Wyoming so here 's a wikipedia link : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyoming [ wikipedia.org ] .
In short the only reason we 're not THE lowest population density state is because Alaska is just so damn big.Cellular service works here and it works surprisingly well considering how few people we have .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here in Wyoming, in the United States of America, I can be on a piece of property that's half days drive from the nearest town and get a stable EVDO connection AND make calls WITHOUT an external antenna.Apparently the guys over at Verizon are smarter than the ones at Telstra!
They've engineered it so I don't have to lug around an external antenna!Also, you're talking out of your hat.
People piss and moan about cellular service in the USA but it's NOT that bad.
You are probably not familiar with Wyoming so here's a wikipedia link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyoming [wikipedia.org] .
In short the only reason we're not THE lowest population density state is because Alaska is just so damn big.Cellular service works here and it works surprisingly well considering how few people we have.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566446</id>
	<title>Only Mobile?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261916160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What about Montgomery, Birmingham, or Huntsville?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What about Montgomery , Birmingham , or Huntsville ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What about Montgomery, Birmingham, or Huntsville?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566324</id>
	<title>Re:In other news...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261915140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What's happened is that countries without legacy copper and overbearing telcos have leapfrogged the US in terms of, well....pretty much everything mobile.</p></div><p>It is fucking ridiculous that the internet and most telecommunications technologies were invented here in the USA, yet we have some of the world's worst connectivity measured in bang-for-buck.  In my opinion, our mobile phone companies are colluding and need to be smacked down HARD by the government, why else is there not one of them who doesn't gouge for text messages?  What is it, something like a thousand text messages equal the bandwidth consumed by one minute of voice?  Fucking nuts.  Where's my fiber to the door?  Why do I have such a low connection speed compared to Japan and most places in Europe with similar population densities?  Yet we tolerate this.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's happened is that countries without legacy copper and overbearing telcos have leapfrogged the US in terms of , well....pretty much everything mobile.It is fucking ridiculous that the internet and most telecommunications technologies were invented here in the USA , yet we have some of the world 's worst connectivity measured in bang-for-buck .
In my opinion , our mobile phone companies are colluding and need to be smacked down HARD by the government , why else is there not one of them who does n't gouge for text messages ?
What is it , something like a thousand text messages equal the bandwidth consumed by one minute of voice ?
Fucking nuts .
Where 's my fiber to the door ?
Why do I have such a low connection speed compared to Japan and most places in Europe with similar population densities ?
Yet we tolerate this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's happened is that countries without legacy copper and overbearing telcos have leapfrogged the US in terms of, well....pretty much everything mobile.It is fucking ridiculous that the internet and most telecommunications technologies were invented here in the USA, yet we have some of the world's worst connectivity measured in bang-for-buck.
In my opinion, our mobile phone companies are colluding and need to be smacked down HARD by the government, why else is there not one of them who doesn't gouge for text messages?
What is it, something like a thousand text messages equal the bandwidth consumed by one minute of voice?
Fucking nuts.
Where's my fiber to the door?
Why do I have such a low connection speed compared to Japan and most places in Europe with similar population densities?
Yet we tolerate this.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566810</id>
	<title>Re:The inevitable Slashdot response...</title>
	<author>JaredOfEuropa</author>
	<datestamp>1261919580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>For me it's the opposite.  I make frequent use of many of my phone's features: the browser, navigation, calendar/todo/notebook features, email, and so on... but I actually don't make calls all that often.  Can they make me a cell phone <i>without</i> the phone (but with mobile data)?</htmltext>
<tokenext>For me it 's the opposite .
I make frequent use of many of my phone 's features : the browser , navigation , calendar/todo/notebook features , email , and so on... but I actually do n't make calls all that often .
Can they make me a cell phone without the phone ( but with mobile data ) ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For me it's the opposite.
I make frequent use of many of my phone's features: the browser, navigation, calendar/todo/notebook features, email, and so on... but I actually don't make calls all that often.
Can they make me a cell phone without the phone (but with mobile data)?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566300</id>
	<title>Fuck the RAZR</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261914840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everyone and their mother had to have one of those, and it wasn't even that good.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone and their mother had to have one of those , and it was n't even that good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone and their mother had to have one of those, and it wasn't even that good.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568126</id>
	<title>Re:Nokia N9000.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261932480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The N900 may be important this year but over the decade I think the most important was the first phone with WiFi. This isn't mentioned in the article and tbh I'm not sure which phone it is. I know HTC had WiFi phones around 2005 (Tornado and Universal) but I'm not sure if they were the first to include both GSM and WiFi in the same device.

These were the start of the proper smartphone market and you mightn't have a N900 or iPhone without these type of phones.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The N900 may be important this year but over the decade I think the most important was the first phone with WiFi .
This is n't mentioned in the article and tbh I 'm not sure which phone it is .
I know HTC had WiFi phones around 2005 ( Tornado and Universal ) but I 'm not sure if they were the first to include both GSM and WiFi in the same device .
