<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_15_1557218</id>
	<title>Firefox 3.7 Dropped In Favor of Feature Updates</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1263573780000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Barence sends in a report from pcpro.co.uk that says <i>"Under its original plans, Mozilla would roll out Firefox 3.6 and 3.7 over the course of 2009, each bringing minor improvements to the browser. However, a steady stream of delays to Firefox 3.6 has rendered that goal unobtainable, forcing Mozilla to rethink its release. As a result, <a href="http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/354844/firefox-3-7-dumped-in-favour-of-feature-updates">Firefox 3.7 has been dropped</a> and will be replaced with feature updates for Firefox 3.6 that will be rolled out with security updates. This should free up the team to work on the next major release, Firefox 4, slated for the last quarter of 2010, which is expected to follow the same development process."</i> <strong>Updated 20100116 00:54 GMT by timothy</strong>:  Alexander Limi, from Firefox User Experience, says that the PC Pro article linked above misinterprets the situation, and that 3.7 is still on the roadmap before 4.0. The confusion stems from a schedule realignment: the out-of-process plugins feature, originally slated to land in 3.7, will instead ship as a minor update in Firefox's 3.6 series. According to Limi, <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685\_3-10433844-264.html">CNET gets it right</a>."</htmltext>
<tokenext>Barence sends in a report from pcpro.co.uk that says " Under its original plans , Mozilla would roll out Firefox 3.6 and 3.7 over the course of 2009 , each bringing minor improvements to the browser .
However , a steady stream of delays to Firefox 3.6 has rendered that goal unobtainable , forcing Mozilla to rethink its release .
As a result , Firefox 3.7 has been dropped and will be replaced with feature updates for Firefox 3.6 that will be rolled out with security updates .
This should free up the team to work on the next major release , Firefox 4 , slated for the last quarter of 2010 , which is expected to follow the same development process .
" Updated 20100116 00 : 54 GMT by timothy : Alexander Limi , from Firefox User Experience , says that the PC Pro article linked above misinterprets the situation , and that 3.7 is still on the roadmap before 4.0 .
The confusion stems from a schedule realignment : the out-of-process plugins feature , originally slated to land in 3.7 , will instead ship as a minor update in Firefox 's 3.6 series .
According to Limi , CNET gets it right .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Barence sends in a report from pcpro.co.uk that says "Under its original plans, Mozilla would roll out Firefox 3.6 and 3.7 over the course of 2009, each bringing minor improvements to the browser.
However, a steady stream of delays to Firefox 3.6 has rendered that goal unobtainable, forcing Mozilla to rethink its release.
As a result, Firefox 3.7 has been dropped and will be replaced with feature updates for Firefox 3.6 that will be rolled out with security updates.
This should free up the team to work on the next major release, Firefox 4, slated for the last quarter of 2010, which is expected to follow the same development process.
" Updated 20100116 00:54 GMT by timothy:  Alexander Limi, from Firefox User Experience, says that the PC Pro article linked above misinterprets the situation, and that 3.7 is still on the roadmap before 4.0.
The confusion stems from a schedule realignment: the out-of-process plugins feature, originally slated to land in 3.7, will instead ship as a minor update in Firefox's 3.6 series.
According to Limi, CNET gets it right.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30786106</id>
	<title>Re:Gecko 1.9.3 and SVG animation</title>
	<author>Randle\_Revar</author>
	<datestamp>1263561780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As far as I can tell, the article is BS. It links to another <a href="http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9144820/Mozilla\_dumps\_Firefox\_3.7\_from\_schedule\_changes\_dev\_process?taxonomyId=168&amp;pageNumber=1" title="computerworld.com">article</a> [computerworld.com], which links... nowhere, really. I don't see anything about this on planet mozilla, nor on any of the Mozilla wiki planning pages.</p><p>I think the author of this article is misinterpreting a discussion I read a few days (a week?) back, where they discussed backporting some high value, relatively low-disruption features from trunk (3.7) to 3.6.x There was some back an forth on what was safe enough and valuable enough to merit backporting, but last I saw, they seemed to be leaning towards only doing "out of process plugins" (OOPP) aka "Flash crashes don't need to crash the browser". I certainly didn't see anything about dropping 3.7</p><p>Ah, finally found that discussion  <a href="http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.dev.planning/browse\_thread/thread/f65f34aba408ca01/82b3086c93a18036" title="google.com">http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.dev.planning/browse\_thread/thread/f65f34aba408ca01/82b3086c93a18036</a> [google.com]</p><p>Note that there doesn't seem to be anything about dropping 3.7 anywhere on <a href="http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.dev.planning/" title="google.com">http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.dev.planning/</a> [google.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As far as I can tell , the article is BS .
It links to another article [ computerworld.com ] , which links... nowhere , really .
