<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_10_164241</id>
	<title>Intel and LG Team Up For x86 Smartphone</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1263144060000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>gbjbaanb writes <i>"I love stories about new smartphones; it shows the IT market is doing something different than the usual same-old desktop apps. Maybe one day we'll all be using super smartphones as our primary computing platforms. And so, here's Intel's offering: the LG GW990. Running a Moorestown CPU, which <a href="http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2010/01/moblin-linux-on-x86-smartphone-intels-small-step-forward.ars">gives 'considerably' better energy efficiency than the Atom</a>, it runs Intel's Linux distro &mdash; Moblin. Quoting: 'In some respects, the GW990 &mdash; which has an impressive high-resolution 4.8-inch touchscreen display &mdash; seems more like a MID than a smartphone. It's possible that we won't see x86 phones with truly competitive all-day battery life until the emergence of Medfield, the Moorestown successor that is said to be coming in 2011. It is clear, however, that Intel aims to eventually compete squarely with ARM in the high-end smartphone market."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>gbjbaanb writes " I love stories about new smartphones ; it shows the IT market is doing something different than the usual same-old desktop apps .
Maybe one day we 'll all be using super smartphones as our primary computing platforms .
And so , here 's Intel 's offering : the LG GW990 .
Running a Moorestown CPU , which gives 'considerably ' better energy efficiency than the Atom , it runs Intel 's Linux distro    Moblin .
Quoting : 'In some respects , the GW990    which has an impressive high-resolution 4.8-inch touchscreen display    seems more like a MID than a smartphone .
It 's possible that we wo n't see x86 phones with truly competitive all-day battery life until the emergence of Medfield , the Moorestown successor that is said to be coming in 2011 .
It is clear , however , that Intel aims to eventually compete squarely with ARM in the high-end smartphone market .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>gbjbaanb writes "I love stories about new smartphones; it shows the IT market is doing something different than the usual same-old desktop apps.
Maybe one day we'll all be using super smartphones as our primary computing platforms.
And so, here's Intel's offering: the LG GW990.
Running a Moorestown CPU, which gives 'considerably' better energy efficiency than the Atom, it runs Intel's Linux distro — Moblin.
Quoting: 'In some respects, the GW990 — which has an impressive high-resolution 4.8-inch touchscreen display — seems more like a MID than a smartphone.
It's possible that we won't see x86 phones with truly competitive all-day battery life until the emergence of Medfield, the Moorestown successor that is said to be coming in 2011.
It is clear, however, that Intel aims to eventually compete squarely with ARM in the high-end smartphone market.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715322</id>
	<title>NIGGERS!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263148020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You can take a NIGGER out of the ghetto, but you can't take the ghetto out of the NIGGER!</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can take a NIGGER out of the ghetto , but you ca n't take the ghetto out of the NIGGER !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can take a NIGGER out of the ghetto, but you can't take the ghetto out of the NIGGER!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715380</id>
	<title>Intel</title>
	<author>mxh83</author>
	<datestamp>1263148560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Times are rough for Intel, I read that their processor proposed for the Apple tablet was ditched in favor of one from a smaller company.  These big companies somehow seem glacial compared to the more agile competition.  They are all going to be forced to really innovate now.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Times are rough for Intel , I read that their processor proposed for the Apple tablet was ditched in favor of one from a smaller company .
These big companies somehow seem glacial compared to the more agile competition .
They are all going to be forced to really innovate now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Times are rough for Intel, I read that their processor proposed for the Apple tablet was ditched in favor of one from a smaller company.
These big companies somehow seem glacial compared to the more agile competition.
They are all going to be forced to really innovate now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30716684</id>
	<title>Super Smartphones?</title>
	<author>dangitman</author>
	<datestamp>1263115980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This article is full of shit. By the time smartphones become our primary computing platform, we'll be using at least Super Duper Smartphones, if not Super Mega Hyper Fragilistic Smartphones.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This article is full of shit .
By the time smartphones become our primary computing platform , we 'll be using at least Super Duper Smartphones , if not Super Mega Hyper Fragilistic Smartphones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This article is full of shit.
By the time smartphones become our primary computing platform, we'll be using at least Super Duper Smartphones, if not Super Mega Hyper Fragilistic Smartphones.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715792</id>
	<title>Forgive my cynicism</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263151740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But I've never understood the theory that someday smartphones will be our primary computing platform.  I may be a crusty old bastard, but I like to have a display I can read from at least two feet away, and "typing" on most mini qwerty phones is a pain in the arse at best.</p><p>Useful?  yes.  Primary?  Not until we can eliminate monitor and keyboard.  Neural interface, anyone?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But I 've never understood the theory that someday smartphones will be our primary computing platform .
I may be a crusty old bastard , but I like to have a display I can read from at least two feet away , and " typing " on most mini qwerty phones is a pain in the arse at best.Useful ?
yes. Primary ?
Not until we can eliminate monitor and keyboard .
Neural interface , anyone ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But I've never understood the theory that someday smartphones will be our primary computing platform.
I may be a crusty old bastard, but I like to have a display I can read from at least two feet away, and "typing" on most mini qwerty phones is a pain in the arse at best.Useful?
yes.  Primary?
Not until we can eliminate monitor and keyboard.
Neural interface, anyone?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30720186</id>
	<title>Re:Sounds like...hell!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263148860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The aetheist part says it all, you dumbass.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The aetheist part says it all , you dumbass .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The aetheist part says it all, you dumbass.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30721244</id>
	<title>Re:Do Not Want</title>
	<author>MemoryDragon</author>
	<datestamp>1263209400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually there are not too many banks which use Applets nowadays, and it comes down to porting the Applet API, Android already has most of Javas APIs underneath (only swing is left outside mostly which can be cross ported)<br>since it runs most of its infrastructure on java.<br>You the rest comes down to delivering the drivers and having the usb port to outgoing mode switched, the printer drivers are in linux so you have a higher chance to get them there than on WinCE which does not have any printing infrastructure, or older Windows versions which dont even be able to run decently on any phone thanks to their mouse centric ui which does not fit properly thanks to missing layout management mechanisms.<br>So again where is the point in x86 for a phone? You loose WinCE binary compatibility, Android binary compatiility in some cases, and iPhone binary compatibility and you gain higher battery drainage than on ARM, and equal to worse speeds than a decent Cortex A9 can do.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually there are not too many banks which use Applets nowadays , and it comes down to porting the Applet API , Android already has most of Javas APIs underneath ( only swing is left outside mostly which can be cross ported ) since it runs most of its infrastructure on java.You the rest comes down to delivering the drivers and having the usb port to outgoing mode switched , the printer drivers are in linux so you have a higher chance to get them there than on WinCE which does not have any printing infrastructure , or older Windows versions which dont even be able to run decently on any phone thanks to their mouse centric ui which does not fit properly thanks to missing layout management mechanisms.So again where is the point in x86 for a phone ?
You loose WinCE binary compatibility , Android binary compatiility in some cases , and iPhone binary compatibility and you gain higher battery drainage than on ARM , and equal to worse speeds than a decent Cortex A9 can do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually there are not too many banks which use Applets nowadays, and it comes down to porting the Applet API, Android already has most of Javas APIs underneath (only swing is left outside mostly which can be cross ported)since it runs most of its infrastructure on java.You the rest comes down to delivering the drivers and having the usb port to outgoing mode switched, the printer drivers are in linux so you have a higher chance to get them there than on WinCE which does not have any printing infrastructure, or older Windows versions which dont even be able to run decently on any phone thanks to their mouse centric ui which does not fit properly thanks to missing layout management mechanisms.So again where is the point in x86 for a phone?
