<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_29_1318221</id>
	<title>Google Netbook Specs Leaked</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1262094600000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Foochee noted that <a href="http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/20091227/google-chrome-based-netbook-tech-specs-are-out.htm">specs have leaked</a> for an alleged new Google NetBook.  Coupling this with the HTC Google Phone, it really appears that Google is going to be pushing into new spaces in the next few years.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Foochee noted that specs have leaked for an alleged new Google NetBook .
Coupling this with the HTC Google Phone , it really appears that Google is going to be pushing into new spaces in the next few years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Foochee noted that specs have leaked for an alleged new Google NetBook.
Coupling this with the HTC Google Phone, it really appears that Google is going to be pushing into new spaces in the next few years.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581622</id>
	<title>Re:Odd</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262099520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>cookies and porn</htmltext>
<tokenext>cookies and porn</tokentext>
<sentencetext>cookies and porn</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581578</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582302</id>
	<title>Re:Others are also sceptical about this leak too</title>
	<author>stakovahflow</author>
	<datestamp>1262104080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.osnews.com/story/22666/\_Google\_Chrome\_OS\_Netbook\_strike\_Bogus\_strike\_Specs\_Leaked\_" title="osnews.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.osnews.com/story/22666/\_Google\_Chrome\_OS\_Netbook\_strike\_Bogus\_strike\_Specs\_Leaked\_</a> [osnews.com]

* Just thought I'd help with the OSNews article link as I was unable to go to the slashdot.org link you provided... *

--Stak</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.osnews.com/story/22666/ \ _Google \ _Chrome \ _OS \ _Netbook \ _strike \ _Bogus \ _strike \ _Specs \ _Leaked \ _ [ osnews.com ] * Just thought I 'd help with the OSNews article link as I was unable to go to the slashdot.org link you provided... * --Stak</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.osnews.com/story/22666/\_Google\_Chrome\_OS\_Netbook\_strike\_Bogus\_strike\_Specs\_Leaked\_ [osnews.com]

* Just thought I'd help with the OSNews article link as I was unable to go to the slashdot.org link you provided... *

--Stak</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30583670</id>
	<title>Re:Odd</title>
	<author>EETech1</author>
	<datestamp>1262111040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm wondering if the '64GB SSD (mind you, not HDD)' they talk about in TFA is something more along the line of a SD card or similar flash chip instead of the more expensive SLC type you'd find with a laptop type hard drive? That would help keep costs in line, and maybe we'll even be lucky, and it'll be in a connector  so we can change them easily, and upgrade the storage capacity as flash memory gets cheaper and bigger!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm wondering if the '64GB SSD ( mind you , not HDD ) ' they talk about in TFA is something more along the line of a SD card or similar flash chip instead of the more expensive SLC type you 'd find with a laptop type hard drive ?
That would help keep costs in line , and maybe we 'll even be lucky , and it 'll be in a connector so we can change them easily , and upgrade the storage capacity as flash memory gets cheaper and bigger !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm wondering if the '64GB SSD (mind you, not HDD)' they talk about in TFA is something more along the line of a SD card or similar flash chip instead of the more expensive SLC type you'd find with a laptop type hard drive?
That would help keep costs in line, and maybe we'll even be lucky, and it'll be in a connector  so we can change them easily, and upgrade the storage capacity as flash memory gets cheaper and bigger!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581680</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581674</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, but what's the catch?</title>
	<author>jimbobborg</author>
	<datestamp>1262099760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>After reading the other replies here, I'd say the best bet would be NetBSD, since it's been ported to everything else.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>After reading the other replies here , I 'd say the best bet would be NetBSD , since it 's been ported to everything else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After reading the other replies here, I'd say the best bet would be NetBSD, since it's been ported to everything else.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582652</id>
	<title>Re:Very interesting.</title>
	<author>linhares</author>
	<datestamp>1262105880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I have never paid Google anything</p></div><p>Selling a soul to the devil is free.  For some time, at least.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have never paid Google anythingSelling a soul to the devil is free .
For some time , at least .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have never paid Google anythingSelling a soul to the devil is free.
For some time, at least.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581754</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582052</id>
	<title>sub-$300 price tag?</title>
	<author>kai\_hiwatari</author>
	<datestamp>1262102520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If it has a price tag of less than $300, as the article says, its a real good deal. It won't be a desktop replacement at all but it'd be great as a web device.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If it has a price tag of less than $ 300 , as the article says , its a real good deal .
It wo n't be a desktop replacement at all but it 'd be great as a web device .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it has a price tag of less than $300, as the article says, its a real good deal.
It won't be a desktop replacement at all but it'd be great as a web device.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581664</id>
	<title>Re:Is it going to be free?</title>
	<author>Thanshin</author>
	<datestamp>1262099760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>and now my Chrome RAM usage goes up to 600MB of RAM.</p></div><p>That's just wrong.</p><p>A much better reaction would've been to have your Chrome RAM usage go up to 600MB of ROCK!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>and now my Chrome RAM usage goes up to 600MB of RAM.That 's just wrong.A much better reaction would 've been to have your Chrome RAM usage go up to 600MB of ROCK !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and now my Chrome RAM usage goes up to 600MB of RAM.That's just wrong.A much better reaction would've been to have your Chrome RAM usage go up to 600MB of ROCK!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30591266</id>
	<title>Re:This has failed before and will fail again.</title>
	<author>oztiks</author>
	<datestamp>1259873100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Its much simpler then all that.</p><p>Tell me right this second what real world market place this system has that hasn't all ready been covered immensely? The only one i can think of is Porn lovers, who would only souly use the PC for looking at dirty websites and even then I can do that on my iPhone.</p><p>The reality is there is no real market (excuse the innuendo) penetration for this system and its a waste of Googles time just like you said.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Its much simpler then all that.Tell me right this second what real world market place this system has that has n't all ready been covered immensely ?
The only one i can think of is Porn lovers , who would only souly use the PC for looking at dirty websites and even then I can do that on my iPhone.The reality is there is no real market ( excuse the innuendo ) penetration for this system and its a waste of Googles time just like you said .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its much simpler then all that.Tell me right this second what real world market place this system has that hasn't all ready been covered immensely?
The only one i can think of is Porn lovers, who would only souly use the PC for looking at dirty websites and even then I can do that on my iPhone.The reality is there is no real market (excuse the innuendo) penetration for this system and its a waste of Googles time just like you said.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582550</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581566</id>
	<title>10" screen??</title>
	<author>filesiteguy</author>
	<datestamp>1262098980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Though the idea sounds cool, I'm wondering what benefit having a solid-state drive with a 10" screen will be other than for those few road warriors who have to write long proposals while on an airplane flight.<br><br>At the same time, having a bundled deal so that one gets phone service with the netbook isn't that much of a benefit, IMO. You can already do this with a HTC Hero/Android device or even an iPhone.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Though the idea sounds cool , I 'm wondering what benefit having a solid-state drive with a 10 " screen will be other than for those few road warriors who have to write long proposals while on an airplane flight.At the same time , having a bundled deal so that one gets phone service with the netbook is n't that much of a benefit , IMO .
You can already do this with a HTC Hero/Android device or even an iPhone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Though the idea sounds cool, I'm wondering what benefit having a solid-state drive with a 10" screen will be other than for those few road warriors who have to write long proposals while on an airplane flight.At the same time, having a bundled deal so that one gets phone service with the netbook isn't that much of a benefit, IMO.
You can already do this with a HTC Hero/Android device or even an iPhone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581644</id>
	<title>Re:Odd</title>
	<author>jhoegl</author>
	<datestamp>1262099580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Porn</htmltext>
<tokenext>Porn</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Porn</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581578</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30584292</id>
	<title>I'm calling fake.</title>
	<author>hyperion2010</author>
	<datestamp>1262114100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What the hell is a nettop that does not use local storage doing with a 64gb SSD harddrive!??!??!  Also what the hell is it doing with 2gigs of ram!?  I'm calling bullshit until we get some real info.  If these are real they could cut the cost in half by using a 16gig ssd and 1gig of ram and see zero performance hit this isnt a gaming rig ffs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What the hell is a nettop that does not use local storage doing with a 64gb SSD harddrive ! ? ? ! ? ? !
Also what the hell is it doing with 2gigs of ram ! ?
I 'm calling bullshit until we get some real info .
If these are real they could cut the cost in half by using a 16gig ssd and 1gig of ram and see zero performance hit this isnt a gaming rig ffs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What the hell is a nettop that does not use local storage doing with a 64gb SSD harddrive!??!??!
Also what the hell is it doing with 2gigs of ram!?
I'm calling bullshit until we get some real info.
If these are real they could cut the cost in half by using a 16gig ssd and 1gig of ram and see zero performance hit this isnt a gaming rig ffs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582002</id>
	<title>Re:smartbook is nice, but where are the ARM nettop</title>
	<author>LWATCDR</author>
	<datestamp>1262102220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fear and because it is bad business.<br>People that sell Windows machines probably make as much from the crapware they install on each machine as they do on the machine. Once you leave the windows world you loose that money and throw in that they will have a razor thin margin and you have a high risk situation.<br>I am not jumping up and down about Chrome. I have seen the SDK on the Pre and I am convinced that the idea of HTML+javascript is NOT a great development platform. Yes Web apps are very cool but I wouldn't want to try and write to do any DSP or image processing  with javascript and doing it all server side really pushes the cost of entry for the developer through the roof.<br>Web and only web just doesn't work for me.<br>I am still convinced that for the "Smartbook" to work you will need to have an app store. No Synaptic+Apt IS NOT AN APPSTORE. It doesn't allow you to buy and sell apps.<br>An  apps store would allow the Smartbook maker to make a little money on the sale of a lot of software and pushes down the cost of software to the point that it becomes a why not purchase.<br>It also gives developers a way to make a little money and gives the average user a safe and easy place to get software. Sure allow people to side load apps but give them an app store.<br>Frankly that is what Linux and smartbooks are missing. To me Chrome is nothing more than a neat research project.<br>Think about GoogleDocs. It is great and very handy but how many people have stopped using Office or OpenOffice and gone 100\% Googledocs?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fear and because it is bad business.People that sell Windows machines probably make as much from the crapware they install on each machine as they do on the machine .
Once you leave the windows world you loose that money and throw in that they will have a razor thin margin and you have a high risk situation.I am not jumping up and down about Chrome .
I have seen the SDK on the Pre and I am convinced that the idea of HTML + javascript is NOT a great development platform .
Yes Web apps are very cool but I would n't want to try and write to do any DSP or image processing with javascript and doing it all server side really pushes the cost of entry for the developer through the roof.Web and only web just does n't work for me.I am still convinced that for the " Smartbook " to work you will need to have an app store .
No Synaptic + Apt IS NOT AN APPSTORE .
It does n't allow you to buy and sell apps.An apps store would allow the Smartbook maker to make a little money on the sale of a lot of software and pushes down the cost of software to the point that it becomes a why not purchase.It also gives developers a way to make a little money and gives the average user a safe and easy place to get software .
Sure allow people to side load apps but give them an app store.Frankly that is what Linux and smartbooks are missing .
To me Chrome is nothing more than a neat research project.Think about GoogleDocs .
It is great and very handy but how many people have stopped using Office or OpenOffice and gone 100 \ % Googledocs ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fear and because it is bad business.People that sell Windows machines probably make as much from the crapware they install on each machine as they do on the machine.
Once you leave the windows world you loose that money and throw in that they will have a razor thin margin and you have a high risk situation.I am not jumping up and down about Chrome.
I have seen the SDK on the Pre and I am convinced that the idea of HTML+javascript is NOT a great development platform.
Yes Web apps are very cool but I wouldn't want to try and write to do any DSP or image processing  with javascript and doing it all server side really pushes the cost of entry for the developer through the roof.Web and only web just doesn't work for me.I am still convinced that for the "Smartbook" to work you will need to have an app store.
No Synaptic+Apt IS NOT AN APPSTORE.
It doesn't allow you to buy and sell apps.An  apps store would allow the Smartbook maker to make a little money on the sale of a lot of software and pushes down the cost of software to the point that it becomes a why not purchase.It also gives developers a way to make a little money and gives the average user a safe and easy place to get software.
Sure allow people to side load apps but give them an app store.Frankly that is what Linux and smartbooks are missing.
To me Chrome is nothing more than a neat research project.Think about GoogleDocs.
It is great and very handy but how many people have stopped using Office or OpenOffice and gone 100\% Googledocs?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582660</id>
	<title>Re:smartbook is nice, but where are the ARM nettop</title>
	<author>ElizabethGreene</author>
	<datestamp>1262105880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There was one called the Pepperpad.  It was ~$700 and ran a java gui on top of montavista linux.  It was end-of-lifed and replaced with an x86 compatible chip.  It was slow, and a marketplace of apps never really surfaced for it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There was one called the Pepperpad .