These were the start of the proper smartphone market and you might n't have a N900 or iPhone without these type of phones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The N900 may be important this year but over the decade I think the most important was the first phone with WiFi.
This isn't mentioned in the article and tbh I'm not sure which phone it is.
I know HTC had WiFi phones around 2005 (Tornado and Universal) but I'm not sure if they were the first to include both GSM and WiFi in the same device.
These were the start of the proper smartphone market and you mightn't have a N900 or iPhone without these type of phones.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566578</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30570004</id>
	<title>Re:The inevitable Slashdot response...</title>
	<author>skrolle2</author>
	<datestamp>1262008200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's because the consumer electronics race causes manufacturers to fill their products with CRAP so that they get more feature bulletpoints or larger numbers they can use in their sales material, because stupid consumers think that more feature and larger numbers are better. That's why we have the megapixel race on compact cameras, even though more megapixels may in many cases produce worse images given that everything else is the same. What really matters is the quality of the optics and the quality and size of the CCD, but you can't put a nice number on that, so manufacturers don't bother.</p><p>With phones, and especially smartphones, it's all about feature bulletpoints and cramming as much shit into the phone as possible, and who the fuck cares about processor power or battery life, eh? The result is shit phones that are slow, and crashing, and that run out of batteries really fast. What use is a phone if you can't actually make calls on it? If you can send a text message? If it takes a few seconds between each keypress for it to register, the phone is fucking broken. I don't care that is has a bajillion apps and features and browsers and data transfer and internet connectivity and word document readers when I can't make or receive a call.</p><p>And that's why you get the backlash here, because it's the people here that are the early adopters, that buy the promised new cool technology, and it's the people here that discover when it's shit and doesn't work, and make rants about how they "just want a phone that makes calls".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's because the consumer electronics race causes manufacturers to fill their products with CRAP so that they get more feature bulletpoints or larger numbers they can use in their sales material , because stupid consumers think that more feature and larger numbers are better .
That 's why we have the megapixel race on compact cameras , even though more megapixels may in many cases produce worse images given that everything else is the same .
What really matters is the quality of the optics and the quality and size of the CCD , but you ca n't put a nice number on that , so manufacturers do n't bother.With phones , and especially smartphones , it 's all about feature bulletpoints and cramming as much shit into the phone as possible , and who the fuck cares about processor power or battery life , eh ?
The result is shit phones that are slow , and crashing , and that run out of batteries really fast .
What use is a phone if you ca n't actually make calls on it ?
If you can send a text message ?
If it takes a few seconds between each keypress for it to register , the phone is fucking broken .
I do n't care that is has a bajillion apps and features and browsers and data transfer and internet connectivity and word document readers when I ca n't make or receive a call.And that 's why you get the backlash here , because it 's the people here that are the early adopters , that buy the promised new cool technology , and it 's the people here that discover when it 's shit and does n't work , and make rants about how they " just want a phone that makes calls " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's because the consumer electronics race causes manufacturers to fill their products with CRAP so that they get more feature bulletpoints or larger numbers they can use in their sales material, because stupid consumers think that more feature and larger numbers are better.
That's why we have the megapixel race on compact cameras, even though more megapixels may in many cases produce worse images given that everything else is the same.
What really matters is the quality of the optics and the quality and size of the CCD, but you can't put a nice number on that, so manufacturers don't bother.With phones, and especially smartphones, it's all about feature bulletpoints and cramming as much shit into the phone as possible, and who the fuck cares about processor power or battery life, eh?
The result is shit phones that are slow, and crashing, and that run out of batteries really fast.
What use is a phone if you can't actually make calls on it?
If you can send a text message?
If it takes a few seconds between each keypress for it to register, the phone is fucking broken.
I don't care that is has a bajillion apps and features and browsers and data transfer and internet connectivity and word document readers when I can't make or receive a call.And that's why you get the backlash here, because it's the people here that are the early adopters, that buy the promised new cool technology, and it's the people here that discover when it's shit and doesn't work, and make rants about how they "just want a phone that makes calls".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566786</id>
	<title>Re:Notable hardware</title>
	<author>hitmark</author>
	<datestamp>1261919340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it kinda helps that one can do, on theory at least, handover from UMTS to GSM. And with EDGE, data transmissions over GSM at least is acceptable unless one tries to do real time streaming or similar (and i understand there is a update in the works that will bump the speed even more).</p><p>all in all, GSM, ones it got GPRS, have shown itself remarkably adaptable. I have recently learned that i can even pull of something similar to UMTS's data and voice at the same time, by diving its time between the data and voice traffic.</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General\_Packet\_Radio\_Service#Hardware" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General\_Packet\_Radio\_Service#Hardware</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it kinda helps that one can do , on theory at least , handover from UMTS to GSM .
And with EDGE , data transmissions over GSM at least is acceptable unless one tries to do real time streaming or similar ( and i understand there is a update in the works that will bump the speed even more ) .all in all , GSM , ones it got GPRS , have shown itself remarkably adaptable .