You loose WinCE binary compatibility, Android binary compatiility in some cases, and iPhone binary compatibility and you gain higher battery drainage than on ARM, and equal to worse speeds than a decent Cortex A9 can do.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715814</id>
	<title>Re:Sounds like...hell!</title>
	<author>SirWinston</author>
	<datestamp>1263151860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't see smartphones as our future primary computing platforms...or even as our future mobile computing platforms...in fact, I don't see them in the future at all.  My guess is that--considering how texting and mobile browsing seem to be a larger part of the future than voice--we'll see touch tablets too large to be called phones but small enough to be reasonably portable take over eventually, with a tiny bluetooth or successor earclip or earbud headset for voice calls over the tablet's wireless internet connection.</p><p>The mobile tablet will be our primary computing device, and our own mobile wireless hotspot.  The desktop computer will be largely relegated to the office, as most home users will be happy using their tablets for basic use and wirelessly displaying their contents on their large flatscreen TVs for other uses.  Power users will still have home desktop computers, but most people won't need them.</p><p>The future is indeed portable--but it ain't a tiny phone.  The phone itself is just going to disappear into the mobile internet tablet, with a bluetooth earpiece as its last vestige.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't see smartphones as our future primary computing platforms...or even as our future mobile computing platforms...in fact , I do n't see them in the future at all .
My guess is that--considering how texting and mobile browsing seem to be a larger part of the future than voice--we 'll see touch tablets too large to be called phones but small enough to be reasonably portable take over eventually , with a tiny bluetooth or successor earclip or earbud headset for voice calls over the tablet 's wireless internet connection.The mobile tablet will be our primary computing device , and our own mobile wireless hotspot .
The desktop computer will be largely relegated to the office , as most home users will be happy using their tablets for basic use and wirelessly displaying their contents on their large flatscreen TVs for other uses .
Power users will still have home desktop computers , but most people wo n't need them.The future is indeed portable--but it ai n't a tiny phone .
The phone itself is just going to disappear into the mobile internet tablet , with a bluetooth earpiece as its last vestige .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't see smartphones as our future primary computing platforms...or even as our future mobile computing platforms...in fact, I don't see them in the future at all.
My guess is that--considering how texting and mobile browsing seem to be a larger part of the future than voice--we'll see touch tablets too large to be called phones but small enough to be reasonably portable take over eventually, with a tiny bluetooth or successor earclip or earbud headset for voice calls over the tablet's wireless internet connection.The mobile tablet will be our primary computing device, and our own mobile wireless hotspot.
The desktop computer will be largely relegated to the office, as most home users will be happy using their tablets for basic use and wirelessly displaying their contents on their large flatscreen TVs for other uses.
Power users will still have home desktop computers, but most people won't need them.The future is indeed portable--but it ain't a tiny phone.
The phone itself is just going to disappear into the mobile internet tablet, with a bluetooth earpiece as its last vestige.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715752</id>
	<title>If Intel wants to beat ARM</title>
	<author>jmknsd</author>
	<datestamp>1263151440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If Intel wants to beat ARM they would have to take a page from the microsoft playbook and release their low end processors for (near)free.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If Intel wants to beat ARM they would have to take a page from the microsoft playbook and release their low end processors for ( near ) free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Intel wants to beat ARM they would have to take a page from the microsoft playbook and release their low end processors for (near)free.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30720028</id>
	<title>if arm is so great</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263146880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>why dont they build super computers or servers with it? wouldnt it save lots of energy?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>why dont they build super computers or servers with it ?
wouldnt it save lots of energy ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>why dont they build super computers or servers with it?
wouldnt it save lots of energy?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715616</id>
	<title>Re:Intel and LG Team Up For x86 Smartphone</title>
	<author>KazW</author>
	<datestamp>1263150420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><blockquote><div><p>compete squarely with ARM in the high-end smartphone market</p></div></blockquote><p>
How can they do that when producing an ARM processor cost only ARMs royalty + costs added on from many producers (Texas instruments qualcomm et al).</p></div><p>I hate <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quote\_mining" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">quote mining</a> [wikipedia.org]... You should have used the entire sentence, because you might have had to re-read it and you might have picked up on a key idea of the sentence. I think you did notice though, because your quote <i>conveniently</i> starts just after that word, which makes your post a troll in my eyes, and you're lucky I don't have mod points this week.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>It is clear, however, that Intel aims to <b>eventually</b> compete squarely with ARM in the high-end smartphone market.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>compete squarely with ARM in the high-end smartphone market How can they do that when producing an ARM processor cost only ARMs royalty + costs added on from many producers ( Texas instruments qualcomm et al ) .I hate quote mining [ wikipedia.org ] ... You should have used the entire sentence , because you might have had to re-read it and you might have picked up on a key idea of the sentence .
I think you did notice though , because your quote conveniently starts just after that word , which makes your post a troll in my eyes , and you 're lucky I do n't have mod points this week.It is clear , however , that Intel aims to eventually compete squarely with ARM in the high-end smartphone market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>compete squarely with ARM in the high-end smartphone market
How can they do that when producing an ARM processor cost only ARMs royalty + costs added on from many producers (Texas instruments qualcomm et al).I hate quote mining [wikipedia.org]... You should have used the entire sentence, because you might have had to re-read it and you might have picked up on a key idea of the sentence.
I think you did notice though, because your quote conveniently starts just after that word, which makes your post a troll in my eyes, and you're lucky I don't have mod points this week.It is clear, however, that Intel aims to eventually compete squarely with ARM in the high-end smartphone market.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715832</id>
	<title>Re:Do Not Want</title>
	<author>itsme1234</author>
	<datestamp>1263152040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Here we have a platform where there is <b>no</b> reason whatsoever to have an ass-backwards-compatible architecture in order to run legacy Windows apps.</p></div><p>There are tons and tons and tons of x86 apps that run on some (potential) over sized x86 phone with 800x600 resolution, 512MB RAM, 1GHz CPU, 8-16-32... GB flash. Yes, you can do MANY things with iPhone, Android, Windows Mobile or Maemo. However with a small x86 box no matter how underpowered you can do MOSTLY ANYTHING. And there's a big difference. Examples: flash is big news on iPhone and Android. Java (as in browser applets): no chance in Android (don't know about the other platforms). That means some banking sites and some remote access software don't work. Get different servers? Switch banks? Heck, they work fine even with Windows 95!<br>Tried to print directly from your phone directly to some dumb printer? Tried to scan something (no, I don't mean take a picture with the crappy camera)? Get some files from some NTFS USB drive? Connect a TV tuner? Connect to some strange nasty corporate VPN?</p><p>Yes, 90\% of the usage is covered with a nice basic browser, some media player and maybe a voip client. But there's a lot in the 10\% left and I don't have the patience to have it all ported to arm (not that it'll ever happen as the market is so divided).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here we have a platform where there is no reason whatsoever to have an ass-backwards-compatible architecture in order to run legacy Windows apps.There are tons and tons and tons of x86 apps that run on some ( potential ) over sized x86 phone with 800x600 resolution , 512MB RAM , 1GHz CPU , 8-16-32... GB flash .
Yes , you can do MANY things with iPhone , Android , Windows Mobile or Maemo .
However with a small x86 box no matter how underpowered you can do MOSTLY ANYTHING .
And there 's a big difference .