It was ~ $ 700 and ran a java gui on top of montavista linux .
It was end-of-lifed and replaced with an x86 compatible chip .
It was slow , and a marketplace of apps never really surfaced for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There was one called the Pepperpad.
It was ~$700 and ran a java gui on top of montavista linux.
It was end-of-lifed and replaced with an x86 compatible chip.
It was slow, and a marketplace of apps never really surfaced for it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581546</id>
	<title>netbook netbook netbook</title>
	<author>For a Free Internet</author>
	<datestamp>1262098860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who cares? It's a fad for itiots.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who cares ?
It 's a fad for itiots .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who cares?
It's a fad for itiots.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30584272</id>
	<title>Re:smartbook is nice, but where are the ARM nettop</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262113980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="https://www.alwaysinnovating.com/home/index.htm" title="alwaysinnovating.com" rel="nofollow">Always Innovating arm based netbook, based on the beagleboard.</a> [alwaysinnovating.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Always Innovating arm based netbook , based on the beagleboard .
[ alwaysinnovating.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Always Innovating arm based netbook, based on the beagleboard.
[alwaysinnovating.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581536</id>
	<title>Google notebook specs...</title>
	<author>desmogod</author>
	<datestamp>1262098740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maximum surface area for adverts and branding!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maximum surface area for adverts and branding !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maximum surface area for adverts and branding!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582050</id>
	<title>Re:Is it going to be free?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262102520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Also is in development, maybe a lot under the surface. The final/public version dont have to be that heavy (but i agree that watching very populated weaves is a resource hog).<br><br>Regarding Chrome OS not doing anything without an internet connection, is mean to be an internet device, no more, no less. Is like complaining that car sucks because can't do anything without gas or batteries, or desktop computers sucks because they can't do anything without electricity. If you want something to work with in places without internet, try something that is not only an internet device, could be more expensive, have less battery life, and maybe more security risks, but will work in the subway.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Also is in development , maybe a lot under the surface .
The final/public version dont have to be that heavy ( but i agree that watching very populated weaves is a resource hog ) .Regarding Chrome OS not doing anything without an internet connection , is mean to be an internet device , no more , no less .
Is like complaining that car sucks because ca n't do anything without gas or batteries , or desktop computers sucks because they ca n't do anything without electricity .
If you want something to work with in places without internet , try something that is not only an internet device , could be more expensive , have less battery life , and maybe more security risks , but will work in the subway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also is in development, maybe a lot under the surface.
The final/public version dont have to be that heavy (but i agree that watching very populated weaves is a resource hog).Regarding Chrome OS not doing anything without an internet connection, is mean to be an internet device, no more, no less.
Is like complaining that car sucks because can't do anything without gas or batteries, or desktop computers sucks because they can't do anything without electricity.
If you want something to work with in places without internet, try something that is not only an internet device, could be more expensive, have less battery life, and maybe more security risks, but will work in the subway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581876</id>
	<title>Re:smartbook is nice, but where are the ARM nettop</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262101440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'd love to see something like Beagleboard that I could mount on the back of an LCD.</p></div><p> <a href="http://www.alwaysinnovating.com/home/index.htm" title="alwaysinnovating.com">Et voila!</a> [alwaysinnovating.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd love to see something like Beagleboard that I could mount on the back of an LCD .
Et voila !
[ alwaysinnovating.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd love to see something like Beagleboard that I could mount on the back of an LCD.
Et voila!
[alwaysinnovating.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582348</id>
	<title>Re:Very interesting.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262104320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and how will these things do all the things people expect of a normal computer? import photos, family movies, download music and movies, video chat with family, games, etc?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and how will these things do all the things people expect of a normal computer ?
import photos , family movies , download music and movies , video chat with family , games , etc ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and how will these things do all the things people expect of a normal computer?
import photos, family movies, download music and movies, video chat with family, games, etc?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581754</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30586272</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, but what's the catch?</title>
	<author>SnarfQuest</author>
	<datestamp>1262079900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Linux is also well supported on the ARM chips. Look at OpenWRT for an example.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Linux is also well supported on the ARM chips .
Look at OpenWRT for an example .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Linux is also well supported on the ARM chips.
Look at OpenWRT for an example.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581674</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30591240</id>
	<title>Re:Very interesting.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259872680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is typical Google, make a useful tool, without any real clue on what its market is.</p><p>Business Machines? Nope. Simply put the same reason why Linux desktop never made the business world and why macs were put at the bottom of the list. Cost of training, cost of migrating, fear of new technology, the same old rant.</p><p>Game Machines? Nope. For obvious "numerous" reasons.</p><p>Mac Users? Nope, its too cheap for the Mac snobs, plus Macs have always been about graphics.</p><p>Google missed the boat with Andriod, and they certainly missed the boat with PCS and what introduce a non-Intel based processor, yeah that will work, look at what Mac eventually ended up doing? it went over to an Intel arch a few years back because it saves so many issues in the long run. Not dissing ARM because it is by far a better processor but we are talking VHS vs Beta argument all over again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is typical Google , make a useful tool , without any real clue on what its market is.Business Machines ?
Nope. Simply put the same reason why Linux desktop never made the business world and why macs were put at the bottom of the list .
Cost of training , cost of migrating , fear of new technology , the same old rant.Game Machines ?
Nope. For obvious " numerous " reasons.Mac Users ?
Nope , its too cheap for the Mac snobs , plus Macs have always been about graphics.Google missed the boat with Andriod , and they certainly missed the boat with PCS and what introduce a non-Intel based processor , yeah that will work , look at what Mac eventually ended up doing ?
it went over to an Intel arch a few years back because it saves so many issues in the long run .
Not dissing ARM because it is by far a better processor but we are talking VHS vs Beta argument all over again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is typical Google, make a useful tool, without any real clue on what its market is.Business Machines?
Nope. Simply put the same reason why Linux desktop never made the business world and why macs were put at the bottom of the list.
Cost of training, cost of migrating, fear of new technology, the same old rant.Game Machines?
Nope. For obvious "numerous" reasons.Mac Users?
Nope, its too cheap for the Mac snobs, plus Macs have always been about graphics.Google missed the boat with Andriod, and they certainly missed the boat with PCS and what introduce a non-Intel based processor, yeah that will work, look at what Mac eventually ended up doing?
it went over to an Intel arch a few years back because it saves so many issues in the long run.
Not dissing ARM because it is by far a better processor but we are talking VHS vs Beta argument all over again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581754</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581706</id>
	<title>SHOCKING!</title>
	<author>whisper\_jeff</author>
	<datestamp>1262100060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...it really appears that Google is going to be pushing into new spaces in the next few years.</p></div><p>
Sorry for being a smartass (blame it on me being at work for one day during the holidays...) but, really, who didn't already know that? Especially if you're even a casual reader of slashdot. It's clear that Google is an expanding company who's focused on a wide offering of products and services that are internet- and information-related. Anyone who doesn't know that Google is planning on pushing into new market segments hasn't been paying a hint of attention.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...it really appears that Google is going to be pushing into new spaces in the next few years .
Sorry for being a smartass ( blame it on me being at work for one day during the holidays... ) but , really , who did n't already know that ?
Especially if you 're even a casual reader of slashdot .
It 's clear that Google is an expanding company who 's focused on a wide offering of products and services that are internet- and information-related .
Anyone who does n't know that Google is planning on pushing into new market segments has n't been paying a hint of attention .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...it really appears that Google is going to be pushing into new spaces in the next few years.
Sorry for being a smartass (blame it on me being at work for one day during the holidays...) but, really, who didn't already know that?
Especially if you're even a casual reader of slashdot.
It's clear that Google is an expanding company who's focused on a wide offering of products and services that are internet- and information-related.
Anyone who doesn't know that Google is planning on pushing into new market segments hasn't been paying a hint of attention.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581506</id>
	<title>I'm a nigger</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262098500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All I can see in the mirror is my teeth.</p><p>nigger<br>-noun<br>1.     Slang: Extremely Disparaging and Offensive.<br>a.     a black person.<br>b.     a member of any dark-skinned people.<br>2.     Slang: Extremely Disparaging and Offensive. a person of any race or origin regarded as contemptible, inferior, ignorant, etc.<br>3.     a victim of prejudice similar to that suffered by blacks; a person who is economically, politically, or socially disenfranchised</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All I can see in the mirror is my teeth.nigger-noun1 .
Slang : Extremely Disparaging and Offensive.a .
a black person.b .
a member of any dark-skinned people.2 .
Slang : Extremely Disparaging and Offensive .
a person of any race or origin regarded as contemptible , inferior , ignorant , etc.3 .
a victim of prejudice similar to that suffered by blacks ; a person who is economically , politically , or socially disenfranchised</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All I can see in the mirror is my teeth.nigger-noun1.
Slang: Extremely Disparaging and Offensive.a.
a black person.b.
a member of any dark-skinned people.2.
Slang: Extremely Disparaging and Offensive.
a person of any race or origin regarded as contemptible, inferior, ignorant, etc.3.
a victim of prejudice similar to that suffered by blacks; a person who is economically, politically, or socially disenfranchised</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581578</id>
	<title>Odd</title>
	<author>Luthair</author>
	<datestamp>1262099040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why would a computer which only uses web applications need a 64GB SSD?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would a computer which only uses web applications need a 64GB SSD ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would a computer which only uses web applications need a 64GB SSD?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30587934</id>
	<title>Re:10" screen??</title>
	<author>Eil</author>
	<datestamp>1262086920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I'm wondering what benefit having a solid-state drive with a 10" screen will be other than for those few road warriors who have to write long proposals while on an airplane flight.</p></div></blockquote><p>That is actually one scenario where you wouldn't want Google's netbook. Chrome OS requires an Internet connection to do anything useful. Not only is wifi access not available (or hideously expensive) on a plane, but extensive document editing is going to be painful in the extreme on such a cramped machine.</p><p>Google's netbook is meant either as an auxiliary computing device for basic tasks or for people who don't do much with their computer except web browsing, email, and IM. In other words, 90\% of everyone currently online.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm wondering what benefit having a solid-state drive with a 10 " screen will be other than for those few road warriors who have to write long proposals while on an airplane flight.That is actually one scenario where you would n't want Google 's netbook .
Chrome OS requires an Internet connection to do anything useful .
Not only is wifi access not available ( or hideously expensive ) on a plane , but extensive document editing is going to be painful in the extreme on such a cramped machine.Google 's netbook is meant either as an auxiliary computing device for basic tasks or for people who do n't do much with their computer except web browsing , email , and IM .
In other words , 90 \ % of everyone currently online .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm wondering what benefit having a solid-state drive with a 10" screen will be other than for those few road warriors who have to write long proposals while on an airplane flight.That is actually one scenario where you wouldn't want Google's netbook.
Chrome OS requires an Internet connection to do anything useful.
Not only is wifi access not available (or hideously expensive) on a plane, but extensive document editing is going to be painful in the extreme on such a cramped machine.Google's netbook is meant either as an auxiliary computing device for basic tasks or for people who don't do much with their computer except web browsing, email, and IM.
In other words, 90\% of everyone currently online.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581566</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581978</id>
	<title>Re:Cool.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262102100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It looks like you're writing a letter!</p><p><a href="http://docs.google.com/" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">Google Docs</a> [google.com] is a great tool for collaboratively writing documents.  <a href="http://www.google.com/google-d-s/tour1.html" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">Tell me more!</a> [google.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It looks like you 're writing a letter ! Google Docs [ google.com ] is a great tool for collaboratively writing documents .
Tell me more !
[ google.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It looks like you're writing a letter!Google Docs [google.com] is a great tool for collaboratively writing documents.
Tell me more!
[google.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581492</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581554</id>
	<title>Is it going to be free?</title>
	<author>alen</author>
	<datestamp>1262098920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i played with Wave and think it sucks. it's slow, it's a resource hog and no one is on it. I joined a few public waves and now my Chrome RAM usage goes up to 600MB of RAM.</p><p>I played with Chrome OS and think it sucks as well. you can't do anything without an internet connection.</p><p>even my iphone can do a lot more without an internet connection in places like the NYC subway</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i played with Wave and think it sucks .
it 's slow , it 's a resource hog and no one is on it .
I joined a few public waves and now my Chrome RAM usage goes up to 600MB of RAM.I played with Chrome OS and think it sucks as well .
you ca n't do anything without an internet connection.even my iphone can do a lot more without an internet connection in places like the NYC subway</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i played with Wave and think it sucks.
it's slow, it's a resource hog and no one is on it.