I have recently learned that i can even pull of something similar to UMTS 's data and voice at the same time , by diving its time between the data and voice traffic.http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General \ _Packet \ _Radio \ _Service # Hardware [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it kinda helps that one can do, on theory at least, handover from UMTS to GSM.
And with EDGE, data transmissions over GSM at least is acceptable unless one tries to do real time streaming or similar (and i understand there is a update in the works that will bump the speed even more).all in all, GSM, ones it got GPRS, have shown itself remarkably adaptable.
I have recently learned that i can even pull of something similar to UMTS's data and voice at the same time, by diving its time between the data and voice traffic.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General\_Packet\_Radio\_Service#Hardware [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566414</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568298</id>
	<title>You should NEVER hold the phone up to your head</title>
	<author>Trip6</author>
	<datestamp>1261935000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cell phones are microwave ovens cooking your head.  Hold next to any body part, especially your head, at your own risk.  Always use the earbuds/microphone or at least a bluetooth device.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cell phones are microwave ovens cooking your head .
Hold next to any body part , especially your head , at your own risk .
Always use the earbuds/microphone or at least a bluetooth device .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cell phones are microwave ovens cooking your head.
Hold next to any body part, especially your head, at your own risk.
Always use the earbuds/microphone or at least a bluetooth device.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566286</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568602</id>
	<title>There is!</title>
	<author>Antiocheian</author>
	<datestamp>1261939860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There *is* more depth, take a look at the final item:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>2010 There are rumours that Apple is going to launch a larger iPhone/tablet device. Palm will hopefully announce a new phone at CES and everyone hopes that Nokia will unveil something amazing.</p></div><p>Capiche ?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There * is * more depth , take a look at the final item : 2010 There are rumours that Apple is going to launch a larger iPhone/tablet device .
Palm will hopefully announce a new phone at CES and everyone hopes that Nokia will unveil something amazing.Capiche ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There *is* more depth, take a look at the final item:2010 There are rumours that Apple is going to launch a larger iPhone/tablet device.
Palm will hopefully announce a new phone at CES and everyone hopes that Nokia will unveil something amazing.Capiche ?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566316</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566516</id>
	<title>I'll tell you what happened.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261916880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's the same thing that happened with the cable (isp) company.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's the same thing that happened with the cable ( isp ) company .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's the same thing that happened with the cable (isp) company.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567238</id>
	<title>Re:The inevitable Slashdot response...</title>
	<author>Spad</author>
	<datestamp>1261923060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Proper" smart phones aren't a problem, it's the phones that try to offer the features of smartphones and end up with the worst of both worlds. You get crappy internet access (WAP) a crappy email substitute (MMS) a crappy camera, a crappy media player and to top it all off you get shitty battery life because of all these "features".</p><p>If I want a smartphone I'll buy a smartphone, but if I don't buy a smartphone then I just want something that makes calls, handles text messages, has an alarm clock and has a decent battery life. My old Nokia 8910 would last almost a week between charges, my Samsung D900 lasts about 3 days if I don't make too many calls, most phones these days *aim* to survive one working day between charges and it's really not good enough (for my uses, at least).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Proper " smart phones are n't a problem , it 's the phones that try to offer the features of smartphones and end up with the worst of both worlds .
You get crappy internet access ( WAP ) a crappy email substitute ( MMS ) a crappy camera , a crappy media player and to top it all off you get shitty battery life because of all these " features " .If I want a smartphone I 'll buy a smartphone , but if I do n't buy a smartphone then I just want something that makes calls , handles text messages , has an alarm clock and has a decent battery life .
My old Nokia 8910 would last almost a week between charges , my Samsung D900 lasts about 3 days if I do n't make too many calls , most phones these days * aim * to survive one working day between charges and it 's really not good enough ( for my uses , at least ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Proper" smart phones aren't a problem, it's the phones that try to offer the features of smartphones and end up with the worst of both worlds.
You get crappy internet access (WAP) a crappy email substitute (MMS) a crappy camera, a crappy media player and to top it all off you get shitty battery life because of all these "features".If I want a smartphone I'll buy a smartphone, but if I don't buy a smartphone then I just want something that makes calls, handles text messages, has an alarm clock and has a decent battery life.
My old Nokia 8910 would last almost a week between charges, my Samsung D900 lasts about 3 days if I don't make too many calls, most phones these days *aim* to survive one working day between charges and it's really not good enough (for my uses, at least).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30575484</id>
	<title>Re:Hmm</title>
	<author>ncc74656</author>
	<datestamp>1261993860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>also a bit US centric really.</p></div></blockquote><p>A strange accusation, given that the article (such as it was) appears to have come from a British website.  What are the odds they'd knock together a "US-centric" article?</p><p>(Then again, complaints of this nature seem rather common here, so I shouldn't be surprised.  You might want to get your knee looked at; if it's not jerking, it's at least twitching.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>also a bit US centric really.A strange accusation , given that the article ( such as it was ) appears to have come from a British website .