Examples : flash is big news on iPhone and Android .
Java ( as in browser applets ) : no chance in Android ( do n't know about the other platforms ) .
That means some banking sites and some remote access software do n't work .
Get different servers ?
Switch banks ?
Heck , they work fine even with Windows 95 ! Tried to print directly from your phone directly to some dumb printer ?
Tried to scan something ( no , I do n't mean take a picture with the crappy camera ) ?
Get some files from some NTFS USB drive ?
Connect a TV tuner ?
Connect to some strange nasty corporate VPN ? Yes , 90 \ % of the usage is covered with a nice basic browser , some media player and maybe a voip client .
But there 's a lot in the 10 \ % left and I do n't have the patience to have it all ported to arm ( not that it 'll ever happen as the market is so divided ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here we have a platform where there is no reason whatsoever to have an ass-backwards-compatible architecture in order to run legacy Windows apps.There are tons and tons and tons of x86 apps that run on some (potential) over sized x86 phone with 800x600 resolution, 512MB RAM, 1GHz CPU, 8-16-32... GB flash.
Yes, you can do MANY things with iPhone, Android, Windows Mobile or Maemo.
However with a small x86 box no matter how underpowered you can do MOSTLY ANYTHING.
And there's a big difference.
Examples: flash is big news on iPhone and Android.
Java (as in browser applets): no chance in Android (don't know about the other platforms).
That means some banking sites and some remote access software don't work.
Get different servers?
Switch banks?
Heck, they work fine even with Windows 95!Tried to print directly from your phone directly to some dumb printer?
Tried to scan something (no, I don't mean take a picture with the crappy camera)?
Get some files from some NTFS USB drive?
Connect a TV tuner?
Connect to some strange nasty corporate VPN?Yes, 90\% of the usage is covered with a nice basic browser, some media player and maybe a voip client.
But there's a lot in the 10\% left and I don't have the patience to have it all ported to arm (not that it'll ever happen as the market is so divided).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715412</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30717274</id>
	<title>Re:Intel and LG Team Up For x86 Smartphone</title>
	<author>Chees0rz</author>
	<datestamp>1263120000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>IMO, the FTC should look into this to make sure their not dumping. Atleast with main PC CPUs, they charged high prices at first and then ramped the price down as the newer processes started to come online. With these Atoms, they can't charge what they cost and still be competitive.</p></div><p>Hate Intel for their integrated graphics, software packages, chipsets, or CPUs.  But you cannot hate on their manufacturing process (which is 1st class).  Your comment ignores the fact that Intel is at 32nm, which brings costs way down, and the atom is a TINY cpu compared to the core series (duh).  Yield cost is directly related to die size.  Looking @ the numbers below I pulled from a simple google search and you'll see that these chips (in the millions) will cost much less to make...
<br> <br>
Some interesting numbers: <br>
Atom @ 45nm process:  26mm^2 <br>
Corei5 @ 32 nm process: 81mm^2  (or 296mm^2 w/ gfx)
<br> <br>
The FTC can investigate for other reasons... but not because they are making smaller chips cheaper than bigger chips.
<br>
sources: <a href="http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/intel\_core\_i5\_661/" title="neoseeker.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/intel\_core\_i5\_661/</a> [neoseeker.com] <br>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_Intel\_Atom\_microprocessors</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>IMO , the FTC should look into this to make sure their not dumping .
Atleast with main PC CPUs , they charged high prices at first and then ramped the price down as the newer processes started to come online .
With these Atoms , they ca n't charge what they cost and still be competitive.Hate Intel for their integrated graphics , software packages , chipsets , or CPUs .
But you can not hate on their manufacturing process ( which is 1st class ) .
Your comment ignores the fact that Intel is at 32nm , which brings costs way down , and the atom is a TINY cpu compared to the core series ( duh ) .
Yield cost is directly related to die size .
Looking @ the numbers below I pulled from a simple google search and you 'll see that these chips ( in the millions ) will cost much less to make.. . Some interesting numbers : Atom @ 45nm process : 26mm ^ 2 Corei5 @ 32 nm process : 81mm ^ 2 ( or 296mm ^ 2 w/ gfx ) The FTC can investigate for other reasons... but not because they are making smaller chips cheaper than bigger chips .
sources : http : //www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/intel \ _core \ _i5 \ _661/ [ neoseeker.com ] http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List \ _of \ _Intel \ _Atom \ _microprocessors</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IMO, the FTC should look into this to make sure their not dumping.
Atleast with main PC CPUs, they charged high prices at first and then ramped the price down as the newer processes started to come online.
With these Atoms, they can't charge what they cost and still be competitive.Hate Intel for their integrated graphics, software packages, chipsets, or CPUs.
But you cannot hate on their manufacturing process (which is 1st class).
Your comment ignores the fact that Intel is at 32nm, which brings costs way down, and the atom is a TINY cpu compared to the core series (duh).
Yield cost is directly related to die size.
Looking @ the numbers below I pulled from a simple google search and you'll see that these chips (in the millions) will cost much less to make...
 
Some interesting numbers: 
Atom @ 45nm process:  26mm^2 
Corei5 @ 32 nm process: 81mm^2  (or 296mm^2 w/ gfx)
 
The FTC can investigate for other reasons... but not because they are making smaller chips cheaper than bigger chips.
sources: http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/intel\_core\_i5\_661/ [neoseeker.com] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_Intel\_Atom\_microprocessors
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715562</id>
	<title>Advantages...</title>
	<author>91degrees</author>
	<datestamp>1263149880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>ARM: Low power.<br> <br>
x86: Runs most desktop PC applications.  <br> <br>
For a desktop PC the ability to run most PC applications is extremely important.  For a smartphone, who cares?  I don't want to run Paintshop Pro, Word, or Call of Duty on my smartphone.  The apps that I do want to run already work on ARM.  I do want low power.  The improvements Intel has made are barely significant next to ARM's huge advantage here.</htmltext>
<tokenext>ARM : Low power .
x86 : Runs most desktop PC applications .
For a desktop PC the ability to run most PC applications is extremely important .
For a smartphone , who cares ?
I do n't want to run Paintshop Pro , Word , or Call of Duty on my smartphone .
The apps that I do want to run already work on ARM .
I do want low power .
The improvements Intel has made are barely significant next to ARM 's huge advantage here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ARM: Low power.
x86: Runs most desktop PC applications.
For a desktop PC the ability to run most PC applications is extremely important.
For a smartphone, who cares?
I don't want to run Paintshop Pro, Word, or Call of Duty on my smartphone.
The apps that I do want to run already work on ARM.
I do want low power.
The improvements Intel has made are barely significant next to ARM's huge advantage here.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715858</id>
	<title>Re:Intel and LG Team Up For x86 Smartphone</title>
	<author>Totenglocke</author>
	<datestamp>1263152340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How can they do that when producing an ARM processor cost only ARMs royalty + costs added on from many producers</p></div><p>I was going to ask, how can they compete when x86 processors cost an ARM and a leg!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How can they do that when producing an ARM processor cost only ARMs royalty + costs added on from many producersI was going to ask , how can they compete when x86 processors cost an ARM and a leg !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How can they do that when producing an ARM processor cost only ARMs royalty + costs added on from many producersI was going to ask, how can they compete when x86 processors cost an ARM and a leg!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30717276</id>
	<title>Re:Forgive my cynicism</title>
	<author>Hillview</author>
	<datestamp>1263120000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hadn't thought of this.. that has possibilities.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had n't thought of this.. that has possibilities .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hadn't thought of this.. that has possibilities.