I joined a few public waves and now my Chrome RAM usage goes up to 600MB of RAM.I played with Chrome OS and think it sucks as well.
you can't do anything without an internet connection.even my iphone can do a lot more without an internet connection in places like the NYC subway</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581754</id>
	<title>Very interesting.</title>
	<author>wvmarle</author>
	<datestamp>1262100480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This can be interesting, why:
</p><ul> <li>This would become a non-Intel platform, which means Windows doesn't run on it. I'd really like to see how well it sells when Windows is simply not an option. If it takes off, MS is going to be hit hard, if only because alternative OSes become a serious alternative all of a sudden. Instead of being a niche product.</li>
<li>Price of under $300, but still subsidised: where is the money coming from? Normally e.g. a mobile phone is subsidised because you are going to pay money to the mobile phone provider (calls, data, etc). I have never paid Google anything, other than for ads that I asked them to place. But not for any of their regular services. So either ad-supported, or only sold together with mobile data plans or so? The first is easy to get around: just install another OS or so.</li>
<li>Opening up the processor market: if this netbook takes off, we could start seeing really lots of non-Intel compatible computers around, first of all of course ARM based, and maybe a revival of the PPC in the consumer market. I think that would be the best effect of this. Not just because Windows doesn't run on it but because there is so much more than Intel. And I bet there will suddenly be more room for competitors to AMD and Intel: they do not need to license any microcode or so. And porting Linux/*BSD/Chrome to those architectures, if not done yet, will be relatively easy.</li>
</ul><p>IMHO one of the core reasons all consumer PCs come with Intel compatible processors is that Windows runs on them. Equip them with other processors and you can not sell your product with Windows. And that is an absolute suicidal business plan at the moment. Google may get this going, get non-Windows and non-Intel computers to the masses, opening up a lot of space for competitors.
</p><p>And if it doesn't work, well we can always continue dreaming.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This can be interesting , why : This would become a non-Intel platform , which means Windows does n't run on it .
I 'd really like to see how well it sells when Windows is simply not an option .
If it takes off , MS is going to be hit hard , if only because alternative OSes become a serious alternative all of a sudden .
Instead of being a niche product .
Price of under $ 300 , but still subsidised : where is the money coming from ?
Normally e.g .
a mobile phone is subsidised because you are going to pay money to the mobile phone provider ( calls , data , etc ) .
I have never paid Google anything , other than for ads that I asked them to place .
But not for any of their regular services .
So either ad-supported , or only sold together with mobile data plans or so ?
The first is easy to get around : just install another OS or so .
Opening up the processor market : if this netbook takes off , we could start seeing really lots of non-Intel compatible computers around , first of all of course ARM based , and maybe a revival of the PPC in the consumer market .
I think that would be the best effect of this .
Not just because Windows does n't run on it but because there is so much more than Intel .
And I bet there will suddenly be more room for competitors to AMD and Intel : they do not need to license any microcode or so .
And porting Linux/ * BSD/Chrome to those architectures , if not done yet , will be relatively easy .
IMHO one of the core reasons all consumer PCs come with Intel compatible processors is that Windows runs on them .
Equip them with other processors and you can not sell your product with Windows .
And that is an absolute suicidal business plan at the moment .
Google may get this going , get non-Windows and non-Intel computers to the masses , opening up a lot of space for competitors .
And if it does n't work , well we can always continue dreaming .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This can be interesting, why:
 This would become a non-Intel platform, which means Windows doesn't run on it.
I'd really like to see how well it sells when Windows is simply not an option.
If it takes off, MS is going to be hit hard, if only because alternative OSes become a serious alternative all of a sudden.
Instead of being a niche product.
Price of under $300, but still subsidised: where is the money coming from?
Normally e.g.
a mobile phone is subsidised because you are going to pay money to the mobile phone provider (calls, data, etc).
I have never paid Google anything, other than for ads that I asked them to place.
But not for any of their regular services.
So either ad-supported, or only sold together with mobile data plans or so?
The first is easy to get around: just install another OS or so.
Opening up the processor market: if this netbook takes off, we could start seeing really lots of non-Intel compatible computers around, first of all of course ARM based, and maybe a revival of the PPC in the consumer market.
I think that would be the best effect of this.
Not just because Windows doesn't run on it but because there is so much more than Intel.
And I bet there will suddenly be more room for competitors to AMD and Intel: they do not need to license any microcode or so.
And porting Linux/*BSD/Chrome to those architectures, if not done yet, will be relatively easy.
IMHO one of the core reasons all consumer PCs come with Intel compatible processors is that Windows runs on them.
Equip them with other processors and you can not sell your product with Windows.
And that is an absolute suicidal business plan at the moment.
Google may get this going, get non-Windows and non-Intel computers to the masses, opening up a lot of space for competitors.
And if it doesn't work, well we can always continue dreaming.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581744</id>
	<title>Re:smartbook is nice, but where are the ARM nettop</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1262100420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Given the existence of things like <a href="http://h18004.www1.hp.com/products/quickspecs/13500\_na/13500\_na.html" title="hp.com">this HP thin client</a> [hp.com] (1.2GHz Marvel ARM Soc, 512MB RAM, 512MB flash, DVI video, running a modified version of Debian(though they don't really like to talk about that), $199 quoted price, quite possibly less, given how enterprise product pricing tends to work) I'd say that building ARM nettops is clearly possible; but(depending on exactly how far down HP actually goes on the stated price) their may not be a whole lot of margin to work with.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Given the existence of things like this HP thin client [ hp.com ] ( 1.2GHz Marvel ARM Soc , 512MB RAM , 512MB flash , DVI video , running a modified version of Debian ( though they do n't really like to talk about that ) , $ 199 quoted price , quite possibly less , given how enterprise product pricing tends to work ) I 'd say that building ARM nettops is clearly possible ; but ( depending on exactly how far down HP actually goes on the stated price ) their may not be a whole lot of margin to work with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Given the existence of things like this HP thin client [hp.com] (1.2GHz Marvel ARM Soc, 512MB RAM, 512MB flash, DVI video, running a modified version of Debian(though they don't really like to talk about that), $199 quoted price, quite possibly less, given how enterprise product pricing tends to work) I'd say that building ARM nettops is clearly possible; but(depending on exactly how far down HP actually goes on the stated price) their may not be a whole lot of margin to work with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30583230</id>
	<title>Re:Very interesting.</title>
	<author>Locutus</author>
	<datestamp>1262109000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>the subsidized price is from 3G network connectivity contracts so the device can get on that Inter web thing people keep talking about. I think Google needs that Inter web thing around. And it might not be so easy as putting another distro in it. Reports have said that Google wants this thing booting in under 10 seconds and that elimination of the standard BIOS is one way to shave a few seconds. It's not impossible but it won't be as easy as using a standard LiveCD.<br><br>I'm all for opening up the playing field to competition and seeing ARM, PPC, and others gain marketshare but we are talking about a standard computer type of device and that's not going to fly with Microsoft. Mostly because of what you stated, they don't have Microsoft Windows to put on it. We have already seen a big hardware company CEO apologize for showing an ARM based netbook at this years CompuTex trade show and he did it with Microsoft on stage with him. We also saw the head of the largest manufacturing association say that they fear Microsoft and say something like non PC stuff is ok for them but PC stuff is scary for them because of Microsoft.  If you remember Netscape, they know how to kill babies before they get a chance to grow into something tougher to kill.  Just look at how they took a Linux platform, the netbook, and turned it into a Windows XP platform in just over one year. Sure Linux is still on 30\% of those netbooks sold worldwide but the press tells everyone Windows is \_the\_ netbook OS and mom and pop believe them.<br><br>There's bucket loads of potential and capabilities in ARM on netbooks but Microsoft will not let that grab hold if they have any say in it. So there's a good chance we'll see more illegal activities by them and will probably see them in court again in 5 years. But we may also see that ARM netbook start to blossom and then get mowed down by MS. Intel is no saint either so it's going to be a backroom battle once again. IMO.<br><br>LoB</htmltext>
<tokenext>the subsidized price is from 3G network connectivity contracts so the device can get on that Inter web thing people keep talking about .
I think Google needs that Inter web thing around .
And it might not be so easy as putting another distro in it .
Reports have said that Google wants this thing booting in under 10 seconds and that elimination of the standard BIOS is one way to shave a few seconds .
It 's not impossible but it wo n't be as easy as using a standard LiveCD.I 'm all for opening up the playing field to competition and seeing ARM , PPC , and others gain marketshare but we are talking about a standard computer type of device and that 's not going to fly with Microsoft .
Mostly because of what you stated , they do n't have Microsoft Windows to put on it .
We have already seen a big hardware company CEO apologize for showing an ARM based netbook at this years CompuTex trade show and he did it with Microsoft on stage with him .
We also saw the head of the largest manufacturing association say that they fear Microsoft and say something like non PC stuff is ok for them but PC stuff is scary for them because of Microsoft .
If you remember Netscape , they know how to kill babies before they get a chance to grow into something tougher to kill .
Just look at how they took a Linux platform , the netbook , and turned it into a Windows XP platform in just over one year .
Sure Linux is still on 30 \ % of those netbooks sold worldwide but the press tells everyone Windows is \ _the \ _ netbook OS and mom and pop believe them.There 's bucket loads of potential and capabilities in ARM on netbooks but Microsoft will not let that grab hold if they have any say in it .
So there 's a good chance we 'll see more illegal activities by them and will probably see them in court again in 5 years .
But we may also see that ARM netbook start to blossom and then get mowed down by MS. Intel is no saint either so it 's going to be a backroom battle once again .
IMO.LoB</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the subsidized price is from 3G network connectivity contracts so the device can get on that Inter web thing people keep talking about.
I think Google needs that Inter web thing around.
And it might not be so easy as putting another distro in it.
Reports have said that Google wants this thing booting in under 10 seconds and that elimination of the standard BIOS is one way to shave a few seconds.
It's not impossible but it won't be as easy as using a standard LiveCD.I'm all for opening up the playing field to competition and seeing ARM, PPC, and others gain marketshare but we are talking about a standard computer type of device and that's not going to fly with Microsoft.
Mostly because of what you stated, they don't have Microsoft Windows to put on it.
We have already seen a big hardware company CEO apologize for showing an ARM based netbook at this years CompuTex trade show and he did it with Microsoft on stage with him.
We also saw the head of the largest manufacturing association say that they fear Microsoft and say something like non PC stuff is ok for them but PC stuff is scary for them because of Microsoft.
If you remember Netscape, they know how to kill babies before they get a chance to grow into something tougher to kill.
Just look at how they took a Linux platform, the netbook, and turned it into a Windows XP platform in just over one year.
Sure Linux is still on 30\% of those netbooks sold worldwide but the press tells everyone Windows is \_the\_ netbook OS and mom and pop believe them.There's bucket loads of potential and capabilities in ARM on netbooks but Microsoft will not let that grab hold if they have any say in it.
So there's a good chance we'll see more illegal activities by them and will probably see them in court again in 5 years.
But we may also see that ARM netbook start to blossom and then get mowed down by MS. Intel is no saint either so it's going to be a backroom battle once again.
IMO.LoB</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581754</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582036</id>
	<title>Re:Is it going to be free?</title>
	<author>mister\_playboy</author>
	<datestamp>1262102400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I played with Chrome OS and think it sucks as well. you can't do anything without an internet connection.</p></div><p>Google can't send you ads if you aren't online.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I played with Chrome OS and think it sucks as well .
you ca n't do anything without an internet connection.Google ca n't send you ads if you are n't online .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I played with Chrome OS and think it sucks as well.
you can't do anything without an internet connection.Google can't send you ads if you aren't online.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30584392</id>
	<title>Not So Fast</title>
	<author>denobug</author>
	<datestamp>1262114520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Somehow I get the feeling with Windows 7 Microsoft is ready to "swap" the platform instruction code/assembler compiler in their kernel to include support for 3rd vender, after Intel and AMD.  Microsoft is simply waiting for the market response.  So this hurts Intel more than Microsoft.
<br> <br>
Remember that MS already has the experience of building a platform for XBox 360 with PowerPC yet they built a platform for game developer to port the game between PC and 360 with relative ease (dispite the fact that most major studios already built their engine to be cross platform compatible).  As long as the brain trust are still in the company this should be a fairly easy fix.  nVidia can only be too happy to allow Microsoft support as long as they pay.  Same goes with ARM, especially CE already support ARM processor.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Somehow I get the feeling with Windows 7 Microsoft is ready to " swap " the platform instruction code/assembler compiler in their kernel to include support for 3rd vender , after Intel and AMD .
Microsoft is simply waiting for the market response .
So this hurts Intel more than Microsoft .