I do n't see anything about this on planet mozilla , nor on any of the Mozilla wiki planning pages.I think the author of this article is misinterpreting a discussion I read a few days ( a week ?
) back , where they discussed backporting some high value , relatively low-disruption features from trunk ( 3.7 ) to 3.6.x There was some back an forth on what was safe enough and valuable enough to merit backporting , but last I saw , they seemed to be leaning towards only doing " out of process plugins " ( OOPP ) aka " Flash crashes do n't need to crash the browser " .
I certainly did n't see anything about dropping 3.7Ah , finally found that discussion http : //groups.google.com/group/mozilla.dev.planning/browse \ _thread/thread/f65f34aba408ca01/82b3086c93a18036 [ google.com ] Note that there does n't seem to be anything about dropping 3.7 anywhere on http : //groups.google.com/group/mozilla.dev.planning/ [ google.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As far as I can tell, the article is BS.
It links to another article [computerworld.com], which links... nowhere, really.
I don't see anything about this on planet mozilla, nor on any of the Mozilla wiki planning pages.I think the author of this article is misinterpreting a discussion I read a few days (a week?
) back, where they discussed backporting some high value, relatively low-disruption features from trunk (3.7) to 3.6.x There was some back an forth on what was safe enough and valuable enough to merit backporting, but last I saw, they seemed to be leaning towards only doing "out of process plugins" (OOPP) aka "Flash crashes don't need to crash the browser".
I certainly didn't see anything about dropping 3.7Ah, finally found that discussion  http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.dev.planning/browse\_thread/thread/f65f34aba408ca01/82b3086c93a18036 [google.com]Note that there doesn't seem to be anything about dropping 3.7 anywhere on http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.dev.planning/ [google.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780344</id>
	<title>Where's the meat?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263578340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What purpose does it serve to skip version numbers, except for some political or media-relations reason? The Linux kernel and many other open source projects have release cycles of "it's done when it's done" -- and a predictable version numbering system. What next, <i>Mozilla Firefox 2010 Professional Edition</i>? Delays are inevitable in any software development project.</p><p>Also, Slashdot -- this news post was like saying "X replaced by Y. Z reported jealous, but A and B are looking forward to bringing C onboard soon." Numbers should not be used in place of content. $WITTY\_COMMENT. $RETORT. $TROLL. $VAGUE\_REFERENCE\_TO\_SEXUALITY.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What purpose does it serve to skip version numbers , except for some political or media-relations reason ?
The Linux kernel and many other open source projects have release cycles of " it 's done when it 's done " -- and a predictable version numbering system .
What next , Mozilla Firefox 2010 Professional Edition ?
Delays are inevitable in any software development project.Also , Slashdot -- this news post was like saying " X replaced by Y. Z reported jealous , but A and B are looking forward to bringing C onboard soon .
" Numbers should not be used in place of content .
$ WITTY \ _COMMENT. $ RETORT .
$ TROLL. $ VAGUE \ _REFERENCE \ _TO \ _SEXUALITY .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What purpose does it serve to skip version numbers, except for some political or media-relations reason?
The Linux kernel and many other open source projects have release cycles of "it's done when it's done" -- and a predictable version numbering system.
What next, Mozilla Firefox 2010 Professional Edition?
Delays are inevitable in any software development project.Also, Slashdot -- this news post was like saying "X replaced by Y. Z reported jealous, but A and B are looking forward to bringing C onboard soon.
" Numbers should not be used in place of content.
$WITTY\_COMMENT. $RETORT.
$TROLL. $VAGUE\_REFERENCE\_TO\_SEXUALITY.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30786312</id>
	<title>Re:I want multithreading!</title>
	<author>BZ</author>
	<datestamp>1263563400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you read the article (or better yet the one it cribbed from), the one feature that's so far being considered for backporting to 3.6.x is in fact out-of-process plug-ins....  So what you want is coming!  You can try it right now if you grab a nightly build.  At least on Linux and Windows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you read the article ( or better yet the one it cribbed from ) , the one feature that 's so far being considered for backporting to 3.6.x is in fact out-of-process plug-ins.... So what you want is coming !
You can try it right now if you grab a nightly build .
At least on Linux and Windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you read the article (or better yet the one it cribbed from), the one feature that's so far being considered for backporting to 3.6.x is in fact out-of-process plug-ins....  So what you want is coming!
You can try it right now if you grab a nightly build.