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30716080</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715518</id>
	<title>"than the Atom"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263149580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>uh Mooresville is the latest iteration of the Atom.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>uh Mooresville is the latest iteration of the Atom .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>uh Mooresville is the latest iteration of the Atom.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715546</id>
	<title>Re:Intel and LG Team Up For x86 Smartphone</title>
	<author>Locutus</author>
	<datestamp>1263149700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>To top it off, Intel has to use their highend processing factories to get the chips in the ball park as ARM. They just announce the 32nm Atoms along with their new i3, i5 and i7 all on the same process. But as you mentioned, they have to sell the Atom far far far cheaper than the iX CPUs to be competitive.  IMO, the FTC should look into this to make sure their not dumping. Atleast with main PC CPUs, they charged high prices at first and then ramped the price down as the newer processes started to come online. With these Atoms, they can't charge what they cost and still be competitive.<br><br>And these new phones will probably have a fan and require 2GB of memory so it can run Windows. lol.  If they only talk about Gnu/Linux then we'll know they are serious but if they pull Microsoft in, you know it's a PR game and like the netbook segment, it'll run the prices up so high few will want them.<br><br>LoL</htmltext>
<tokenext>To top it off , Intel has to use their highend processing factories to get the chips in the ball park as ARM .
They just announce the 32nm Atoms along with their new i3 , i5 and i7 all on the same process .
But as you mentioned , they have to sell the Atom far far far cheaper than the iX CPUs to be competitive .
IMO , the FTC should look into this to make sure their not dumping .
Atleast with main PC CPUs , they charged high prices at first and then ramped the price down as the newer processes started to come online .
With these Atoms , they ca n't charge what they cost and still be competitive.And these new phones will probably have a fan and require 2GB of memory so it can run Windows .
lol. If they only talk about Gnu/Linux then we 'll know they are serious but if they pull Microsoft in , you know it 's a PR game and like the netbook segment , it 'll run the prices up so high few will want them.LoL</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To top it off, Intel has to use their highend processing factories to get the chips in the ball park as ARM.
They just announce the 32nm Atoms along with their new i3, i5 and i7 all on the same process.
But as you mentioned, they have to sell the Atom far far far cheaper than the iX CPUs to be competitive.
IMO, the FTC should look into this to make sure their not dumping.
Atleast with main PC CPUs, they charged high prices at first and then ramped the price down as the newer processes started to come online.
With these Atoms, they can't charge what they cost and still be competitive.And these new phones will probably have a fan and require 2GB of memory so it can run Windows.
lol.  If they only talk about Gnu/Linux then we'll know they are serious but if they pull Microsoft in, you know it's a PR game and like the netbook segment, it'll run the prices up so high few will want them.LoL</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30716620</id>
	<title>"compete"</title>
	<author>farble1670</author>
	<datestamp>1263115320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>It is clear, however, that Intel aims to eventually compete squarely with ARM in the high-end smartphone market</i> </p><p>woe to the company that intel decides to &quot;compete&quot; with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is clear , however , that Intel aims to eventually compete squarely with ARM in the high-end smartphone market woe to the company that intel decides to " compete " with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> It is clear, however, that Intel aims to eventually compete squarely with ARM in the high-end smartphone market woe to the company that intel decides to "compete" with.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715666</id>
	<title>Yay for also-rans</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263150840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They're trying to pull a micros~1: Realise you've fscked up, then splash lots of dosh, marketeering, and the finest FUD you can come up with around in very large quantities. Add a crap product and boy, see the great unwashed eat it all up like candy. Polished turd vomit flavoured candy.</p><p>x86 desperately needs to die, and if intel doesn't like that because they can no longer come up with anything else and make it work, tough cookies. I don't care that this thing "runs linux" to appease the slashdot crowd. Please support something that is worthy of support. Arm, mips, powerpc, anything but x86.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're trying to pull a micros ~ 1 : Realise you 've fscked up , then splash lots of dosh , marketeering , and the finest FUD you can come up with around in very large quantities .
Add a crap product and boy , see the great unwashed eat it all up like candy .
Polished turd vomit flavoured candy.x86 desperately needs to die , and if intel does n't like that because they can no longer come up with anything else and make it work , tough cookies .
I do n't care that this thing " runs linux " to appease the slashdot crowd .
Please support something that is worthy of support .
Arm , mips , powerpc , anything but x86 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're trying to pull a micros~1: Realise you've fscked up, then splash lots of dosh, marketeering, and the finest FUD you can come up with around in very large quantities.
Add a crap product and boy, see the great unwashed eat it all up like candy.
Polished turd vomit flavoured candy.x86 desperately needs to die, and if intel doesn't like that because they can no longer come up with anything else and make it work, tough cookies.
I don't care that this thing "runs linux" to appease the slashdot crowd.
Please support something that is worthy of support.
Arm, mips, powerpc, anything but x86.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715570</id>
	<title>Needs to be open no APP store lock / sim locks as</title>
	<author>Joe The Dragon</author>
	<datestamp>1263150000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Needs to be open no APP store lock / sim locks as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Needs to be open no APP store lock / sim locks as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Needs to be open no APP store lock / sim locks as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30716152</id>
	<title>Re:Do Not Want</title>
	<author>EvilNTUser</author>
	<datestamp>1263155160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If my phone had a USB host port, I could do all of the things you mentioned, and it runs Maemo + ARM Debian. Nasty corporate software excluded - and we'll all be better off if those guys are forced to modify their crap.</p><p>Might I also suggest that you don't switch to a bank with a website that wants to run binaries on your computer.  For your own good.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If my phone had a USB host port , I could do all of the things you mentioned , and it runs Maemo + ARM Debian .
Nasty corporate software excluded - and we 'll all be better off if those guys are forced to modify their crap.Might I also suggest that you do n't switch to a bank with a website that wants to run binaries on your computer .
For your own good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If my phone had a USB host port, I could do all of the things you mentioned, and it runs Maemo + ARM Debian.
Nasty corporate software excluded - and we'll all be better off if those guys are forced to modify their crap.Might I also suggest that you don't switch to a bank with a website that wants to run binaries on your computer.
For your own good.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715350</id>
	<title>Sounds like...hell!</title>
	<author>syousef</author>
	<datestamp>1263148260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Maybe one day we'll all be using super smartphones as our primary computing platforms.</i></p><p>Oh I sure hope not. Sounds like hell to me, and I'm an aetheist!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe one day we 'll all be using super smartphones as our primary computing platforms.Oh I sure hope not .
Sounds like hell to me , and I 'm an aetheist !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe one day we'll all be using super smartphones as our primary computing platforms.Oh I sure hope not.
Sounds like hell to me, and I'm an aetheist!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715584</id>
	<title>Re:Sounds like...hell!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263150060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Oh I sure hope not. Sounds like hell to me, and I'm an aetheist!</p></div></blockquote><p>
Perhaps maybe just purgatory.  But it could work.  Carry your uberdevice in your pocket (lead foil lined), use it with it's native human interface devices when wandering around.  Pop it in some sort of dock at work with a decent keyboard, mouse and screen.  Remember to pick it up before you go home.<br> <br>
Obviously this sort of thing raises a number of issues and problems and the hardware in a smart phone just can't compete with a real computer for now for anything other than email / browsing / light apps.  I'd love it at the hospital that I work - walk around the bedside inputting data, looking up things, pop the thing in the dock at the nurses station, look up an xray on a decent monitor, type in some notes, get up and walk around some more. <br> <br>
Right now I have to scribble stuff on paper, walk over to a generic computer, log in to several different applications, gripe because Firefox isn't on this particular machine or doesn't have a utility that I like, actually do something useful, then log out of everything, rinse and repeat.<br> <br>
So it might not be as bad as you envision it.  Of course, this sort of thing requires significant multi vendor coordination and standards, so I don't hold out much hope for it.  I guy can dream<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh I sure hope not .