What are the odds they 'd knock together a " US-centric " article ?
( Then again , complaints of this nature seem rather common here , so I should n't be surprised .
You might want to get your knee looked at ; if it 's not jerking , it 's at least twitching .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>also a bit US centric really.A strange accusation, given that the article (such as it was) appears to have come from a British website.
What are the odds they'd knock together a "US-centric" article?
(Then again, complaints of this nature seem rather common here, so I shouldn't be surprised.
You might want to get your knee looked at; if it's not jerking, it's at least twitching.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567332</id>
	<title>Re:The inevitable Slashdot response...</title>
	<author>selven</author>
	<datestamp>1261923960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem is that without phones that just make calls, if you already have your all-in-one entertainment and productivity center (eg. a netbook) and don't need a duplicate you would still have to spend $500 on all those features.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is that without phones that just make calls , if you already have your all-in-one entertainment and productivity center ( eg .
a netbook ) and do n't need a duplicate you would still have to spend $ 500 on all those features .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is that without phones that just make calls, if you already have your all-in-one entertainment and productivity center (eg.
a netbook) and don't need a duplicate you would still have to spend $500 on all those features.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30569626</id>
	<title>Re:The inevitable Slashdot response...</title>
	<author>houghi</author>
	<datestamp>1262002500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am a person who only wants phone and sms. Those I mostly use to make an apointment with people so we see each other in person soewhere. I do not want a computer with me all the time. I detest blackberry people who are online all the time. If iother people are more interesting then I am, please go to them. Do not come to me and then chat with them.</p><p>I rather plan my day around what I need to do. Not sitting at a PC and having actual contact with real people is very intersting. It is like live chat, but you can actually hear, see and feel the person.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am a person who only wants phone and sms .
Those I mostly use to make an apointment with people so we see each other in person soewhere .
I do not want a computer with me all the time .
I detest blackberry people who are online all the time .
If iother people are more interesting then I am , please go to them .
Do not come to me and then chat with them.I rather plan my day around what I need to do .
Not sitting at a PC and having actual contact with real people is very intersting .
It is like live chat , but you can actually hear , see and feel the person .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am a person who only wants phone and sms.
Those I mostly use to make an apointment with people so we see each other in person soewhere.
I do not want a computer with me all the time.
I detest blackberry people who are online all the time.
If iother people are more interesting then I am, please go to them.
Do not come to me and then chat with them.I rather plan my day around what I need to do.
Not sitting at a PC and having actual contact with real people is very intersting.
It is like live chat, but you can actually hear, see and feel the person.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566812</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30573876</id>
	<title>Re:In other news...</title>
	<author>maccam</author>
	<datestamp>1262028840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think it is about time to retire the "Al Gore invented the Internet" jokes. Al Gore never made that claim; the RNC created that sound bite and released it to the media. Al Gore facilitated the internet by sponsoring the legislation that funded the infrastructure of the internet, and credit for that is the statement made by Gore that the RNC distorted into the famous "invented" quote. Gore deserves credit for having the vision to appreciate the importance of the internet, when other legislators did not. Even the 'the father of the Internet', Vint Cerf, gives Gore that credit.</div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think it is about time to retire the " Al Gore invented the Internet " jokes .
Al Gore never made that claim ; the RNC created that sound bite and released it to the media .
Al Gore facilitated the internet by sponsoring the legislation that funded the infrastructure of the internet , and credit for that is the statement made by Gore that the RNC distorted into the famous " invented " quote .
Gore deserves credit for having the vision to appreciate the importance of the internet , when other legislators did not .
Even the 'the father of the Internet ' , Vint Cerf , gives Gore that credit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think it is about time to retire the "Al Gore invented the Internet" jokes.
Al Gore never made that claim; the RNC created that sound bite and released it to the media.
Al Gore facilitated the internet by sponsoring the legislation that funded the infrastructure of the internet, and credit for that is the statement made by Gore that the RNC distorted into the famous "invented" quote.
Gore deserves credit for having the vision to appreciate the importance of the internet, when other legislators did not.
Even the 'the father of the Internet', Vint Cerf, gives Gore that credit.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30569566</id>
	<title>Re:The inevitable Slashdot response...</title>
	<author>Rick17JJ</author>
	<datestamp>1262001360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I only make about one call per week with my cell phone and do not use it enough to even remember how to adjust the volume.  All I want is a cell phone to make calls.  Any unnecessary complexity just gets in the way of my remembering how to just make a call or adjust the volume.<br><br>I have memorized the several of my most commonly used phone numbers, which saves me from needing to know how to look up a telephone number in the cell phone. I keep a few other less commonly used telephone numbers on a card in my wallet.<br><br>I usually do not bring my reading glasses along when hiking or working outside, so I am then unable to see the menus or labels on the buttons. So when I forget which button does what, I have difficulty using the phone. As for the alternative of using voice activated commands when outdoors, I do not use the cell phone enough to ever remember how to use that feature either.<br><br>Despite being somewhat of a Luddite about some technology, I have built several of my own desktop computers for use at home over the years, and installed Linux on each of them.  I even prefer to do many ordinary tasks such as moving files from the command line instead of using the built-in point-and-click GUI alternatives. But, I was once told by a computer expert, that Linux is too difficult for the average computer user. I have never managed to learn how to properly operate my cell phone, but I have had no building a computer and installing and using Linux. I also managed to easily setup my DSL modem and its firewall, even though the installation CD was not designed to run under Linux. But, using an ordinary cell phone is a much more difficult task which is too complicated for me.<br><br>By the way, all that advertising on TV about the minutes used in a plan, is as irrelevant to me as extra cell phone features, since I only use a total of several minutes per month. Cell phone are not designed or marketed towards customers like me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I only make about one call per week with my cell phone and do not use it enough to even remember how to adjust the volume .