Remember that MS already has the experience of building a platform for XBox 360 with PowerPC yet they built a platform for game developer to port the game between PC and 360 with relative ease ( dispite the fact that most major studios already built their engine to be cross platform compatible ) .
As long as the brain trust are still in the company this should be a fairly easy fix .
nVidia can only be too happy to allow Microsoft support as long as they pay .
Same goes with ARM , especially CE already support ARM processor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Somehow I get the feeling with Windows 7 Microsoft is ready to "swap" the platform instruction code/assembler compiler in their kernel to include support for 3rd vender, after Intel and AMD.
Microsoft is simply waiting for the market response.
So this hurts Intel more than Microsoft.
Remember that MS already has the experience of building a platform for XBox 360 with PowerPC yet they built a platform for game developer to port the game between PC and 360 with relative ease (dispite the fact that most major studios already built their engine to be cross platform compatible).
As long as the brain trust are still in the company this should be a fairly easy fix.
nVidia can only be too happy to allow Microsoft support as long as they pay.
Same goes with ARM, especially CE already support ARM processor.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582550</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581510</id>
	<title>dn2 post</title>
	<author>fregare</author>
	<datestamp>1262098500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What the hell I have terrible Karma.  I feel like an untouchable in India.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What the hell I have terrible Karma .
I feel like an untouchable in India .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What the hell I have terrible Karma.
I feel like an untouchable in India.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581860</id>
	<title>Re:smartbook is nice, but where are the ARM nettop</title>
	<author>thetoadwarrior</author>
	<datestamp>1262101320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because Windows doesn't run on it. I saw a piece on Google news about the netbook fad dying. The premise is that they lost sight of their original goals and are just becoming low powered laptops. IMO, this is mainly down to trying to get windows on netbooks.
<br> <br>
This is true. We're seeing fewer with SSDs, they're becoming slightly bigger but still have shitty little atom processors.
<br> <br>
So now they're not as portable, more expensive and irrelevant. The EEE's were awesome (typing this on my 901 in bed), cheap, ran forever (compared to a laptop) and could take some serious abuse.
<br> <br>
Personally I believe the netbook will be another victim of the Windows monopoly.
<br> <br>
I intend the keep my little EEE. I went to Crucial, scored some extra memory and a 64 gig ssd. It runs eveything I want just fine and has more than enough space for when I'm out and about.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because Windows does n't run on it .
I saw a piece on Google news about the netbook fad dying .
The premise is that they lost sight of their original goals and are just becoming low powered laptops .
IMO , this is mainly down to trying to get windows on netbooks .
This is true .
We 're seeing fewer with SSDs , they 're becoming slightly bigger but still have shitty little atom processors .
So now they 're not as portable , more expensive and irrelevant .
The EEE 's were awesome ( typing this on my 901 in bed ) , cheap , ran forever ( compared to a laptop ) and could take some serious abuse .
Personally I believe the netbook will be another victim of the Windows monopoly .
I intend the keep my little EEE .
I went to Crucial , scored some extra memory and a 64 gig ssd .
It runs eveything I want just fine and has more than enough space for when I 'm out and about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because Windows doesn't run on it.
I saw a piece on Google news about the netbook fad dying.
The premise is that they lost sight of their original goals and are just becoming low powered laptops.
IMO, this is mainly down to trying to get windows on netbooks.
This is true.
We're seeing fewer with SSDs, they're becoming slightly bigger but still have shitty little atom processors.
So now they're not as portable, more expensive and irrelevant.
The EEE's were awesome (typing this on my 901 in bed), cheap, ran forever (compared to a laptop) and could take some serious abuse.
Personally I believe the netbook will be another victim of the Windows monopoly.
I intend the keep my little EEE.
I went to Crucial, scored some extra memory and a 64 gig ssd.
It runs eveything I want just fine and has more than enough space for when I'm out and about.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30588992</id>
	<title>Re:This has failed before and will fail again.</title>
	<author>Eil</author>
	<datestamp>1262092500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>#1) Google will SUBSIDIZE the cost of the netbook (aka NetPC, which was hacked out of existence).</p></div></blockquote><p>If they're targeting the sub-$300 region as TFA says, they won't have to subsidize much, as similar netbooks (albeit with more expensive chipsets) already sell for less than that. And, uh, it's Google. A company run by hackers doing interesting things with cheap hardware. They're expecting a certain number of them to be hacked or repurposed. Also, they're not selling a separately-purchased subscription or anything with it. All they want is for people to keep using the web and this netbook helps them achieve that.</p><blockquote><div><p>#2) Unlike NetPC, they won't be using an intel processor, locking out Windows.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; --- so when joey or jane try to download and install their favorite game or chat client, it will fail.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; --- so when grandma can't load in her quickbooks document for the church, it will fail.</p></div></blockquote><p>This won't be marketed as a general-purpose computer. The things that you mentioned won't work on a Linux netbook either and that hasn't stopped netbooks from being shipped with Linux preinstalled. (Dell Mini 10, HP Mini 110, Acer Aspire One, MSI Wind, etc.) Most people just want a web browser, an email client, and instant messaging. That's the market that Google's netbook targets. Whoever buys this thing expecting to put their Windows XP Pirate Edition on it instead, deserves whatever complete lack of support they get.</p><blockquote><div><p>#3) As someone who has lurked in many a netbook forum, I can tell you the number one question will be "How do I install Windows XP on it?"</p></div></blockquote><p>An the #1 answer will be, "You don't. You just use it like it is." Not so hard, is it? Again, it's not meant to be a general-purpose computer. It's a specific device with a specific job: getting you on the web. Asking how to install Windows on it will make about as much sense as asking how to install OS X on a Nintendo Wii.</p><blockquote><div><p>#4) Someone will figure out how to install alternative OSes on it, maybe even write some kind of intel CPU emulator, or real-time recompiler, and then hack Windows into running on it, and then the lawsuits begin.</p></div></blockquote><p>Uhhh, what? The only "alternative" OS that a hacker can port to ARM is Linux or maybe one of the BSDs. Emulating an x86 CPU with any reasonable speed is simply not going to be feasible. And if it were, where would the lawsuits come from? Microsoft does not care what kind of computer you install Windows upon. And I highly doubt that Google will include an Apple-esqe EULA stating which kinds of software you can and cannot install.</p><p>Also, the Chromium OS is open source, is <a href="http://www.chromium.org/chromium-os" title="chromium.org">very well documented</a> [chromium.org], and Google encourages <a href="http://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/getting-involved-in-chromium-os" title="chromium.org">external hacking and development</a> [chromium.org].</p><blockquote><div><p>#5) As soon as people get bored with it, into the trash heap it goes.</p></div></blockquote><p>If you get bored with it, you either didn't need one in the first place, or you're just bored with the Internet in general. I don't think there's a lot that Google can do to prevent either of those.</p><blockquote><div><p>When the masses get it they will be disappointed by it's lack of backwards compatibility, and start searching (ironically using Google) for websites to show them how to "jailbreak" the thing into running what they want.</p></div></blockquote><p>The whole thrust of your thinly-veiled argument is that nobody will want it if it can't run Windows. What you fail to realize is that:</p><p>1. With the notable exception of hardcore PC gaming, there are really not many computing tasks that absolutely require windows any more. Despite Microsoft's best efforts, Internet content these days is very much OS-independent. We're to the point where <i>most</i> people can do everything they need within the confines of a web browser.</p><p>2. The unwashed masses are really not as attached to Windows as you think. They buy a computer, and Windows happens to come on it due to Microsoft's monopoly tactics with OEMs in the 90's. The only want to use their computer like they would any other tool. Those with a special attachment to Windows can buy any of the dozens of Windows netbooks already on the market.</p><blockquote><div><p>Adblocker apps will appear as will other hacks to thwart Google, so people can feel they got a "free netbook".</p></div></blockquote><p>Ad-blocking extensions <a href="https://chrome.google.com/extensions/search?q=adblock" title="google.com">already exist for Chrome</a> [google.com]. Nobody will get a "free netbook" because Google is not giving them away for free.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext># 1 ) Google will SUBSIDIZE the cost of the netbook ( aka NetPC , which was hacked out of existence ) .If they 're targeting the sub- $ 300 region as TFA says , they wo n't have to subsidize much , as similar netbooks ( albeit with more expensive chipsets ) already sell for less than that .
And , uh , it 's Google .
A company run by hackers doing interesting things with cheap hardware .
They 're expecting a certain number of them to be hacked or repurposed .
Also , they 're not selling a separately-purchased subscription or anything with it .
All they want is for people to keep using the web and this netbook helps them achieve that. # 2 ) Unlike NetPC , they wo n't be using an intel processor , locking out Windows .
                --- so when joey or jane try to download and install their favorite game or chat client , it will fail .
                --- so when grandma ca n't load in her quickbooks document for the church , it will fail.This wo n't be marketed as a general-purpose computer .
The things that you mentioned wo n't work on a Linux netbook either and that has n't stopped netbooks from being shipped with Linux preinstalled .
( Dell Mini 10 , HP Mini 110 , Acer Aspire One , MSI Wind , etc .
) Most people just want a web browser , an email client , and instant messaging .
That 's the market that Google 's netbook targets .
Whoever buys this thing expecting to put their Windows XP Pirate Edition on it instead , deserves whatever complete lack of support they get. # 3 ) As someone who has lurked in many a netbook forum , I can tell you the number one question will be " How do I install Windows XP on it ?
" An the # 1 answer will be , " You do n't .
You just use it like it is .
" Not so hard , is it ?
Again , it 's not meant to be a general-purpose computer .
It 's a specific device with a specific job : getting you on the web .
Asking how to install Windows on it will make about as much sense as asking how to install OS X on a Nintendo Wii. # 4 ) Someone will figure out how to install alternative OSes on it , maybe even write some kind of intel CPU emulator , or real-time recompiler , and then hack Windows into running on it , and then the lawsuits begin.Uhhh , what ?
The only " alternative " OS that a hacker can port to ARM is Linux or maybe one of the BSDs .
Emulating an x86 CPU with any reasonable speed is simply not going to be feasible .
And if it were , where would the lawsuits come from ?
Microsoft does not care what kind of computer you install Windows upon .
And I highly doubt that Google will include an Apple-esqe EULA stating which kinds of software you can and can not install.Also , the Chromium OS is open source , is very well documented [ chromium.org ] , and Google encourages external hacking and development [ chromium.org ] . # 5 ) As soon as people get bored with it , into the trash heap it goes.If you get bored with it , you either did n't need one in the first place , or you 're just bored with the Internet in general .
I do n't think there 's a lot that Google can do to prevent either of those.When the masses get it they will be disappointed by it 's lack of backwards compatibility , and start searching ( ironically using Google ) for websites to show them how to " jailbreak " the thing into running what they want.The whole thrust of your thinly-veiled argument is that nobody will want it if it ca n't run Windows .
What you fail to realize is that : 1 .
With the notable exception of hardcore PC gaming , there are really not many computing tasks that absolutely require windows any more .
Despite Microsoft 's best efforts , Internet content these days is very much OS-independent .
We 're to the point where most people can do everything they need within the confines of a web browser.2 .
The unwashed masses are really not as attached to Windows as you think .
They buy a computer , and Windows happens to come on it due to Microsoft 's monopoly tactics with OEMs in the 90 's .
The only want to use their computer like they would any other tool .
Those with a special attachment to Windows can buy any of the dozens of Windows netbooks already on the market.Adblocker apps will appear as will other hacks to thwart Google , so people can feel they got a " free netbook " .Ad-blocking extensions already exist for Chrome [ google.com ] .
Nobody will get a " free netbook " because Google is not giving them away for free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>#1) Google will SUBSIDIZE the cost of the netbook (aka NetPC, which was hacked out of existence).If they're targeting the sub-$300 region as TFA says, they won't have to subsidize much, as similar netbooks (albeit with more expensive chipsets) already sell for less than that.
And, uh, it's Google.
A company run by hackers doing interesting things with cheap hardware.
They're expecting a certain number of them to be hacked or repurposed.
Also, they're not selling a separately-purchased subscription or anything with it.
All they want is for people to keep using the web and this netbook helps them achieve that.#2) Unlike NetPC, they won't be using an intel processor, locking out Windows.
                --- so when joey or jane try to download and install their favorite game or chat client, it will fail.
                --- so when grandma can't load in her quickbooks document for the church, it will fail.This won't be marketed as a general-purpose computer.
The things that you mentioned won't work on a Linux netbook either and that hasn't stopped netbooks from being shipped with Linux preinstalled.
(Dell Mini 10, HP Mini 110, Acer Aspire One, MSI Wind, etc.
) Most people just want a web browser, an email client, and instant messaging.