Sounds like hell to me , and I 'm an aetheist !
Perhaps maybe just purgatory .
But it could work .
Carry your uberdevice in your pocket ( lead foil lined ) , use it with it 's native human interface devices when wandering around .
Pop it in some sort of dock at work with a decent keyboard , mouse and screen .
Remember to pick it up before you go home .
Obviously this sort of thing raises a number of issues and problems and the hardware in a smart phone just ca n't compete with a real computer for now for anything other than email / browsing / light apps .
I 'd love it at the hospital that I work - walk around the bedside inputting data , looking up things , pop the thing in the dock at the nurses station , look up an xray on a decent monitor , type in some notes , get up and walk around some more .
Right now I have to scribble stuff on paper , walk over to a generic computer , log in to several different applications , gripe because Firefox is n't on this particular machine or does n't have a utility that I like , actually do something useful , then log out of everything , rinse and repeat .
So it might not be as bad as you envision it .
Of course , this sort of thing requires significant multi vendor coordination and standards , so I do n't hold out much hope for it .
I guy can dream .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh I sure hope not.
Sounds like hell to me, and I'm an aetheist!
Perhaps maybe just purgatory.
But it could work.
Carry your uberdevice in your pocket (lead foil lined), use it with it's native human interface devices when wandering around.
Pop it in some sort of dock at work with a decent keyboard, mouse and screen.
Remember to pick it up before you go home.
Obviously this sort of thing raises a number of issues and problems and the hardware in a smart phone just can't compete with a real computer for now for anything other than email / browsing / light apps.
I'd love it at the hospital that I work - walk around the bedside inputting data, looking up things, pop the thing in the dock at the nurses station, look up an xray on a decent monitor, type in some notes, get up and walk around some more.
Right now I have to scribble stuff on paper, walk over to a generic computer, log in to several different applications, gripe because Firefox isn't on this particular machine or doesn't have a utility that I like, actually do something useful, then log out of everything, rinse and repeat.
So it might not be as bad as you envision it.
Of course, this sort of thing requires significant multi vendor coordination and standards, so I don't hold out much hope for it.
I guy can dream ...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715396</id>
	<title>Wow, that's big</title>
	<author>Overzeetop</author>
	<datestamp>1263148680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know...that what she said...</p><p>Anyway - that's a pretty damned big phone. I'm more excited about the possibility of dual processor netbooks (or any notebook) with a fast processor and a ULV/super efficient processor that can shif on the fly to get a day's use if you're just surfing, or 3-4 hours of hot-n-heavy processing, without a 4 pound battery.</p><p>I guess on the x86 front, it's not much use if I'm stuck with a limited set of apps. I'm still waiting for a really good mobile browser, and it would be awesome to get some of my discipline-specific utility apps on a phone. Of course, that means windows, since that's all the apps are written for. So I guess this is cool for what it is, but it's still a pretty long stretch to get to useful.</p><p>PS - why would they indicate the capacity of the battery at 1850mAh without a voltage of the pack? I thought tech reporters at CES were supposed to be better than this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know...that what she said...Anyway - that 's a pretty damned big phone .
I 'm more excited about the possibility of dual processor netbooks ( or any notebook ) with a fast processor and a ULV/super efficient processor that can shif on the fly to get a day 's use if you 're just surfing , or 3-4 hours of hot-n-heavy processing , without a 4 pound battery.I guess on the x86 front , it 's not much use if I 'm stuck with a limited set of apps .
I 'm still waiting for a really good mobile browser , and it would be awesome to get some of my discipline-specific utility apps on a phone .
Of course , that means windows , since that 's all the apps are written for .
So I guess this is cool for what it is , but it 's still a pretty long stretch to get to useful.PS - why would they indicate the capacity of the battery at 1850mAh without a voltage of the pack ?
I thought tech reporters at CES were supposed to be better than this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know...that what she said...Anyway - that's a pretty damned big phone.
I'm more excited about the possibility of dual processor netbooks (or any notebook) with a fast processor and a ULV/super efficient processor that can shif on the fly to get a day's use if you're just surfing, or 3-4 hours of hot-n-heavy processing, without a 4 pound battery.I guess on the x86 front, it's not much use if I'm stuck with a limited set of apps.
I'm still waiting for a really good mobile browser, and it would be awesome to get some of my discipline-specific utility apps on a phone.
Of course, that means windows, since that's all the apps are written for.
So I guess this is cool for what it is, but it's still a pretty long stretch to get to useful.PS - why would they indicate the capacity of the battery at 1850mAh without a voltage of the pack?
I thought tech reporters at CES were supposed to be better than this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715414</id>
	<title>One x86 to rule them all?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263148740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't see Intel competing with ARM, ARM has an advantage over x86 in performance per watt, then again DEC, MIPS and many other RISC vendors didn't see Intel competing with them in the high-end workstation and server market. Hindsight is 20/20.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't see Intel competing with ARM , ARM has an advantage over x86 in performance per watt , then again DEC , MIPS and many other RISC vendors did n't see Intel competing with them in the high-end workstation and server market .
Hindsight is 20/20 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't see Intel competing with ARM, ARM has an advantage over x86 in performance per watt, then again DEC, MIPS and many other RISC vendors didn't see Intel competing with them in the high-end workstation and server market.
Hindsight is 20/20.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30718434</id>
	<title>Re:Intel and LG Team Up For x86 Smartphone</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1263127860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Atom @ 45nm process: 26mm^2</p> </div><p>
For reference, a Cortex A8 is a little under 9mm^2 on a 65nm process.  Clock for clock, it performs better than Atom for some workloads, worse for others, but is roughly comparable.  For the same transistor budget as an Atom, you get an entire ARM SoC.  An OMAP3530 was only 60mm^2 on a 65nm process (I think TI is using 45nm now), which gives you a Cortex A8, a PowerVR GPU (OpenGL ES 2.0), a DSP, and all of the controllers you're likely to need (Flash, memory, USB, and so on).  </p><p>
Atom does quite well against the A8, but can't touch the A9 or Snapdragon in either performance or power usage.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Atom @ 45nm process : 26mm ^ 2 For reference , a Cortex A8 is a little under 9mm ^ 2 on a 65nm process .
Clock for clock , it performs better than Atom for some workloads , worse for others , but is roughly comparable .
For the same transistor budget as an Atom , you get an entire ARM SoC .
An OMAP3530 was only 60mm ^ 2 on a 65nm process ( I think TI is using 45nm now ) , which gives you a Cortex A8 , a PowerVR GPU ( OpenGL ES 2.0 ) , a DSP , and all of the controllers you 're likely to need ( Flash , memory , USB , and so on ) .
Atom does quite well against the A8 , but ca n't touch the A9 or Snapdragon in either performance or power usage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Atom @ 45nm process: 26mm^2 
For reference, a Cortex A8 is a little under 9mm^2 on a 65nm process.
Clock for clock, it performs better than Atom for some workloads, worse for others, but is roughly comparable.
For the same transistor budget as an Atom, you get an entire ARM SoC.