At least on Linux and Windows.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782676</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782300</id>
	<title>Is it already time for the next *generation*?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1263586080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know, sometimes the architecture that you originally designed (and that was great and the right thing back then) does not fit your current needs anymore. You get slower and slower, everything becomes bloated and messy, and starts to look like an upside-down pyramid (Windows ME syndrome).</p><p>And that&rsquo;s the time, where it&rsquo;s good to think about not just making the next version. But about making the next <em>generation</em>. Like a complete rewrite, but not. More like forgetting everything and designing a good and more future-proof system from the ground up. Which usually results in not much loss of work, because you notice how much falls into that new design as if it were made for it, because you lose the coding around that you previously had do employ. (Which also is the indicator that a new generation was the better decision: When it is less work than what the other choice.)</p><p>Has anyone else the feeling, that we&rsquo;re pretty close to that with Firefox right now?</p><p>It&rsquo;s strange how many experienced developers think they can just pile up version after version of <em>major new goals</em> onto the same architecture.</p><p>I myself would at this point make two branches: One called Firefox. And one called Firefox Two / Firefox II / SomethingCompletelyDifferent. (As in &ldquo;SomeMovie 2&rdquo;, not as in &ldquo;SomeSoftware 2.0.&rdquo; One level higher.)</p><p>I hope the team makes the best decision.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know , sometimes the architecture that you originally designed ( and that was great and the right thing back then ) does not fit your current needs anymore .
You get slower and slower , everything becomes bloated and messy , and starts to look like an upside-down pyramid ( Windows ME syndrome ) .And that    s the time , where it    s good to think about not just making the next version .
But about making the next generation .
Like a complete rewrite , but not .
More like forgetting everything and designing a good and more future-proof system from the ground up .
Which usually results in not much loss of work , because you notice how much falls into that new design as if it were made for it , because you lose the coding around that you previously had do employ .
( Which also is the indicator that a new generation was the better decision : When it is less work than what the other choice .
) Has anyone else the feeling , that we    re pretty close to that with Firefox right now ? It    s strange how many experienced developers think they can just pile up version after version of major new goals onto the same architecture.I myself would at this point make two branches : One called Firefox .
And one called Firefox Two / Firefox II / SomethingCompletelyDifferent .
( As in    SomeMovie 2    , not as in    SomeSoftware 2.0.    One level higher .
) I hope the team makes the best decision .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know, sometimes the architecture that you originally designed (and that was great and the right thing back then) does not fit your current needs anymore.
You get slower and slower, everything becomes bloated and messy, and starts to look like an upside-down pyramid (Windows ME syndrome).And that’s the time, where it’s good to think about not just making the next version.
But about making the next generation.
Like a complete rewrite, but not.
More like forgetting everything and designing a good and more future-proof system from the ground up.
Which usually results in not much loss of work, because you notice how much falls into that new design as if it were made for it, because you lose the coding around that you previously had do employ.
(Which also is the indicator that a new generation was the better decision: When it is less work than what the other choice.
)Has anyone else the feeling, that we’re pretty close to that with Firefox right now?It’s strange how many experienced developers think they can just pile up version after version of major new goals onto the same architecture.I myself would at this point make two branches: One called Firefox.
And one called Firefox Two / Firefox II / SomethingCompletelyDifferent.
(As in “SomeMovie 2”, not as in “SomeSoftware 2.0.” One level higher.
)I hope the team makes the best decision.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780616</id>
	<title>Re:Combining security and feature updates, bad ide</title>
	<author>MtViewGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1263579360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't think the Mozilla Foundation is dumb enough to wait for new features for 3.6.x version security updates! I do think the version number could go as high as 3.6.15 (my guess) as security updates and the new features are "slipstreamed" in.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think the Mozilla Foundation is dumb enough to wait for new features for 3.6.x version security updates !
I do think the version number could go as high as 3.6.15 ( my guess ) as security updates and the new features are " slipstreamed " in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think the Mozilla Foundation is dumb enough to wait for new features for 3.6.x version security updates!
I do think the version number could go as high as 3.6.15 (my guess) as security updates and the new features are "slipstreamed" in.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782796</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the meat?</title>
	<author>Bazzargh</author>
	<datestamp>1263588240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><em>What purpose does it serve to skip version numbers, except for some political or media-relations reason?</em></p><p>Work was going on simultaneously on 3.7 and 4.0 branches of the code. There is an overhead in doing that, eg builds of both could be failing, who's looking into that, etc. Not least of your problems is getting developers who're working on shiny-new-stuff (4.0) to care about incremental-updates (3.7)</p><p>Version numbers are just marketing. The linux numbering system changed not that long ago, and every so often there is a bunfight over it (there was talk of making releases last year version 9.x, matching the year); and the discussions are always about how this would be perceived, since what matters to developers is just the git hash anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What purpose does it serve to skip version numbers , except for some political or media-relations reason ? Work was going on simultaneously on 3.7 and 4.0 branches of the code .
There is an overhead in doing that , eg builds of both could be failing , who 's looking into that , etc .
Not least of your problems is getting developers who 're working on shiny-new-stuff ( 4.0 ) to care about incremental-updates ( 3.7 ) Version numbers are just marketing .