That's the market that Google's netbook targets.
Whoever buys this thing expecting to put their Windows XP Pirate Edition on it instead, deserves whatever complete lack of support they get.#3) As someone who has lurked in many a netbook forum, I can tell you the number one question will be "How do I install Windows XP on it?
"An the #1 answer will be, "You don't.
You just use it like it is.
" Not so hard, is it?
Again, it's not meant to be a general-purpose computer.
It's a specific device with a specific job: getting you on the web.
Asking how to install Windows on it will make about as much sense as asking how to install OS X on a Nintendo Wii.#4) Someone will figure out how to install alternative OSes on it, maybe even write some kind of intel CPU emulator, or real-time recompiler, and then hack Windows into running on it, and then the lawsuits begin.Uhhh, what?
The only "alternative" OS that a hacker can port to ARM is Linux or maybe one of the BSDs.
Emulating an x86 CPU with any reasonable speed is simply not going to be feasible.
And if it were, where would the lawsuits come from?
Microsoft does not care what kind of computer you install Windows upon.
And I highly doubt that Google will include an Apple-esqe EULA stating which kinds of software you can and cannot install.Also, the Chromium OS is open source, is very well documented [chromium.org], and Google encourages external hacking and development [chromium.org].#5) As soon as people get bored with it, into the trash heap it goes.If you get bored with it, you either didn't need one in the first place, or you're just bored with the Internet in general.
I don't think there's a lot that Google can do to prevent either of those.When the masses get it they will be disappointed by it's lack of backwards compatibility, and start searching (ironically using Google) for websites to show them how to "jailbreak" the thing into running what they want.The whole thrust of your thinly-veiled argument is that nobody will want it if it can't run Windows.
What you fail to realize is that:1.
With the notable exception of hardcore PC gaming, there are really not many computing tasks that absolutely require windows any more.
Despite Microsoft's best efforts, Internet content these days is very much OS-independent.
We're to the point where most people can do everything they need within the confines of a web browser.2.
The unwashed masses are really not as attached to Windows as you think.
They buy a computer, and Windows happens to come on it due to Microsoft's monopoly tactics with OEMs in the 90's.
The only want to use their computer like they would any other tool.
Those with a special attachment to Windows can buy any of the dozens of Windows netbooks already on the market.Adblocker apps will appear as will other hacks to thwart Google, so people can feel they got a "free netbook".Ad-blocking extensions already exist for Chrome [google.com].
Nobody will get a "free netbook" because Google is not giving them away for free.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582550</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582550</id>
	<title>This has failed before and will fail again.</title>
	<author>tekrat</author>
	<datestamp>1262105340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Okay, let's see if I've got this straight...<br>#1) Google will SUBSIDIZE the cost of the netbook (aka NetPC, which was hacked out of existence).<br>#2) Unlike NetPC, they won't be using an intel processor, locking out Windows.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; --- so when joey or jane try to download and install their favorite game or chat client, it will fail.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; --- so when grandma can't load in her quickbooks document for the church, it will fail.<br>#3) As someone who has lurked in many a netbook forum, I can tell you the number one question will be "How do I install Windows XP on it?"<br>#4) Someone will figure out how to install alternative OSes on it, maybe even write some kind of intel CPU emulator, or real-time recompiler, and then hack Windows into running on it, and then the lawsuits begin.<br>#5) As soon as people get bored with it, into the trash heap it goes.</p><p>Google will lose money on this deal. Chrome will not take hold, in fact, most early adopters will be spending their time trying to get Chrome off of it. When the masses get it they will be disappointed by it's lack of backwards compatibility, and start searching (ironically using Google) for websites to show them how to "jailbreak" the thing into running what they want. Adblocker apps will appear as will other hacks to thwart Google, so people can feel they got a "free netbook".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Okay , let 's see if I 've got this straight... # 1 ) Google will SUBSIDIZE the cost of the netbook ( aka NetPC , which was hacked out of existence ) . # 2 ) Unlike NetPC , they wo n't be using an intel processor , locking out Windows .
        --- so when joey or jane try to download and install their favorite game or chat client , it will fail .
        --- so when grandma ca n't load in her quickbooks document for the church , it will fail. # 3 ) As someone who has lurked in many a netbook forum , I can tell you the number one question will be " How do I install Windows XP on it ?
" # 4 ) Someone will figure out how to install alternative OSes on it , maybe even write some kind of intel CPU emulator , or real-time recompiler , and then hack Windows into running on it , and then the lawsuits begin. # 5 ) As soon as people get bored with it , into the trash heap it goes.Google will lose money on this deal .
Chrome will not take hold , in fact , most early adopters will be spending their time trying to get Chrome off of it .
When the masses get it they will be disappointed by it 's lack of backwards compatibility , and start searching ( ironically using Google ) for websites to show them how to " jailbreak " the thing into running what they want .
Adblocker apps will appear as will other hacks to thwart Google , so people can feel they got a " free netbook " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Okay, let's see if I've got this straight...#1) Google will SUBSIDIZE the cost of the netbook (aka NetPC, which was hacked out of existence).#2) Unlike NetPC, they won't be using an intel processor, locking out Windows.
        --- so when joey or jane try to download and install their favorite game or chat client, it will fail.
        --- so when grandma can't load in her quickbooks document for the church, it will fail.#3) As someone who has lurked in many a netbook forum, I can tell you the number one question will be "How do I install Windows XP on it?
"#4) Someone will figure out how to install alternative OSes on it, maybe even write some kind of intel CPU emulator, or real-time recompiler, and then hack Windows into running on it, and then the lawsuits begin.#5) As soon as people get bored with it, into the trash heap it goes.Google will lose money on this deal.
Chrome will not take hold, in fact, most early adopters will be spending their time trying to get Chrome off of it.
When the masses get it they will be disappointed by it's lack of backwards compatibility, and start searching (ironically using Google) for websites to show them how to "jailbreak" the thing into running what they want.
Adblocker apps will appear as will other hacks to thwart Google, so people can feel they got a "free netbook".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581552</id>
	<title>smartbook is nice, but where are the ARM nettops?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262098920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does anyone know why there are no ARM nettops?</p><p>Is it that it can't be made or perhaps that there's almost no profit margin left if it has to undercut something like the $200 Acer Aspire Revo?</p><p>I'd love to see something like Beagleboard that I could mount on the back of an LCD.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does anyone know why there are no ARM nettops ? Is it that it ca n't be made or perhaps that there 's almost no profit margin left if it has to undercut something like the $ 200 Acer Aspire Revo ? I 'd love to see something like Beagleboard that I could mount on the back of an LCD .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does anyone know why there are no ARM nettops?Is it that it can't be made or perhaps that there's almost no profit margin left if it has to undercut something like the $200 Acer Aspire Revo?I'd love to see something like Beagleboard that I could mount on the back of an LCD.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30583306</id>
	<title>Arm is already a viable desktop</title>
	<author>mpapet</author>
	<datestamp>1262109420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Opening up the processor market:</i><br>I ran Debian's ARM distro on an NSLU2 a couple of years ago and running on ARM was identical to running on X86.  I would argue, ARM viability has been there for quite a while.   Nokia's N800 is an ARM device. Now that Google's name is attached to it (for now) it benefits from the Google Reality Distortion Field.</p><p><i>we could start seeing really lots of non-Intel compatible computers around, first of all of course ARM based, and maybe a revival of the PPC in the consumer market.</i><br>There are way more non-intel computers out there than people like you realize.  Your mp3 player, firewall appliance, phone, TV are examples of non-Intel devices.</p><p>Remember that the processor platform is a business decision.  If Intel feels they are missing a growing market, they will come in with pricing that will simply drive competitors out of business.  Microsoft too.  Which is why I am guessing if there is a Google device, then by the time it reaches market, Intel will probably be powering it.</p><p>Finally, ARM's cost appears cheaper, but I believe that there are additional RAM material costs that end up with a device that is more expensive to make than an X86.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Opening up the processor market : I ran Debian 's ARM distro on an NSLU2 a couple of years ago and running on ARM was identical to running on X86 .
I would argue , ARM viability has been there for quite a while .
Nokia 's N800 is an ARM device .
Now that Google 's name is attached to it ( for now ) it benefits from the Google Reality Distortion Field.we could start seeing really lots of non-Intel compatible computers around , first of all of course ARM based , and maybe a revival of the PPC in the consumer market.There are way more non-intel computers out there than people like you realize .
Your mp3 player , firewall appliance , phone , TV are examples of non-Intel devices.Remember that the processor platform is a business decision .
If Intel feels they are missing a growing market , they will come in with pricing that will simply drive competitors out of business .
Microsoft too .
Which is why I am guessing if there is a Google device , then by the time it reaches market , Intel will probably be powering it.Finally , ARM 's cost appears cheaper , but I believe that there are additional RAM material costs that end up with a device that is more expensive to make than an X86 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opening up the processor market:I ran Debian's ARM distro on an NSLU2 a couple of years ago and running on ARM was identical to running on X86.
I would argue, ARM viability has been there for quite a while.
Nokia's N800 is an ARM device.
Now that Google's name is attached to it (for now) it benefits from the Google Reality Distortion Field.we could start seeing really lots of non-Intel compatible computers around, first of all of course ARM based, and maybe a revival of the PPC in the consumer market.There are way more non-intel computers out there than people like you realize.
Your mp3 player, firewall appliance, phone, TV are examples of non-Intel devices.Remember that the processor platform is a business decision.
If Intel feels they are missing a growing market, they will come in with pricing that will simply drive competitors out of business.
Microsoft too.
Which is why I am guessing if there is a Google device, then by the time it reaches market, Intel will probably be powering it.Finally, ARM's cost appears cheaper, but I believe that there are additional RAM material costs that end up with a device that is more expensive to make than an X86.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581754</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582400</id>
	<title>Re:Odd</title>
	<author>linzeal</author>
	<datestamp>1262104500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have no use for a device that stores less than 50 gigs atm.  64 gigs actually barely meets those needs.  I would actually like something that could work with a few dozen USB boot images which my job requires, so 100+ gig would be ideal.  That is why my current netbook has 160 gigs.</p><p>64 gigs is not enough for me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have no use for a device that stores less than 50 gigs atm .
64 gigs actually barely meets those needs .
I would actually like something that could work with a few dozen USB boot images which my job requires , so 100 + gig would be ideal .
That is why my current netbook has 160 gigs.64 gigs is not enough for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have no use for a device that stores less than 50 gigs atm.
64 gigs actually barely meets those needs.
I would actually like something that could work with a few dozen USB boot images which my job requires, so 100+ gig would be ideal.
That is why my current netbook has 160 gigs.64 gigs is not enough for me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581680</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30585922</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, but what's the catch?</title>
	<author>jo\_ham</author>
	<datestamp>1262078100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No kidding, NetBSD runs on all my ammo, so that netcraft can officially confirm when the deer dies while I'm out hunting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No kidding , NetBSD runs on all my ammo , so that netcraft can officially confirm when the deer dies while I 'm out hunting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No kidding, NetBSD runs on all my ammo, so that netcraft can officially confirm when the deer dies while I'm out hunting.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581674</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581732</id>
	<title>Google in New Spaces</title>
	<author>lousyd</author>
	<datestamp>1262100300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>it really appears that Google is going to be pushing into new spaces in the next few years</i> <p>
You could have said this at any point in Google's history.  It's almost to the point that all Google stories should be marked dupe.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it really appears that Google is going to be pushing into new spaces in the next few years You could have said this at any point in Google 's history .
It 's almost to the point that all Google stories should be marked dupe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it really appears that Google is going to be pushing into new spaces in the next few years 
You could have said this at any point in Google's history.
It's almost to the point that all Google stories should be marked dupe.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582344</id>
	<title>How the fuck?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262104260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>How the fuck is this insightful? Apple mods in full swing today?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How the fuck is this insightful ?
Apple mods in full swing today ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How the fuck is this insightful?
Apple mods in full swing today?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582818</id>
	<title>Google Netbook Specs? I *totally* misread that</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262106900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was hoping for some Google Goggles.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was hoping for some Google Goggles .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was hoping for some Google Goggles.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582008</id>
	<title>Re:Is it going to be free?</title>
	<author>molnarcs</author>
	<datestamp>1262102220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>i played with Wave and think it sucks. it's slow, it's a resource hog and no one is on it. I joined a few public waves and now my Chrome RAM usage goes up to 600MB of RAM.</p><p>I played with Chrome OS and think it sucks as well. you can't do anything without an internet connection.</p><p>even my iphone can do a lot more without an internet connection in places like the NYC subway</p></div><p>It sucks now, but they have one year to refine the experience, which is hell of a lot time considering that they already have the major components in place. If they have the will, they have the resources necessary to pull this off... Think android a year ago, and see what it can do now for example (T-Mobile G1 vs HTC Hero). Not to mention that this isn't going to be a random install on random hardware - they'll have hardware built for their exact specs!!!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>i played with Wave and think it sucks .
it 's slow , it 's a resource hog and no one is on it .