An OMAP3530 was only 60mm^2 on a 65nm process (I think TI is using 45nm now), which gives you a Cortex A8, a PowerVR GPU (OpenGL ES 2.0), a DSP, and all of the controllers you're likely to need (Flash, memory, USB, and so on).
Atom does quite well against the A8, but can't touch the A9 or Snapdragon in either performance or power usage.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30717274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30717074</id>
	<title>Re:Intel</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1263118560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Citation? Has the Apple tablet moved beyond rumour yet?</p><p>Times must be tough for Intel if they're even getting turned don for non-existent vaporware. They'll have to focus their efforts on real products instead<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Citation ?
Has the Apple tablet moved beyond rumour yet ? Times must be tough for Intel if they 're even getting turned don for non-existent vaporware .
They 'll have to focus their efforts on real products instead : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Citation?
Has the Apple tablet moved beyond rumour yet?Times must be tough for Intel if they're even getting turned don for non-existent vaporware.
They'll have to focus their efforts on real products instead :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30716080</id>
	<title>Re:Forgive my cynicism</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1263154200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Keyboards can be bluetooth, they don't need to be built into the device.  Most modern TVs have HDMI input.  Add a power port next to that, and you can just drop your phone in a dock next to your TV and pick up a Bluetooth keyboard and mouse when you are at home, but then pick up the computer when you leave.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Keyboards can be bluetooth , they do n't need to be built into the device .
Most modern TVs have HDMI input .
Add a power port next to that , and you can just drop your phone in a dock next to your TV and pick up a Bluetooth keyboard and mouse when you are at home , but then pick up the computer when you leave .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Keyboards can be bluetooth, they don't need to be built into the device.
Most modern TVs have HDMI input.
Add a power port next to that, and you can just drop your phone in a dock next to your TV and pick up a Bluetooth keyboard and mouse when you are at home, but then pick up the computer when you leave.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715792</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715348</id>
	<title>Intel and LG Team Up For x86 Smartphone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263148260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>compete squarely with ARM in the high-end smartphone market</p></div></blockquote><p>
How can they do that when producing an ARM processor cost only ARMs royalty + costs added on from many producers (Texas instruments qualcomm et al).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>compete squarely with ARM in the high-end smartphone market How can they do that when producing an ARM processor cost only ARMs royalty + costs added on from many producers ( Texas instruments qualcomm et al ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>compete squarely with ARM in the high-end smartphone market
How can they do that when producing an ARM processor cost only ARMs royalty + costs added on from many producers (Texas instruments qualcomm et al).
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30717120</id>
	<title>Re:Do Not Want</title>
	<author>noidentity</author>
	<datestamp>1263118860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>But but how are we going to run the vast library of malware written for x86? That's just a killer app waiting to happen on smartphones, and what's holding them back from becoming truely mainstream. I'm excited about this latest development. Oh, that and the ability to synergistically leverage all the x86 compiler expertise built up over the years.</htmltext>
<tokenext>But but how are we going to run the vast library of malware written for x86 ?
That 's just a killer app waiting to happen on smartphones , and what 's holding them back from becoming truely mainstream .
I 'm excited about this latest development .
Oh , that and the ability to synergistically leverage all the x86 compiler expertise built up over the years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But but how are we going to run the vast library of malware written for x86?
That's just a killer app waiting to happen on smartphones, and what's holding them back from becoming truely mainstream.
I'm excited about this latest development.
Oh, that and the ability to synergistically leverage all the x86 compiler expertise built up over the years.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715412</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30721352</id>
	<title>Re:Intel</title>
	<author>mxh83</author>
	<datestamp>1263211140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>More specific link <a href="http://www.thestreet.com/story/10656904/1/exclusive-apples-tablet-has-no-intel-inside.html" title="thestreet.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.thestreet.com/story/10656904/1/exclusive-apples-tablet-has-no-intel-inside.html</a> [thestreet.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>More specific link http : //www.thestreet.com/story/10656904/1/exclusive-apples-tablet-has-no-intel-inside.html [ thestreet.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More specific link http://www.thestreet.com/story/10656904/1/exclusive-apples-tablet-has-no-intel-inside.html [thestreet.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30717074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715412</id>
	<title>Do Not Want</title>
	<author>marcansoft</author>
	<datestamp>1263148740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here we have a platform where there is <b>no</b> reason whatsoever to have an ass-backwards-compatible architecture in order to run legacy Windows apps. There is zero reason to use x86 here other than marketing and Intel. Please go away, we're perfectly happy with a modern RISC architecture (ARM), thank you very much.</p><p>Here's to hoping that ARM will permeate its way up into the netbook market and beyond, instead of the other way around. We've been tortured by x86 long enough already.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here we have a platform where there is no reason whatsoever to have an ass-backwards-compatible architecture in order to run legacy Windows apps .
There is zero reason to use x86 here other than marketing and Intel .
Please go away , we 're perfectly happy with a modern RISC architecture ( ARM ) , thank you very much.Here 's to hoping that ARM will permeate its way up into the netbook market and beyond , instead of the other way around .
We 've been tortured by x86 long enough already .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here we have a platform where there is no reason whatsoever to have an ass-backwards-compatible architecture in order to run legacy Windows apps.
There is zero reason to use x86 here other than marketing and Intel.
Please go away, we're perfectly happy with a modern RISC architecture (ARM), thank you very much.Here's to hoping that ARM will permeate its way up into the netbook market and beyond, instead of the other way around.
We've been tortured by x86 long enough already.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30719922</id>
	<title>Why did Intel ditch the StrongARM?</title>
	<author>lotho brandybuck</author>
	<datestamp>1263145200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What I want to know about this is why Intel sold off the StrongARM line... a few years ago, weren't these the fastest ARMs on the planet?

Was it a case of "not invented here?"</htmltext>
<tokenext>What I want to know about this is why Intel sold off the StrongARM line... a few years ago , were n't these the fastest ARMs on the planet ?
Was it a case of " not invented here ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I want to know about this is why Intel sold off the StrongARM line... a few years ago, weren't these the fastest ARMs on the planet?
Was it a case of "not invented here?
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715356</id>
	<title>Competition</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263148320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Has anyone made a scatter plot of benchmark score vs watt, for a given benchmark and various x86 and ARM processors?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Has anyone made a scatter plot of benchmark score vs watt , for a given benchmark and various x86 and ARM processors ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Has anyone made a scatter plot of benchmark score vs watt, for a given benchmark and various x86 and ARM processors?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715566</id>
	<title>Re:Intel and LG Team Up For x86 Smartphone</title>
	<author>JackDW</author>
	<datestamp>1263149940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Part of the plan would surely involve getting into the IP core business, like ARM. <a href="http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=221601364" title="eetimes.com">AMD are doing it</a> [eetimes.com], and some <a href="http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1508128.1508160&amp;coll=&amp;dl=&amp;type=series&amp;idx=SERIES100&amp;part=series&amp;WantType=Proceedings&amp;title=FPGA" title="acm.org">Intel researchers already have a prototype</a> [acm.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Part of the plan would surely involve getting into the IP core business , like ARM .
AMD are doing it [ eetimes.com ] , and some Intel researchers already have a prototype [ acm.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Part of the plan would surely involve getting into the IP core business, like ARM.