All I want is a cell phone to make calls .
Any unnecessary complexity just gets in the way of my remembering how to just make a call or adjust the volume.I have memorized the several of my most commonly used phone numbers , which saves me from needing to know how to look up a telephone number in the cell phone .
I keep a few other less commonly used telephone numbers on a card in my wallet.I usually do not bring my reading glasses along when hiking or working outside , so I am then unable to see the menus or labels on the buttons .
So when I forget which button does what , I have difficulty using the phone .
As for the alternative of using voice activated commands when outdoors , I do not use the cell phone enough to ever remember how to use that feature either.Despite being somewhat of a Luddite about some technology , I have built several of my own desktop computers for use at home over the years , and installed Linux on each of them .
I even prefer to do many ordinary tasks such as moving files from the command line instead of using the built-in point-and-click GUI alternatives .
But , I was once told by a computer expert , that Linux is too difficult for the average computer user .
I have never managed to learn how to properly operate my cell phone , but I have had no building a computer and installing and using Linux .
I also managed to easily setup my DSL modem and its firewall , even though the installation CD was not designed to run under Linux .
But , using an ordinary cell phone is a much more difficult task which is too complicated for me.By the way , all that advertising on TV about the minutes used in a plan , is as irrelevant to me as extra cell phone features , since I only use a total of several minutes per month .
Cell phone are not designed or marketed towards customers like me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I only make about one call per week with my cell phone and do not use it enough to even remember how to adjust the volume.
All I want is a cell phone to make calls.
Any unnecessary complexity just gets in the way of my remembering how to just make a call or adjust the volume.I have memorized the several of my most commonly used phone numbers, which saves me from needing to know how to look up a telephone number in the cell phone.
I keep a few other less commonly used telephone numbers on a card in my wallet.I usually do not bring my reading glasses along when hiking or working outside, so I am then unable to see the menus or labels on the buttons.
So when I forget which button does what, I have difficulty using the phone.
As for the alternative of using voice activated commands when outdoors, I do not use the cell phone enough to ever remember how to use that feature either.Despite being somewhat of a Luddite about some technology, I have built several of my own desktop computers for use at home over the years, and installed Linux on each of them.
I even prefer to do many ordinary tasks such as moving files from the command line instead of using the built-in point-and-click GUI alternatives.
But, I was once told by a computer expert, that Linux is too difficult for the average computer user.
I have never managed to learn how to properly operate my cell phone, but I have had no building a computer and installing and using Linux.
I also managed to easily setup my DSL modem and its firewall, even though the installation CD was not designed to run under Linux.
But, using an ordinary cell phone is a much more difficult task which is too complicated for me.By the way, all that advertising on TV about the minutes used in a plan, is as irrelevant to me as extra cell phone features, since I only use a total of several minutes per month.
Cell phone are not designed or marketed towards customers like me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30572434</id>
	<title>Re:In other news...</title>
	<author>Verna</author>
	<datestamp>1262022540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>
Over the past ten years a lot has changed as a result of mobiles too:

<a href="http://thealbatross.ca/2009/12/blackberry-users-discover-that-blackberry-is-also-telephone/" title="thealbatross.ca" rel="nofollow">http://thealbatross.ca/2009/12/blackberry-users-discover-that-blackberry-is-also-telephone/</a> [thealbatross.ca]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Over the past ten years a lot has changed as a result of mobiles too : http : //thealbatross.ca/2009/12/blackberry-users-discover-that-blackberry-is-also-telephone/ [ thealbatross.ca ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Over the past ten years a lot has changed as a result of mobiles too:

http://thealbatross.ca/2009/12/blackberry-users-discover-that-blackberry-is-also-telephone/ [thealbatross.ca]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566712</id>
	<title>Re:In other news...</title>
	<author>Fred\_A</author>
	<datestamp>1261918620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What's happened is that countries without legacy copper and overbearing telcos have leapfrogged the US in terms of, well....pretty much everything mobile.</p></div><p>But it's difficult to keep up with the mobile market, it's such a moving target !</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's happened is that countries without legacy copper and overbearing telcos have leapfrogged the US in terms of , well....pretty much everything mobile.But it 's difficult to keep up with the mobile market , it 's such a moving target !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's happened is that countries without legacy copper and overbearing telcos have leapfrogged the US in terms of, well....pretty much everything mobile.But it's difficult to keep up with the mobile market, it's such a moving target !