I joined a few public waves and now my Chrome RAM usage goes up to 600MB of RAM.I played with Chrome OS and think it sucks as well .
you ca n't do anything without an internet connection.even my iphone can do a lot more without an internet connection in places like the NYC subwayIt sucks now , but they have one year to refine the experience , which is hell of a lot time considering that they already have the major components in place .
If they have the will , they have the resources necessary to pull this off... Think android a year ago , and see what it can do now for example ( T-Mobile G1 vs HTC Hero ) .
Not to mention that this is n't going to be a random install on random hardware - they 'll have hardware built for their exact specs ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i played with Wave and think it sucks.
it's slow, it's a resource hog and no one is on it.
I joined a few public waves and now my Chrome RAM usage goes up to 600MB of RAM.I played with Chrome OS and think it sucks as well.
you can't do anything without an internet connection.even my iphone can do a lot more without an internet connection in places like the NYC subwayIt sucks now, but they have one year to refine the experience, which is hell of a lot time considering that they already have the major components in place.
If they have the will, they have the resources necessary to pull this off... Think android a year ago, and see what it can do now for example (T-Mobile G1 vs HTC Hero).
Not to mention that this isn't going to be a random install on random hardware - they'll have hardware built for their exact specs!!
!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30587918</id>
	<title>Re:smartbook is nice, but where are the ARM nettop</title>
	<author>Stevecrox</author>
	<datestamp>1262086800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are ARM netbooks, if I go into Maplins in the UK I have a choice of three for less than &pound;150. The problem is they either run some highly neutered version of linux (Pocket Surf II for example) or Windows CE that's been skinned to look like XP. Both aren't much better than a PDA/Smartphone in specifications so they haven't really taken off.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are ARM netbooks , if I go into Maplins in the UK I have a choice of three for less than   150 .
The problem is they either run some highly neutered version of linux ( Pocket Surf II for example ) or Windows CE that 's been skinned to look like XP .
Both are n't much better than a PDA/Smartphone in specifications so they have n't really taken off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are ARM netbooks, if I go into Maplins in the UK I have a choice of three for less than £150.
The problem is they either run some highly neutered version of linux (Pocket Surf II for example) or Windows CE that's been skinned to look like XP.
Both aren't much better than a PDA/Smartphone in specifications so they haven't really taken off.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582498</id>
	<title>Re:smartbook is nice, but where are the ARM nettop</title>
	<author>Nadaka</author>
	<datestamp>1262105040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ok?</p><p>Buy a 3 beagle board and strap it to the back of an LCD. Revision 3 has pinouts for direct lcd connection, other versions have dvi output through an hdmi jack. You then have exactly what you are looking for. You could probably even do it for $200 (using revision c, a small cheap lcd and a case crafted from spare parts).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok ? Buy a 3 beagle board and strap it to the back of an LCD .
Revision 3 has pinouts for direct lcd connection , other versions have dvi output through an hdmi jack .
You then have exactly what you are looking for .
You could probably even do it for $ 200 ( using revision c , a small cheap lcd and a case crafted from spare parts ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok?Buy a 3 beagle board and strap it to the back of an LCD.
Revision 3 has pinouts for direct lcd connection, other versions have dvi output through an hdmi jack.
You then have exactly what you are looking for.
You could probably even do it for $200 (using revision c, a small cheap lcd and a case crafted from spare parts).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30588248</id>
	<title>Re:This has failed before and will fail again.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262088360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except it won't be sold as a netbook, it'll be marketed as an "Internet Appliance" what will determine if it fails is whether people want such a device.</p><p>Also "granma's Quickbooks document" really???</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except it wo n't be sold as a netbook , it 'll be marketed as an " Internet Appliance " what will determine if it fails is whether people want such a device.Also " granma 's Quickbooks document " really ? ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except it won't be sold as a netbook, it'll be marketed as an "Internet Appliance" what will determine if it fails is whether people want such a device.Also "granma's Quickbooks document" really??
?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582550</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582422</id>
	<title>Re:smartbook is nice, but where are the ARM nettop</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262104620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I want one too, something like a scaled up N800 with a non-sucky screen, a small SSD, and a real kbd.  So as my N800 can run for 8 days before I have to recharge it (depending on how much I use it to play videos), a netbook with a much larger battery should be able to run for days.</p><p>It'll never happen though because, as others have said, it can't run Windows, and ain't no way that Joe and Jane Sixpack will ever become non-sheeple and try anything that all their neighbors are not doing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I want one too , something like a scaled up N800 with a non-sucky screen , a small SSD , and a real kbd .
So as my N800 can run for 8 days before I have to recharge it ( depending on how much I use it to play videos ) , a netbook with a much larger battery should be able to run for days.It 'll never happen though because , as others have said , it ca n't run Windows , and ai n't no way that Joe and Jane Sixpack will ever become non-sheeple and try anything that all their neighbors are not doing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I want one too, something like a scaled up N800 with a non-sucky screen, a small SSD, and a real kbd.
So as my N800 can run for 8 days before I have to recharge it (depending on how much I use it to play videos), a netbook with a much larger battery should be able to run for days.It'll never happen though because, as others have said, it can't run Windows, and ain't no way that Joe and Jane Sixpack will ever become non-sheeple and try anything that all their neighbors are not doing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581550</id>
	<title>"3G"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262098860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>doesn't mean shit. gsm or cdma</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>does n't mean shit .
gsm or cdma</tokentext>
<sentencetext>doesn't mean shit.
gsm or cdma</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581618</id>
	<title>In A.D. 2010</title>
	<author>Yvan256</author>
	<datestamp>1262099460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Orwellian Society was beginning.<br>User: What happen ?<br>Router: Somebody set up us the banners.<br>Computer: We get wi-fi signal.<br>User: What !<br>Operator: Main screen turn on.<br>User: It's You !!<br>Google: How are you gentlemen !!<br>Google: All your browsing history are belong to us.<br>Google: You are on the way to spam.<br>User: What you say !!<br>Google: You have no chance to hide make your time.<br>Google: HA HA HA HA<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....<br>User: Download every 'Linux Distro' !!<br>User: You know what you doing.<br>User: Install 'Linux Distro'.<br>User: For great justice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Orwellian Society was beginning.User : What happen ? Router : Somebody set up us the banners.Computer : We get wi-fi signal.User : What ! Operator : Main screen turn on.User : It 's You !
! Google : How are you gentlemen !
! Google : All your browsing history are belong to us.Google : You are on the way to spam.User : What you say !
! Google : You have no chance to hide make your time.Google : HA HA HA HA ....User : Download every 'Linux Distro ' !
! User : You know what you doing.User : Install 'Linux Distro'.User : For great justice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Orwellian Society was beginning.User: What happen ?Router: Somebody set up us the banners.Computer: We get wi-fi signal.User: What !Operator: Main screen turn on.User: It's You !
!Google: How are you gentlemen !
!Google: All your browsing history are belong to us.Google: You are on the way to spam.User: What you say !
!Google: You have no chance to hide make your time.Google: HA HA HA HA ....User: Download every 'Linux Distro' !
!User: You know what you doing.User: Install 'Linux Distro'.User: For great justice.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30583240</id>
	<title>Re:Very interesting.</title>
	<author>Bert64</author>
	<datestamp>1262109060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>PPC is alive and well in the consumer market, just not in the general purpose computing market...<br>PPC is currently dominating the games console market, and such devices are very much targeted at consumers.</p><p>Speaking of which, Sony could have done much better pushing the linux options on the PS3 - if setup with a good linux distro it would make a good browsing/mail/im platform that could have satisfied most people's computing requirements.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>PPC is alive and well in the consumer market , just not in the general purpose computing market...PPC is currently dominating the games console market , and such devices are very much targeted at consumers.Speaking of which , Sony could have done much better pushing the linux options on the PS3 - if setup with a good linux distro it would make a good browsing/mail/im platform that could have satisfied most people 's computing requirements .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PPC is alive and well in the consumer market, just not in the general purpose computing market...PPC is currently dominating the games console market, and such devices are very much targeted at consumers.Speaking of which, Sony could have done much better pushing the linux options on the PS3 - if setup with a good linux distro it would make a good browsing/mail/im platform that could have satisfied most people's computing requirements.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581754</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581880</id>
	<title>A Ferrari for the price of a Mini</title>
	<author>Anneco</author>
	<datestamp>1262101500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>quote:<br>
<i>
It's like getting a Ferrari for the price of a Mini Cooper. (...)
</i>
<i>
The Google netbook will be subsidised.
</i>
<br>
<br>
Now, who will pay this device ?</div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>quote : It 's like getting a Ferrari for the price of a Mini Cooper .
( ... ) The Google netbook will be subsidised .
Now , who will pay this device ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>quote:

It's like getting a Ferrari for the price of a Mini Cooper.
(...)


The Google netbook will be subsidised.
Now, who will pay this device ?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581680</id>
	<title>Re:Odd</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1262099820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The plan has always been for ChromeOS to have Google Gears/HTML5 style offline storage for those webapps; but 64GB seems quite ambitious. Perhaps the aggressiveness of the offline storage component is greater than commonly believed? They must have some reason to be doing that; because SSDs are modular(so they could easily have chosen a smaller size with pretty much zero re-engineering cost) and, even if you stick to the cheap seats, 64GB of flash is a real punch in the BOM compared to just about anything else in a netbook.<br> <br>

I find it particularly surprising because I'm writing this on a more or less ordinary netbook, running UNR, with a 16GB SSD for a full OS, applications, and user data.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The plan has always been for ChromeOS to have Google Gears/HTML5 style offline storage for those webapps ; but 64GB seems quite ambitious .
Perhaps the aggressiveness of the offline storage component is greater than commonly believed ?
They must have some reason to be doing that ; because SSDs are modular ( so they could easily have chosen a smaller size with pretty much zero re-engineering cost ) and , even if you stick to the cheap seats , 64GB of flash is a real punch in the BOM compared to just about anything else in a netbook .
I find it particularly surprising because I 'm writing this on a more or less ordinary netbook , running UNR , with a 16GB SSD for a full OS , applications , and user data .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The plan has always been for ChromeOS to have Google Gears/HTML5 style offline storage for those webapps; but 64GB seems quite ambitious.
Perhaps the aggressiveness of the offline storage component is greater than commonly believed?
They must have some reason to be doing that; because SSDs are modular(so they could easily have chosen a smaller size with pretty much zero re-engineering cost) and, even if you stick to the cheap seats, 64GB of flash is a real punch in the BOM compared to just about anything else in a netbook.
I find it particularly surprising because I'm writing this on a more or less ordinary netbook, running UNR, with a 16GB SSD for a full OS, applications, and user data.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581578</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30584234</id>
	<title>Re:smartbook is nice, but where are the ARM nettop</title>
	<author>Zerth</author>
	<datestamp>1262113740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What, like an openRD client?  It's like $250 currently.</p><p>If you want cheaper and don't care about lots of ports and local storage, you can use a USB video card with a Sheevaplug for $100+cost of the USB dongle.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What , like an openRD client ?
It 's like $ 250 currently.If you want cheaper and do n't care about lots of ports and local storage , you can use a USB video card with a Sheevaplug for $ 100 + cost of the USB dongle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What, like an openRD client?
It's like $250 currently.If you want cheaper and don't care about lots of ports and local storage, you can use a USB video card with a Sheevaplug for $100+cost of the USB dongle.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30586456</id>
	<title>Re:10" screen??</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262080740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Load videos or books onto the drive and you're set for a transcontinental flight's worth of entertainment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Load videos or books onto the drive and you 're set for a transcontinental flight 's worth of entertainment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Load videos or books onto the drive and you're set for a transcontinental flight's worth of entertainment.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581566</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581648</id>
	<title>Bullshit</title>
	<author>buruonbrails</author>
	<datestamp>1262099640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>No more than stupid rumors. Chrome OS main strength is the ability to run on cheap hardware, and if Google netbook will exist, it will utilize this advantage. For example, why does it need 64Gb SSD while it may store all data in the cloud? Why does it need NVidia Tegra chip? To play 720p HD video on 10" screen? - what a joke.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No more than stupid rumors .
Chrome OS main strength is the ability to run on cheap hardware , and if Google netbook will exist , it will utilize this advantage .
For example , why does it need 64Gb SSD while it may store all data in the cloud ?