AMD are doing it [eetimes.com], and some Intel researchers already have a prototype [acm.org].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715804</id>
	<title>Re:Intel and LG Team Up For x86 Smartphone</title>
	<author>sznupi</author>
	<datestamp>1263151800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...and order of magnitude less power usage for the same performance. Meaning less problems with heat, smaller battery, much smaller phone with comparable performance.</p><p>There is no benefit of x86 on smartphones that could drag Intel into this market, quite the contrary; ARM is established, and working very fine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...and order of magnitude less power usage for the same performance .
Meaning less problems with heat , smaller battery , much smaller phone with comparable performance.There is no benefit of x86 on smartphones that could drag Intel into this market , quite the contrary ; ARM is established , and working very fine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and order of magnitude less power usage for the same performance.
Meaning less problems with heat, smaller battery, much smaller phone with comparable performance.There is no benefit of x86 on smartphones that could drag Intel into this market, quite the contrary; ARM is established, and working very fine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30716752</id>
	<title>Rerun</title>
	<author>that this is not und</author>
	<datestamp>1263116460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I love stories about new <b>PDAs</b>; it shows the IT market is doing something different than the usual same-old desktop apps.</i></p><p>Same old, same old</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I love stories about new PDAs ; it shows the IT market is doing something different than the usual same-old desktop apps.Same old , same old</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love stories about new PDAs; it shows the IT market is doing something different than the usual same-old desktop apps.Same old, same old</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30724440</id>
	<title>Re:Sounds like...hell!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263231900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I actually read an interesting blog just the other day (www.yellowsquared.com) where they were talking about the future and how in their opinion smartphones would replace people's computers.  They saw the rise of Software as a Service applications where more processing is done server side as a possible solution to the problem of limited processing power on mobile devices.</p><p>Wouldn't work for all applications though I guess.  I can't really imagine doing any graphics work using a web based app!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I actually read an interesting blog just the other day ( www.yellowsquared.com ) where they were talking about the future and how in their opinion smartphones would replace people 's computers .
They saw the rise of Software as a Service applications where more processing is done server side as a possible solution to the problem of limited processing power on mobile devices.Would n't work for all applications though I guess .
I ca n't really imagine doing any graphics work using a web based app !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I actually read an interesting blog just the other day (www.yellowsquared.com) where they were talking about the future and how in their opinion smartphones would replace people's computers.
They saw the rise of Software as a Service applications where more processing is done server side as a possible solution to the problem of limited processing power on mobile devices.Wouldn't work for all applications though I guess.
I can't really imagine doing any graphics work using a web based app!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30728880</id>
	<title>Re:Sounds like...hell!</title>
	<author>Urkki</author>
	<datestamp>1263205020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><blockquote><div><p>Oh I sure hope not. Sounds like hell to me, and I'm an aetheist!</p></div></blockquote><p>Perhaps maybe just purgatory.  But it could work.  Carry your uberdevice in your pocket (lead foil lined), use it with it's native human interface devices when wandering around.  Pop it in some sort of dock at work with a decent keyboard, mouse and screen.  Remember to pick it up before you go home.<br>
&nbsp; </p></div><p>At least Maemo can do this today for real. The "docking station" will just have to be a PC running VNC and phone needs to connect to it with WLAN or USB. There are also other possibilities (like running phone apps on PC X server instead of the phone X server), but VNC is the most universal and easy one I think. Is there a VNC server for Android yet, or even for iPhone?</p><p>Or then you could use cloud apps, they do work at least technically (at least Maemo5 stock browser, and I assume also mobile-Firefox release candidate, can run for example Google Docs and Google Wave), though user interfaces would need some serious optimization for touchscreens and crappy keyboards...  But I bet at least some of the cloud apps available are bound to be pretty good on phone browsers.</p><p>Or then you could use network disk shares to store documents, and edit them in-place, whether using a phone/tablet or a PC.</p><p>But the point is, what you describe is possible today. This future started already last year<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh I sure hope not .
Sounds like hell to me , and I 'm an aetheist ! Perhaps maybe just purgatory .
But it could work .
Carry your uberdevice in your pocket ( lead foil lined ) , use it with it 's native human interface devices when wandering around .
Pop it in some sort of dock at work with a decent keyboard , mouse and screen .
Remember to pick it up before you go home .
  At least Maemo can do this today for real .
The " docking station " will just have to be a PC running VNC and phone needs to connect to it with WLAN or USB .
There are also other possibilities ( like running phone apps on PC X server instead of the phone X server ) , but VNC is the most universal and easy one I think .
Is there a VNC server for Android yet , or even for iPhone ? Or then you could use cloud apps , they do work at least technically ( at least Maemo5 stock browser , and I assume also mobile-Firefox release candidate , can run for example Google Docs and Google Wave ) , though user interfaces would need some serious optimization for touchscreens and crappy keyboards... But I bet at least some of the cloud apps available are bound to be pretty good on phone browsers.Or then you could use network disk shares to store documents , and edit them in-place , whether using a phone/tablet or a PC.But the point is , what you describe is possible today .
This future started already last year : - ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh I sure hope not.
Sounds like hell to me, and I'm an aetheist!Perhaps maybe just purgatory.
But it could work.
Carry your uberdevice in your pocket (lead foil lined), use it with it's native human interface devices when wandering around.
Pop it in some sort of dock at work with a decent keyboard, mouse and screen.
Remember to pick it up before you go home.
  At least Maemo can do this today for real.
The "docking station" will just have to be a PC running VNC and phone needs to connect to it with WLAN or USB.
There are also other possibilities (like running phone apps on PC X server instead of the phone X server), but VNC is the most universal and easy one I think.
Is there a VNC server for Android yet, or even for iPhone?Or then you could use cloud apps, they do work at least technically (at least Maemo5 stock browser, and I assume also mobile-Firefox release candidate, can run for example Google Docs and Google Wave), though user interfaces would need some serious optimization for touchscreens and crappy keyboards...  But I bet at least some of the cloud apps available are bound to be pretty good on phone browsers.Or then you could use network disk shares to store documents, and edit them in-place, whether using a phone/tablet or a PC.But the point is, what you describe is possible today.
This future started already last year :-).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715440</id>
	<title>what will it look like</title>
	<author>Locutus</author>
	<datestamp>1263148980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>maybe the image used on this topics OP?  Seriously, Intel has to make their Atom chips on the top-of-the-line 32nm or better process equipment just to be in the ball game with the ARM or PPC chips with regards to performance per watt. They now want to put x86 chips in smartphones?  I guess they can try to spin up the press about this failure and hope they can drag it out for another few years. Maybe at 24nm it'll work but by then, ARM will be on 32nm and probably running quad cores and still beating them.<br><br>My guess is that LG is getting paid by Intel to play along and nothing more.<br><br>LoB</htmltext>
<tokenext>maybe the image used on this topics OP ?
Seriously , Intel has to make their Atom chips on the top-of-the-line 32nm or better process equipment just to be in the ball game with the ARM or PPC chips with regards to performance per watt .
They now want to put x86 chips in smartphones ?
I guess they can try to spin up the press about this failure and hope they can drag it out for another few years .
Maybe at 24nm it 'll work but by then , ARM will be on 32nm and probably running quad cores and still beating them.My guess is that LG is getting paid by Intel to play along and nothing more.LoB</tokentext>
<sentencetext>maybe the image used on this topics OP?
Seriously, Intel has to make their Atom chips on the top-of-the-line 32nm or better process equipment just to be in the ball game with the ARM or PPC chips with regards to performance per watt.
They now want to put x86 chips in smartphones?
I guess they can try to spin up the press about this failure and hope they can drag it out for another few years.