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568512</id>
	<title>Re:The inevitable Slashdot response...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261938600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why not have the best of both worlds?  This is a problem that is easily solved with a GSM based network, and two phone lines.  You have your usual phone that can do everything on one line.  Then on the other line, you have a dirt cheap phone.  I picked up a Nokia 1661 for $15 which is a phone that can do four things:  Use a LED on the top as a flashlight, play a FM radio on attached earphones with a 2.5mm connector, do calls, and do text messages.  The phone is very well built for a cheapie, and it does all I need when I don't feel like taking my Android phone (say when outdoors or taking a weekend sabbatical.)  The only thing notable about the 1661 is that nobody has been able to crack its unlock algorithm yet, so you won't be finding unlocked versions of these.</p><p>Low end phones are well made.  Other than incremental UI improvements, there isn't much that can be done with them, improvement wise.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why not have the best of both worlds ?
This is a problem that is easily solved with a GSM based network , and two phone lines .
You have your usual phone that can do everything on one line .
Then on the other line , you have a dirt cheap phone .
I picked up a Nokia 1661 for $ 15 which is a phone that can do four things : Use a LED on the top as a flashlight , play a FM radio on attached earphones with a 2.5mm connector , do calls , and do text messages .
The phone is very well built for a cheapie , and it does all I need when I do n't feel like taking my Android phone ( say when outdoors or taking a weekend sabbatical .
) The only thing notable about the 1661 is that nobody has been able to crack its unlock algorithm yet , so you wo n't be finding unlocked versions of these.Low end phones are well made .
Other than incremental UI improvements , there is n't much that can be done with them , improvement wise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why not have the best of both worlds?
This is a problem that is easily solved with a GSM based network, and two phone lines.
You have your usual phone that can do everything on one line.
Then on the other line, you have a dirt cheap phone.
I picked up a Nokia 1661 for $15 which is a phone that can do four things:  Use a LED on the top as a flashlight, play a FM radio on attached earphones with a 2.5mm connector, do calls, and do text messages.
The phone is very well built for a cheapie, and it does all I need when I don't feel like taking my Android phone (say when outdoors or taking a weekend sabbatical.
)  The only thing notable about the 1661 is that nobody has been able to crack its unlock algorithm yet, so you won't be finding unlocked versions of these.Low end phones are well made.
Other than incremental UI improvements, there isn't much that can be done with them, improvement wise.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30572470</id>
	<title>Re:Smartphones and Flip Format</title>
	<author>tzanger</author>
	<datestamp>1262022780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Flip phones are not a superior technology; halving the length at the cost of doubling the thickness? No thanks.</p><p>Some of us prefer a thin phone.  You can keep your flip; I'll keep my bars.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Flip phones are not a superior technology ; halving the length at the cost of doubling the thickness ?
No thanks.Some of us prefer a thin phone .
You can keep your flip ; I 'll keep my bars .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Flip phones are not a superior technology; halving the length at the cost of doubling the thickness?
No thanks.Some of us prefer a thin phone.
You can keep your flip; I'll keep my bars.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566286</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567746</id>
	<title>They missed an important on: Nokia 1100</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261927980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nokia 1100 is not only a remarkable mobile phone, but also a best-seller:</p><p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia\_1100</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nokia 1100 is not only a remarkable mobile phone , but also a best-seller : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia \ _1100</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nokia 1100 is not only a remarkable mobile phone, but also a best-seller:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia\_1100</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566784</id>
	<title>Re:The inevitable Slashdot response...</title>
	<author>loshwomp</author>
	<datestamp>1261919340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I've never quite got my head around a tech site like Slashdot, where the demographic is almost certainly interested in new technology having such a negative response to technological advances in what our phones can do.</p></div><p>It's not that.  New features are fine when added to a solid core feature set, but when bells and whistles come at *the expense* of basics like durability, call quality, ergonomics, and a whole host of human factors, then that's shitty.</p><p>The transition from land lines to mobiles marked a significant regression in both call reliability and call quality.  Similarly, the "race to the bottom" for cheap mobile phones packed with bells and whistles has left quality behind.  It's become acceptable to have telephones that lock up and reset periodically.  My Western Electric model 2500 telephone was designed to last a lifetime (or several lifetimes), and to be *serviceable* in the unlikely event something broke.  Almost all modern mobile phones are designed to take up space in the landfill two years after purchase.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've never quite got my head around a tech site like Slashdot , where the demographic is almost certainly interested in new technology having such a negative response to technological advances in what our phones can do.It 's not that .
New features are fine when added to a solid core feature set , but when bells and whistles come at * the expense * of basics like durability , call quality , ergonomics , and a whole host of human factors , then that 's shitty.The transition from land lines to mobiles marked a significant regression in both call reliability and call quality .