Why does it need NVidia Tegra chip ?
To play 720p HD video on 10 " screen ?
- what a joke .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No more than stupid rumors.
Chrome OS main strength is the ability to run on cheap hardware, and if Google netbook will exist, it will utilize this advantage.
For example, why does it need 64Gb SSD while it may store all data in the cloud?
Why does it need NVidia Tegra chip?
To play 720p HD video on 10" screen?
- what a joke.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582088</id>
	<title>Carrier plan bundling</title>
	<author>Zantetsuken</author>
	<datestamp>1262102640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>FTFA: "However, in some countries like the US, Google will tie up with one or more network operators and sell it as part of a bundled 3G plan"</htmltext>
<tokenext>FTFA : " However , in some countries like the US , Google will tie up with one or more network operators and sell it as part of a bundled 3G plan "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FTFA: "However, in some countries like the US, Google will tie up with one or more network operators and sell it as part of a bundled 3G plan"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581492</id>
	<title>Cool.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262098320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds cool with the exception of ad's showing up when I'm trying to type a letter to grandma</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds cool with the exception of ad 's showing up when I 'm trying to type a letter to grandma</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds cool with the exception of ad's showing up when I'm trying to type a letter to grandma</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30584262</id>
	<title>Linux Portability (kernel and apps)</title>
	<author>jonaskoelker</author>
	<datestamp>1262113860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And porting Linux/*BSD/Chrome to those architectures, if not done yet, will be relatively easy.</p></div><p>With high probability, it's already done.  For most applications, a simple recompile should do.</p><p>See for instance <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_Linux\_supported\_architectures" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_Linux\_supported\_architectures</a> [wikipedia.org] and <a href="https://buildd.debian.org/stats/" title="debian.org">https://buildd.debian.org/stats/</a> [debian.org]</p><p>You might have to write a bit of arch-specific code to get Linux running, and fix a few portability bugs in some applications, but it should be easily doable to get something going.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And porting Linux/ * BSD/Chrome to those architectures , if not done yet , will be relatively easy.With high probability , it 's already done .
For most applications , a simple recompile should do.See for instance http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List \ _of \ _Linux \ _supported \ _architectures [ wikipedia.org ] and https : //buildd.debian.org/stats/ [ debian.org ] You might have to write a bit of arch-specific code to get Linux running , and fix a few portability bugs in some applications , but it should be easily doable to get something going .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And porting Linux/*BSD/Chrome to those architectures, if not done yet, will be relatively easy.With high probability, it's already done.
For most applications, a simple recompile should do.See for instance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_Linux\_supported\_architectures [wikipedia.org] and https://buildd.debian.org/stats/ [debian.org]You might have to write a bit of arch-specific code to get Linux running, and fix a few portability bugs in some applications, but it should be easily doable to get something going.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581754</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581572</id>
	<title>Yeah, but what's the catch?</title>
	<author>ThoughtMonster</author>
	<datestamp>1262099040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At that price point, I'd expect it to come with some kind of (legal) obligation towards Google. Can I take the device, nuke ChromeOS and load my own GNU/Linux distribution? Do I have to register the device with Google?</p><p>Maybe I'm wrong and maybe the price point is realistic in accordance with the cost of manufacturing. I'd expect that Google, effectively being an advertising company, would have some rules in place to ensure the "fair" use of their investment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At that price point , I 'd expect it to come with some kind of ( legal ) obligation towards Google .
Can I take the device , nuke ChromeOS and load my own GNU/Linux distribution ?
Do I have to register the device with Google ? Maybe I 'm wrong and maybe the price point is realistic in accordance with the cost of manufacturing .
I 'd expect that Google , effectively being an advertising company , would have some rules in place to ensure the " fair " use of their investment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At that price point, I'd expect it to come with some kind of (legal) obligation towards Google.
Can I take the device, nuke ChromeOS and load my own GNU/Linux distribution?
Do I have to register the device with Google?Maybe I'm wrong and maybe the price point is realistic in accordance with the cost of manufacturing.
I'd expect that Google, effectively being an advertising company, would have some rules in place to ensure the "fair" use of their investment.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30584102</id>
	<title>Re:This has failed before and will fail again.</title>
	<author>mxh83</author>
	<datestamp>1262113080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why do people forget that google isn't even trying to compete or replace Windows.  It currently aspires to be nothing more than your other computer.  It will be like a TV- It starts very fast, is and is reliable.  It will browse the net without requiring Apple tablet hand acrobatics.  It will sync everything with the fscking google cloud, so that you and google have full access to all your data wherever you go.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do people forget that google is n't even trying to compete or replace Windows .
It currently aspires to be nothing more than your other computer .
It will be like a TV- It starts very fast , is and is reliable .
It will browse the net without requiring Apple tablet hand acrobatics .
It will sync everything with the fscking google cloud , so that you and google have full access to all your data wherever you go .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why do people forget that google isn't even trying to compete or replace Windows.
It currently aspires to be nothing more than your other computer.
It will be like a TV- It starts very fast, is and is reliable.
It will browse the net without requiring Apple tablet hand acrobatics.
It will sync everything with the fscking google cloud, so that you and google have full access to all your data wherever you go.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582550</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30584206</id>
	<title>Re:This has failed before and will fail again.</title>
	<author>Paradigm\_Complex</author>
	<datestamp>1262113620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>#1) Google will SUBSIDIZE the cost of the netbook (aka NetPC, which was hacked out of existence).</p></div><p>Something will be subsidizing it, yes.  Probably a required monthly fee for the 3G.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>#2) Unlike NetPC, they won't be using an intel processor, locking out Windows.
        --- so when joey or jane try to download and install their favorite game or chat client, it will fail.
        --- so when grandma can't load in her quickbooks document for the church, it will fail.</p></div><p>People who want those things will most likely be informed at some point that this machine can't do that.  Macs aren't failing, and they can't run Windows software.  Neither are smartphones, which can't run Windows software.  So long as it isn't marketed as a generic PC, it's not really an issue.  It's targeting a limited audience, yes.  This won't be replacing all laptops everywhere.  It wasn't intended too.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>#3) As someone who has lurked in many a netbook forum, I can tell you the number one question will be "How do I install Windows XP on it?"</p></div><p>The people who go to these forums are people who hear somewhere that such a thing is possible - because it is.  If it isn't, these people won't go to the forums and ask.  I haven't seen people ask how to install Windows on an iphone anywhere, have you?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>#4) Someone will figure out how to install alternative OSes on it,</p></div><p>If I understand correctly, it may be a bit of trouble to install another OS on it.  You're locked out of the BIOS - you can't boot off of a USB drive.  There may be some security problem that will allow jailbreaking of sorts, from which you may be able to chroot a Linux distro on there or something.  The only alternative I can think of would require physically opening the machine up, and pray the flash drive is connected via some standard connection inside and not sitting directly on the mobo.  Even if it's possible, it won't be easy or common - much more difficult then just jailbreaking an iphone.  Most people will either use Google's OS or not use the device at all.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>maybe even write some kind of intel CPU emulator, or real-time recompiler, and then hack Windows into running on it, and then the lawsuits begin.</p></div><p>CPU emulation has a substantial performance hit.  Additionally, the processor on the netbook will be pretty weak - one goal is to have a long battery life, which means the performance will be poor.  Even if people do get their own OS on there, and do get it to do some sort of CPU emulation (probably QEMU), the performance will be miserable - worthless.<br> <br>

Getting your own linux distro on there may be possible, but difficult - not something Joe Sixpack could do.  Getting Windows on there, even if possible, wouldn't be worthwhile.  And even if it was, I don't see why any lawsuites would result.  If you buy Windows and put it on there, MS is happy.  If you pirate windows, MS will try to update WGA to stop you.  That's... it.  I don't foresee any lawsuits, even if it was feasible to get Windows on there.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>#5) As soon as people get bored with it, into the trash heap it goes.</p></div><p>I don't see how this device would be any different from other electronics... maybe trash, maybe given as a gift, maybe left in the basement in a box somewhere never to be seen again.  Unless I'm missing something, I don't see why this is even worth mentioning.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext># 1 ) Google will SUBSIDIZE the cost of the netbook ( aka NetPC , which was hacked out of existence ) .Something will be subsidizing it , yes .
Probably a required monthly fee for the 3G. # 2 ) Unlike NetPC , they wo n't be using an intel processor , locking out Windows .
--- so when joey or jane try to download and install their favorite game or chat client , it will fail .
--- so when grandma ca n't load in her quickbooks document for the church , it will fail.People who want those things will most likely be informed at some point that this machine ca n't do that .
Macs are n't failing , and they ca n't run Windows software .
Neither are smartphones , which ca n't run Windows software .
So long as it is n't marketed as a generic PC , it 's not really an issue .
It 's targeting a limited audience , yes .
This wo n't be replacing all laptops everywhere .
It was n't intended too. # 3 ) As someone who has lurked in many a netbook forum , I can tell you the number one question will be " How do I install Windows XP on it ?
" The people who go to these forums are people who hear somewhere that such a thing is possible - because it is .
If it is n't , these people wo n't go to the forums and ask .
I have n't seen people ask how to install Windows on an iphone anywhere , have you ? # 4 ) Someone will figure out how to install alternative OSes on it,If I understand correctly , it may be a bit of trouble to install another OS on it .
You 're locked out of the BIOS - you ca n't boot off of a USB drive .
There may be some security problem that will allow jailbreaking of sorts , from which you may be able to chroot a Linux distro on there or something .
The only alternative I can think of would require physically opening the machine up , and pray the flash drive is connected via some standard connection inside and not sitting directly on the mobo .
Even if it 's possible , it wo n't be easy or common - much more difficult then just jailbreaking an iphone .
Most people will either use Google 's OS or not use the device at all.maybe even write some kind of intel CPU emulator , or real-time recompiler , and then hack Windows into running on it , and then the lawsuits begin.CPU emulation has a substantial performance hit .
Additionally , the processor on the netbook will be pretty weak - one goal is to have a long battery life , which means the performance will be poor .
Even if people do get their own OS on there , and do get it to do some sort of CPU emulation ( probably QEMU ) , the performance will be miserable - worthless .
Getting your own linux distro on there may be possible , but difficult - not something Joe Sixpack could do .
Getting Windows on there , even if possible , would n't be worthwhile .
And even if it was , I do n't see why any lawsuites would result .
If you buy Windows and put it on there , MS is happy .
If you pirate windows , MS will try to update WGA to stop you .
That 's... it .
I do n't foresee any lawsuits , even if it was feasible to get Windows on there. # 5 ) As soon as people get bored with it , into the trash heap it goes.I do n't see how this device would be any different from other electronics... maybe trash , maybe given as a gift , maybe left in the basement in a box somewhere never to be seen again .
Unless I 'm missing something , I do n't see why this is even worth mentioning .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>#1) Google will SUBSIDIZE the cost of the netbook (aka NetPC, which was hacked out of existence).Something will be subsidizing it, yes.
Probably a required monthly fee for the 3G.#2) Unlike NetPC, they won't be using an intel processor, locking out Windows.
--- so when joey or jane try to download and install their favorite game or chat client, it will fail.
--- so when grandma can't load in her quickbooks document for the church, it will fail.People who want those things will most likely be informed at some point that this machine can't do that.
Macs aren't failing, and they can't run Windows software.
Neither are smartphones, which can't run Windows software.
So long as it isn't marketed as a generic PC, it's not really an issue.
It's targeting a limited audience, yes.
This won't be replacing all laptops everywhere.
It wasn't intended too.#3) As someone who has lurked in many a netbook forum, I can tell you the number one question will be "How do I install Windows XP on it?
"The people who go to these forums are people who hear somewhere that such a thing is possible - because it is.
If it isn't, these people won't go to the forums and ask.
I haven't seen people ask how to install Windows on an iphone anywhere, have you?#4) Someone will figure out how to install alternative OSes on it,If I understand correctly, it may be a bit of trouble to install another OS on it.
You're locked out of the BIOS - you can't boot off of a USB drive.
There may be some security problem that will allow jailbreaking of sorts, from which you may be able to chroot a Linux distro on there or something.
The only alternative I can think of would require physically opening the machine up, and pray the flash drive is connected via some standard connection inside and not sitting directly on the mobo.
Even if it's possible, it won't be easy or common - much more difficult then just jailbreaking an iphone.
Most people will either use Google's OS or not use the device at all.maybe even write some kind of intel CPU emulator, or real-time recompiler, and then hack Windows into running on it, and then the lawsuits begin.CPU emulation has a substantial performance hit.
Additionally, the processor on the netbook will be pretty weak - one goal is to have a long battery life, which means the performance will be poor.