Maybe at 24nm it'll work but by then, ARM will be on 32nm and probably running quad cores and still beating them.My guess is that LG is getting paid by Intel to play along and nothing more.LoB</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30717578</id>
	<title>Re:Do Not Want</title>
	<author>bcmm</author>
	<datestamp>1263121740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Tried to print directly from your phone directly to some dumb printer?</p></div></blockquote><p>Tried to print directly from your laptop to someone else's dumb printer? Windows printer drivers are pretty horrible. At well over a gigabyte (!) of disk space required for some HP drivers (including all the non-optional utilities), it'd need a lot of storage (for a phone) to make you want to do that without thinking carefully...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Tried to print directly from your phone directly to some dumb printer ? Tried to print directly from your laptop to someone else 's dumb printer ?
Windows printer drivers are pretty horrible .
At well over a gigabyte ( !
) of disk space required for some HP drivers ( including all the non-optional utilities ) , it 'd need a lot of storage ( for a phone ) to make you want to do that without thinking carefully.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tried to print directly from your phone directly to some dumb printer?Tried to print directly from your laptop to someone else's dumb printer?
Windows printer drivers are pretty horrible.
At well over a gigabyte (!
) of disk space required for some HP drivers (including all the non-optional utilities), it'd need a lot of storage (for a phone) to make you want to do that without thinking carefully...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30718240</id>
	<title>Re:Intel and LG Team Up For x86 Smartphone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263126300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because high end "smartphones" are way more expensive than the MID I already own (the Viliv S5: http://www.umpcportal.com/2009/05/viliv-s5-premium-umpc-full-review/ ).</p><p>Some information:<br>1) If you're comparing it to the previous generation (like the S5), you should probably say "Running a Moorestown CPU, which gives 'considerably' better energy efficiency than the Menlow platform" to be consistent with your naming, since those are both the family code names for the processors in that family. I think Intel is still going to call Moorestown stuff "Atom processors."</p><p>2) You can install Windows or whatever x86 OS you want on an MID (which Moorestown devices are), you're not limited to Moblin (though it certainly is well optimized). Therefore you can use whatever applications you want, this is x86.</p><p>Personally, I love it, and I'd never trade it for some ARM crap, it's hugely convenient to have the gigantic program base of x86, you don't have to rely on the slow support chain of the company you purchased your device from.</p><p>3) I'm sure battery life on Moorestown must be ridiculous, because my Menlow device (Viliv S5) already has a better battery than my old laptop (which it completely replaced for half the cost). I can run XP with the screen on for 5 hours, easily. If I turn on my music player (through Windows) and leave it playing through external speakers on a loud volume with the screen off, it can last 12-15 hours.</p><p>That's a lot longer than I can talk on my phone before it dies (not even a smartphone, and it's brand new with a new battery).</p><p>4) Oh, and my Viliv S5 has 1 GB of RAM, 32 GB SSD hard drive, 1.33 Ghz processor, no fan, doesn't overheat, and cost $550.</p><p>I'm sure Moorestown specs will be even more impressive.</p><p>----------</p><p>Long story short, this isn't a new device, just none of you know about the devices that have been on the market since 2007.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because high end " smartphones " are way more expensive than the MID I already own ( the Viliv S5 : http : //www.umpcportal.com/2009/05/viliv-s5-premium-umpc-full-review/ ) .Some information : 1 ) If you 're comparing it to the previous generation ( like the S5 ) , you should probably say " Running a Moorestown CPU , which gives 'considerably ' better energy efficiency than the Menlow platform " to be consistent with your naming , since those are both the family code names for the processors in that family .
I think Intel is still going to call Moorestown stuff " Atom processors .
" 2 ) You can install Windows or whatever x86 OS you want on an MID ( which Moorestown devices are ) , you 're not limited to Moblin ( though it certainly is well optimized ) .
Therefore you can use whatever applications you want , this is x86.Personally , I love it , and I 'd never trade it for some ARM crap , it 's hugely convenient to have the gigantic program base of x86 , you do n't have to rely on the slow support chain of the company you purchased your device from.3 ) I 'm sure battery life on Moorestown must be ridiculous , because my Menlow device ( Viliv S5 ) already has a better battery than my old laptop ( which it completely replaced for half the cost ) .
I can run XP with the screen on for 5 hours , easily .
If I turn on my music player ( through Windows ) and leave it playing through external speakers on a loud volume with the screen off , it can last 12-15 hours.That 's a lot longer than I can talk on my phone before it dies ( not even a smartphone , and it 's brand new with a new battery ) .4 ) Oh , and my Viliv S5 has 1 GB of RAM , 32 GB SSD hard drive , 1.33 Ghz processor , no fan , does n't overheat , and cost $ 550.I 'm sure Moorestown specs will be even more impressive.----------Long story short , this is n't a new device , just none of you know about the devices that have been on the market since 2007 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because high end "smartphones" are way more expensive than the MID I already own (the Viliv S5: http://www.umpcportal.com/2009/05/viliv-s5-premium-umpc-full-review/ ).Some information:1) If you're comparing it to the previous generation (like the S5), you should probably say "Running a Moorestown CPU, which gives 'considerably' better energy efficiency than the Menlow platform" to be consistent with your naming, since those are both the family code names for the processors in that family.
I think Intel is still going to call Moorestown stuff "Atom processors.
"2) You can install Windows or whatever x86 OS you want on an MID (which Moorestown devices are), you're not limited to Moblin (though it certainly is well optimized).
Therefore you can use whatever applications you want, this is x86.Personally, I love it, and I'd never trade it for some ARM crap, it's hugely convenient to have the gigantic program base of x86, you don't have to rely on the slow support chain of the company you purchased your device from.3) I'm sure battery life on Moorestown must be ridiculous, because my Menlow device (Viliv S5) already has a better battery than my old laptop (which it completely replaced for half the cost).
I can run XP with the screen on for 5 hours, easily.
If I turn on my music player (through Windows) and leave it playing through external speakers on a loud volume with the screen off, it can last 12-15 hours.That's a lot longer than I can talk on my phone before it dies (not even a smartphone, and it's brand new with a new battery).4) Oh, and my Viliv S5 has 1 GB of RAM, 32 GB SSD hard drive, 1.33 Ghz processor, no fan, doesn't overheat, and cost $550.I'm sure Moorestown specs will be even more impressive.----------Long story short, this isn't a new device, just none of you know about the devices that have been on the market since 2007.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715348</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_164241_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715814
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_164241_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30724440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_164241_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30718434
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30717274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715348
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_164241_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30717578
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715412
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_164241_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30717120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715412
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_164241_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715616
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715348
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_164241_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30728880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_164241_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715858
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715348
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_164241_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30716152
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715412
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_164241_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30717276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30716080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715792
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_164241_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30721352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30717074
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715380
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_164241_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30718240
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715348
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_164241_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30720186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_164241_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30721244
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715412
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_164241_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715566
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715348
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_164241_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715804
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715348
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_164241.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715440
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_164241.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715752
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_164241.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715414
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_164241.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715792
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30716080
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30717276
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_164241.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715350
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715814
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715584
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30724440
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30728880
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30720186
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_164241.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715348
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30718240
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715804
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715858
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715546
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30717274
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30718434
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715616
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715566
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_164241.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715666
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_164241.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715396
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_164241.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30719922
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_164241.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715380
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30717074
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30721352
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_164241.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715562
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_164241.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715412
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30717120
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715832
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30716152
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30721244
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30717578
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_164241.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_164241.30715570
</commentlist>
</conversation>