Similarly , the " race to the bottom " for cheap mobile phones packed with bells and whistles has left quality behind .
It 's become acceptable to have telephones that lock up and reset periodically .
My Western Electric model 2500 telephone was designed to last a lifetime ( or several lifetimes ) , and to be * serviceable * in the unlikely event something broke .
Almost all modern mobile phones are designed to take up space in the landfill two years after purchase .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've never quite got my head around a tech site like Slashdot, where the demographic is almost certainly interested in new technology having such a negative response to technological advances in what our phones can do.It's not that.
New features are fine when added to a solid core feature set, but when bells and whistles come at *the expense* of basics like durability, call quality, ergonomics, and a whole host of human factors, then that's shitty.The transition from land lines to mobiles marked a significant regression in both call reliability and call quality.
Similarly, the "race to the bottom" for cheap mobile phones packed with bells and whistles has left quality behind.
It's become acceptable to have telephones that lock up and reset periodically.
My Western Electric model 2500 telephone was designed to last a lifetime (or several lifetimes), and to be *serviceable* in the unlikely event something broke.
Almost all modern mobile phones are designed to take up space in the landfill two years after purchase.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566982</id>
	<title>Re:The inevitable Slashdot response...</title>
	<author>rolfwind</author>
	<datestamp>1261920720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Whenever mobile phones are mentioned on Slashdot, something akin to the following comment will inevitably appear:</p><p>'All I want is a phone that makes calls.'</p><p>I've never quite got my head around a tech site like Slashdot, where the demographic is almost certainly interested in new technology having such a negative response to technological advances in what our phones can do. You rarely [never?] hear this with other technology on this site:</p></div></blockquote><p>Before the iPhone, I used to echo this luddite-sounding sentiment as well.  It wasn't because I was scared of new features, but because the new features often compromised the primary function of the phone itself.  Giving them keyboards often made the number keys beyond tiny making it hard to dial in a number, the browsers and internet capability were micky mouse and often sucked battery life, it had a camera but besides poor pictures, it was hard to share them (often more work than it was worth), etcetera.</p><p>And there are still people that just want a phone.  Perhaps their workplace doesn't allow phones with cameras.  Maybe they want to be reachable but without all the temptation and distractions.  There are legitimate reasons to want less in a device besides battery life but it's probably borne out of frustration that so few manufacturers are willing to provide something very basic that works well rather than actual bitching about the specific device itself.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Whenever mobile phones are mentioned on Slashdot , something akin to the following comment will inevitably appear : 'All I want is a phone that makes calls .
'I 've never quite got my head around a tech site like Slashdot , where the demographic is almost certainly interested in new technology having such a negative response to technological advances in what our phones can do .
You rarely [ never ?
] hear this with other technology on this site : Before the iPhone , I used to echo this luddite-sounding sentiment as well .
It was n't because I was scared of new features , but because the new features often compromised the primary function of the phone itself .
Giving them keyboards often made the number keys beyond tiny making it hard to dial in a number , the browsers and internet capability were micky mouse and often sucked battery life , it had a camera but besides poor pictures , it was hard to share them ( often more work than it was worth ) , etcetera.And there are still people that just want a phone .
Perhaps their workplace does n't allow phones with cameras .
Maybe they want to be reachable but without all the temptation and distractions .
There are legitimate reasons to want less in a device besides battery life but it 's probably borne out of frustration that so few manufacturers are willing to provide something very basic that works well rather than actual bitching about the specific device itself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whenever mobile phones are mentioned on Slashdot, something akin to the following comment will inevitably appear:'All I want is a phone that makes calls.
'I've never quite got my head around a tech site like Slashdot, where the demographic is almost certainly interested in new technology having such a negative response to technological advances in what our phones can do.
You rarely [never?
] hear this with other technology on this site:Before the iPhone, I used to echo this luddite-sounding sentiment as well.
It wasn't because I was scared of new features, but because the new features often compromised the primary function of the phone itself.
Giving them keyboards often made the number keys beyond tiny making it hard to dial in a number, the browsers and internet capability were micky mouse and often sucked battery life, it had a camera but besides poor pictures, it was hard to share them (often more work than it was worth), etcetera.And there are still people that just want a phone.
Perhaps their workplace doesn't allow phones with cameras.
Maybe they want to be reachable but without all the temptation and distractions.