Even if people do get their own OS on there, and do get it to do some sort of CPU emulation (probably QEMU), the performance will be miserable - worthless.
Getting your own linux distro on there may be possible, but difficult - not something Joe Sixpack could do.
Getting Windows on there, even if possible, wouldn't be worthwhile.
And even if it was, I don't see why any lawsuites would result.
If you buy Windows and put it on there, MS is happy.
If you pirate windows, MS will try to update WGA to stop you.
That's... it.
I don't foresee any lawsuits, even if it was feasible to get Windows on there.#5) As soon as people get bored with it, into the trash heap it goes.I don't see how this device would be any different from other electronics... maybe trash, maybe given as a gift, maybe left in the basement in a box somewhere never to be seen again.
Unless I'm missing something, I don't see why this is even worth mentioning.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582550</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30583838</id>
	<title>Re:Very interesting.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262111700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>This would become a non-Intel platform, which means Windows doesn't run on it. I'd really like to see how well it sells when Windows is simply not an option. If it takes off, MS is going to be hit hard, if only because alternative OSes become a serious alternative all of a sudden. Instead of being a niche product.</p></div></blockquote><p>A low-margin, niche product is going to make an alternative OS not niche? How does that work?</p><p>Also, "serious alternative" is a very vague. I think by most people's measures, Apple is already a serious alternative in the consumer market; Linux is a serious alternative -- if not the standard -- in much of the server market, and among supercomputers. Where there's no real alternative to Windows is on the desktops of most employees, and a tablet is not going to affect that one bit.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This would become a non-Intel platform , which means Windows does n't run on it .
I 'd really like to see how well it sells when Windows is simply not an option .
If it takes off , MS is going to be hit hard , if only because alternative OSes become a serious alternative all of a sudden .
Instead of being a niche product.A low-margin , niche product is going to make an alternative OS not niche ?
How does that work ? Also , " serious alternative " is a very vague .
I think by most people 's measures , Apple is already a serious alternative in the consumer market ; Linux is a serious alternative -- if not the standard -- in much of the server market , and among supercomputers .
Where there 's no real alternative to Windows is on the desktops of most employees , and a tablet is not going to affect that one bit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This would become a non-Intel platform, which means Windows doesn't run on it.
I'd really like to see how well it sells when Windows is simply not an option.
If it takes off, MS is going to be hit hard, if only because alternative OSes become a serious alternative all of a sudden.
Instead of being a niche product.A low-margin, niche product is going to make an alternative OS not niche?
How does that work?Also, "serious alternative" is a very vague.
I think by most people's measures, Apple is already a serious alternative in the consumer market; Linux is a serious alternative -- if not the standard -- in much of the server market, and among supercomputers.
Where there's no real alternative to Windows is on the desktops of most employees, and a tablet is not going to affect that one bit.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581754</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30585596</id>
	<title>Re:This has failed before and will fail again.</title>
	<author>alteran</author>
	<datestamp>1262120040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think you make excellent points, and may actually be proven right-- but I happen to disagree with your conclusion that this is doomed to failure.</p><p>This thing is a netbook. Gramma can't even see a screen that small, much less aspire to getting frustrated because it won't install Quickbooks. Moreover, since it's a netbook, the vast majority of people will be using it as a secondary surfing/email device.</p><p>Sure, some cheapos will be dumb enough to try and use something with a 10.1 inch screen and a reduced size keyboard as their primary PC, but  most people will be using it for web access while wandering around the house, or as a coffehouse/travel computer. For those purposes, it really should more than suffice as is.</p><p>I agree that subsidized devices have failed in similar segments before-- either failing outright, or struggling because people created simple hacks that removed the crippleware that subsidized the device.</p><p>However, the incentive is different here. I really don't expect google to deliver a crippled device. It's just not how they think. Android is a pretty efficient OS, I imagine Chrome OS will be materially similar. A year from now, most devices in this segment will be running Win7 on similarly spec'd computers. THAT'S crippleware. Unless you expect Apple to release a $300 netbook.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p><p>This thing will be markedly superior to any similar product within phaser range. The vast majority of users will have far more incentive to leave the device as is.</p><p>I wonder how much google will have to subsidize the system anyway? You can already get a netbook with nearly these specs for under $300. By the time this thing comes out, I expect these specs will be pretty much mainstream, if not behind the curve (maybe not the 64g SSHD-- but the price of that should be far less next year).</p><p>I agree with you on the "where's the payoff for google?" front. I'm not sure I see google's play here, besides making the world more agnostic to OS's, which hurts google's primary enemies, Apple and MS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you make excellent points , and may actually be proven right-- but I happen to disagree with your conclusion that this is doomed to failure.This thing is a netbook .
Gramma ca n't even see a screen that small , much less aspire to getting frustrated because it wo n't install Quickbooks .
Moreover , since it 's a netbook , the vast majority of people will be using it as a secondary surfing/email device.Sure , some cheapos will be dumb enough to try and use something with a 10.1 inch screen and a reduced size keyboard as their primary PC , but most people will be using it for web access while wandering around the house , or as a coffehouse/travel computer .
For those purposes , it really should more than suffice as is.I agree that subsidized devices have failed in similar segments before-- either failing outright , or struggling because people created simple hacks that removed the crippleware that subsidized the device.However , the incentive is different here .
I really do n't expect google to deliver a crippled device .
It 's just not how they think .
Android is a pretty efficient OS , I imagine Chrome OS will be materially similar .
A year from now , most devices in this segment will be running Win7 on similarly spec 'd computers .
THAT 'S crippleware .
Unless you expect Apple to release a $ 300 netbook .
: - ) This thing will be markedly superior to any similar product within phaser range .
The vast majority of users will have far more incentive to leave the device as is.I wonder how much google will have to subsidize the system anyway ?
You can already get a netbook with nearly these specs for under $ 300 .
By the time this thing comes out , I expect these specs will be pretty much mainstream , if not behind the curve ( maybe not the 64g SSHD-- but the price of that should be far less next year ) .I agree with you on the " where 's the payoff for google ?
" front .
I 'm not sure I see google 's play here , besides making the world more agnostic to OS 's , which hurts google 's primary enemies , Apple and MS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you make excellent points, and may actually be proven right-- but I happen to disagree with your conclusion that this is doomed to failure.This thing is a netbook.
Gramma can't even see a screen that small, much less aspire to getting frustrated because it won't install Quickbooks.
Moreover, since it's a netbook, the vast majority of people will be using it as a secondary surfing/email device.Sure, some cheapos will be dumb enough to try and use something with a 10.1 inch screen and a reduced size keyboard as their primary PC, but  most people will be using it for web access while wandering around the house, or as a coffehouse/travel computer.
For those purposes, it really should more than suffice as is.I agree that subsidized devices have failed in similar segments before-- either failing outright, or struggling because people created simple hacks that removed the crippleware that subsidized the device.However, the incentive is different here.
I really don't expect google to deliver a crippled device.
It's just not how they think.
Android is a pretty efficient OS, I imagine Chrome OS will be materially similar.
A year from now, most devices in this segment will be running Win7 on similarly spec'd computers.
THAT'S crippleware.
Unless you expect Apple to release a $300 netbook.
:-)This thing will be markedly superior to any similar product within phaser range.
The vast majority of users will have far more incentive to leave the device as is.I wonder how much google will have to subsidize the system anyway?
You can already get a netbook with nearly these specs for under $300.
By the time this thing comes out, I expect these specs will be pretty much mainstream, if not behind the curve (maybe not the 64g SSHD-- but the price of that should be far less next year).I agree with you on the "where's the payoff for google?
" front.
I'm not sure I see google's play here, besides making the world more agnostic to OS's, which hurts google's primary enemies, Apple and MS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582550</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30589948</id>
	<title>Re:Very interesting.</title>
	<author>wvmarle</author>
	<datestamp>1262101080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My 1st generation EEEPC running Linux can do all that (I know it can: I've done all that and more). Also doesn't run  Windows. So I wouldn't see any difference when that would have been a non-Intel platform. Except for Flash maybe.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My 1st generation EEEPC running Linux can do all that ( I know it can : I 've done all that and more ) .
Also does n't run Windows .
So I would n't see any difference when that would have been a non-Intel platform .
Except for Flash maybe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My 1st generation EEEPC running Linux can do all that (I know it can: I've done all that and more).
Also doesn't run  Windows.
So I wouldn't see any difference when that would have been a non-Intel platform.
Except for Flash maybe.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581642</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, but what's the catch?</title>
	<author>alen</author>
	<datestamp>1262099580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the article states that in the US you will probably have to sign a 2 year contract with a cell phone carrier as well</p><p>check out www.abovethecrowd.com for a nice write up of Google's revenue sharing model. They pay people to sell their products like MS pays others to use Bing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the article states that in the US you will probably have to sign a 2 year contract with a cell phone carrier as wellcheck out www.abovethecrowd.com for a nice write up of Google 's revenue sharing model .
They pay people to sell their products like MS pays others to use Bing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the article states that in the US you will probably have to sign a 2 year contract with a cell phone carrier as wellcheck out www.abovethecrowd.com for a nice write up of Google's revenue sharing model.
They pay people to sell their products like MS pays others to use Bing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581632</id>
	<title>Others are also sceptical about this leak too</title>
	<author>Sits</author>
	<datestamp>1262099580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="osnews.com/story/22666/\_quot\_Google\_Chrome\_OS\_Netbook\_lt\_strike\_gt\_Bogus\_lt\_strike\_gt\_Specs\_Leaked\_quot\_" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">OSNews also questions why such a device would need such a large SSD</a> [slashdot.org]. I can well believe it will be ARM based (so long as the ARM version of flash is up to the job) but that hard drive size seems excessive even if it is keeping two copies of the OS (one for restoration purposes). It will also be interesting to see if the Moblin boot time work and Kernel Mode Setting support would/could be supported in an NVIDIA binary driver...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>OSNews also questions why such a device would need such a large SSD [ slashdot.org ] .
I can well believe it will be ARM based ( so long as the ARM version of flash is up to the job ) but that hard drive size seems excessive even if it is keeping two copies of the OS ( one for restoration purposes ) .
It will also be interesting to see if the Moblin boot time work and Kernel Mode Setting support would/could be supported in an NVIDIA binary driver.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OSNews also questions why such a device would need such a large SSD [slashdot.org].
I can well believe it will be ARM based (so long as the ARM version of flash is up to the job) but that hard drive size seems excessive even if it is keeping two copies of the OS (one for restoration purposes).
It will also be interesting to see if the Moblin boot time work and Kernel Mode Setting support would/could be supported in an NVIDIA binary driver...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581578</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30594200</id>
	<title>Ouch, that push hurts</title>
	<author>jaunty</author>
	<datestamp>1259858520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"it really appears that Google is going to be pushing into new spaces in the next few years...."</p><p>As someone who has had a colonoscopy done, I for one, welcome our new "pushing into new spaces" overlords.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" it really appears that Google is going to be pushing into new spaces in the next few years.... " As someone who has had a colonoscopy done , I for one , welcome our new " pushing into new spaces " overlords .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"it really appears that Google is going to be pushing into new spaces in the next few years...."As someone who has had a colonoscopy done, I for one, welcome our new "pushing into new spaces" overlords.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30589948
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30585596
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582550
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581744
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581622
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581578
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30586272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581674
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581572
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582302
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581578
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582050
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581554
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30586456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581566
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582400
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581680
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581578
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30584234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30583838
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582008
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581554
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30584392
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582550
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30583670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581680
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581578
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30588992
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582550
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30588248
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582550
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30591266
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582550
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582652
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30584206
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582550
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30587918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582344
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581554
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581642
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581572
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581492
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30587934
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581566
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581876
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581860
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30583240
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582660
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581554
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30584272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30585922
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581674
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581572
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30584262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582036
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581554
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581644
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581578
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30583306
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30591240
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30584102
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582550
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582498
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_29_1318221_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30583230
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1318221.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582088
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1318221.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581578
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581632
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582302
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581622
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581680
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582400
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30583670
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581644
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1318221.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581492
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581978
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1318221.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581566
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30587934
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30586456
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1318221.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582550
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30588248
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30584102
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30588992
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30584392
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30585596
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30591266
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30584206
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1318221.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581572
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581674
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30585922
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30586272
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581642
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1318221.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581754
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30591240
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30583230
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582348
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30589948
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30583306
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30583240
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30584262
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30583838
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582652
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1318221.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581552
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581860
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30587918
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30584234
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582002
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581876
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582498
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30584272
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582660
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582422
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581744
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1318221.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581506
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1318221.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581536
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1318221.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581618
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_29_1318221.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581554
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582008
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582344
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582036
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30581664
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_29_1318221.30582050
</commentlist>
</conversation>