There are legitimate reasons to want less in a device besides battery life but it's probably borne out of frustration that so few manufacturers are willing to provide something very basic that works well rather than actual bitching about the specific device itself.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566804</id>
	<title>Well, you heard it now.</title>
	<author>argent</author>
	<datestamp>1261919520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I wish Windows 7 had less features. All I want is the ability to write a letter</i></p><p>I wish Windows 7 had fewer features. All I want is an OS, not an entertainment center loaded with DRM so that people who want to watch movies on their PC can do it without buying the "entertainment center" version. I don't want Aero Glass and the Sidebar and System Restore and all the other memory- and laptop-battery-wasting CRAP that Windows has accumulated over the years. When I use Windows, I use Windows 2000 or XP.</p><p>I want a phone that just does "phone stuff", so the power that goes to the faster CPU can go to giving me longer standby time, so the space taken up by the large screen and camera and flip-out keyboard can go to a larger battery instead. Because my first cellphone was a dumb bar phone, just a phone, with a battery pack that could go three days without a recharge... and for my current phone I have a charger at home, a charger in my office, and a charger in my car just in case. Text, sure, but leave out the MP3 player and camera and web browser and all the rest of the glitz until battery technology is up to the job.</p><p>Being interested in technology doesn't make one automatically in favor of stupid ideas just because they're shiny.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wish Windows 7 had less features .
All I want is the ability to write a letterI wish Windows 7 had fewer features .
All I want is an OS , not an entertainment center loaded with DRM so that people who want to watch movies on their PC can do it without buying the " entertainment center " version .
I do n't want Aero Glass and the Sidebar and System Restore and all the other memory- and laptop-battery-wasting CRAP that Windows has accumulated over the years .
When I use Windows , I use Windows 2000 or XP.I want a phone that just does " phone stuff " , so the power that goes to the faster CPU can go to giving me longer standby time , so the space taken up by the large screen and camera and flip-out keyboard can go to a larger battery instead .
Because my first cellphone was a dumb bar phone , just a phone , with a battery pack that could go three days without a recharge... and for my current phone I have a charger at home , a charger in my office , and a charger in my car just in case .
Text , sure , but leave out the MP3 player and camera and web browser and all the rest of the glitz until battery technology is up to the job.Being interested in technology does n't make one automatically in favor of stupid ideas just because they 're shiny .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wish Windows 7 had less features.
All I want is the ability to write a letterI wish Windows 7 had fewer features.
All I want is an OS, not an entertainment center loaded with DRM so that people who want to watch movies on their PC can do it without buying the "entertainment center" version.
I don't want Aero Glass and the Sidebar and System Restore and all the other memory- and laptop-battery-wasting CRAP that Windows has accumulated over the years.
When I use Windows, I use Windows 2000 or XP.I want a phone that just does "phone stuff", so the power that goes to the faster CPU can go to giving me longer standby time, so the space taken up by the large screen and camera and flip-out keyboard can go to a larger battery instead.
Because my first cellphone was a dumb bar phone, just a phone, with a battery pack that could go three days without a recharge... and for my current phone I have a charger at home, a charger in my office, and a charger in my car just in case.
Text, sure, but leave out the MP3 player and camera and web browser and all the rest of the glitz until battery technology is up to the job.Being interested in technology doesn't make one automatically in favor of stupid ideas just because they're shiny.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567026</id>
	<title>What has happened in Mobile...</title>
	<author>EmagGeek</author>
	<datestamp>1261921080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you really want to know, there are several newspapers in Mobile that probably offer online archives going back that far that would tell you everything you wanted to know about the events of the past decade.</p><p>The Mobile Press Register is probably a good place to start..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you really want to know , there are several newspapers in Mobile that probably offer online archives going back that far that would tell you everything you wanted to know about the events of the past decade.The Mobile Press Register is probably a good place to start. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you really want to know, there are several newspapers in Mobile that probably offer online archives going back that far that would tell you everything you wanted to know about the events of the past decade.The Mobile Press Register is probably a good place to start..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566784
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30569898
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30570004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567892
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566286
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566324
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566316
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30570126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566578
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568780
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567006
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566578
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30570710
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566286
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567502
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30572470
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566286
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30575484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566316
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566414
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568696
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567006
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566578
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30570446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566316
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30573002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566286
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567204
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567470
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566286
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567238
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30569626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566812
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30581102
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566316
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30569580
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566578
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30569960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566804
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30576016
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566786
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566414
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30569566
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30572434
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30569050
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566894
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30569358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30573876
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_27_2222202_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567124
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566810
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_27_2222202.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566262
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566602
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567892
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566324
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568276
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566540
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568370
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30576016
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30569898
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30569050
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30572434
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567138
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30573876
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566712
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_27_2222202.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566414
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566786
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566870
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_27_2222202.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566844
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_27_2222202.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566316
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566480
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566554
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30575484
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30581102
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568602
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_27_2222202.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568850
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30569358
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_27_2222202.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566300
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_27_2222202.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566286
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30572470
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566406
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30573002
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30570710
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568298
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_27_2222202.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566648
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568490
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30570004
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567204
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568646
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30570446
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566810
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567124
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568562
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566894
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567332
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30570126
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568512
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567238
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566982
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567476
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567470
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566784
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30569566
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566812
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30569626
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567502
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566804
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567546
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30569960
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_27_2222202.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567734
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_27_2222202.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30566578
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30569580
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568126
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30567006
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568696
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_27_2222202.30568780
</commentlist>
</conversation>