The linux numbering system changed not that long ago , and every so often there is a bunfight over it ( there was talk of making releases last year version 9.x , matching the year ) ; and the discussions are always about how this would be perceived , since what matters to developers is just the git hash anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What purpose does it serve to skip version numbers, except for some political or media-relations reason?Work was going on simultaneously on 3.7 and 4.0 branches of the code.
There is an overhead in doing that, eg builds of both could be failing, who's looking into that, etc.
Not least of your problems is getting developers who're working on shiny-new-stuff (4.0) to care about incremental-updates (3.7)Version numbers are just marketing.
The linux numbering system changed not that long ago, and every so often there is a bunfight over it (there was talk of making releases last year version 9.x, matching the year); and the discussions are always about how this would be perceived, since what matters to developers is just the git hash anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782764</id>
	<title>Just make it faster</title>
	<author>Snaller</author>
	<datestamp>1263588060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>SO damn slow</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>SO damn slow</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SO damn slow</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780664</id>
	<title>Re:Combining security and feature updates, bad ide</title>
	<author>twidarkling</author>
	<datestamp>1263579600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, you're missing option 3.</p><p>Three, Mozilla rolls out a patch that includes a feature when it's ready, and rolls out a different patch when a security update is ready, and combines them if/when possible. That would still be "with" security updates, after a fashion, and it would be the logical, intelligent way to do so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , you 're missing option 3.Three , Mozilla rolls out a patch that includes a feature when it 's ready , and rolls out a different patch when a security update is ready , and combines them if/when possible .
That would still be " with " security updates , after a fashion , and it would be the logical , intelligent way to do so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, you're missing option 3.Three, Mozilla rolls out a patch that includes a feature when it's ready, and rolls out a different patch when a security update is ready, and combines them if/when possible.
That would still be "with" security updates, after a fashion, and it would be the logical, intelligent way to do so.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780542</id>
	<title>informative fuckerfMucker</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263579060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">For the record, I</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>For the record , I [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For the record, I [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780706</id>
	<title>Re:Gecko 1.9.3 and SVG animation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263579720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>SVG animation?  Heh, they don't even have a half assed SVG static renderer yet, and you want animation?  I think they need to make it so we can draw more than a smiley face using primitive shapes and basic fills before they start worrying about animation.</p><p>At a bare minimum, can we get it to pass SOME part of the 1.1 test suite for static elements before we start with animation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>SVG animation ?
Heh , they do n't even have a half assed SVG static renderer yet , and you want animation ?
I think they need to make it so we can draw more than a smiley face using primitive shapes and basic fills before they start worrying about animation.At a bare minimum , can we get it to pass SOME part of the 1.1 test suite for static elements before we start with animation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SVG animation?
Heh, they don't even have a half assed SVG static renderer yet, and you want animation?
I think they need to make it so we can draw more than a smiley face using primitive shapes and basic fills before they start worrying about animation.At a bare minimum, can we get it to pass SOME part of the 1.1 test suite for static elements before we start with animation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30785622</id>
	<title>Re:I want multithreading!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263558480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Multithreading != Multiprocessing</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Multithreading ! = Multiprocessing</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Multithreading != Multiprocessing</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782676</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30784132</id>
	<title>Re:Gecko 1.9.3 and SVG animation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263550920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.trollaxor.com/2009/12/firefox-has-too-many-developers.html" title="trollaxor.com" rel="nofollow">Firefox has too many developers</a> [trollaxor.com]!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Firefox has too many developers [ trollaxor.com ] !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Firefox has too many developers [trollaxor.com]!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780398</id>
	<title>Combining security and feature updates, bad idea</title>
	<author>Paradigm\_Complex</author>
	<datestamp>1263578580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>will be replaced with feature updates for Firefox 3.6 that will be rolled out with security updates</p></div><p>This seems to be a horrible idea to me, unless I'm misinterpreting it.  I can see this being implemented in two ways:<br> <br>

One, Mozilla withholds security updates until there is a feature ready to go, which is just stupid - don't leave a hole if you've got a fix ready.  One of the arguments in favor Firefox over IE is the more rapid security updates.<br> <br>

Two, Mozilla withholds features until a security update is necessary.  I can't see any advantage to doing this, but there's a few obvious downsides (like withholding a perfectly good feature until someone finds something we're supposed to be hoping is not there).<br> <br>

Unless I'm missing something?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>will be replaced with feature updates for Firefox 3.6 that will be rolled out with security updatesThis seems to be a horrible idea to me , unless I 'm misinterpreting it .
I can see this being implemented in two ways : One , Mozilla withholds security updates until there is a feature ready to go , which is just stupid - do n't leave a hole if you 've got a fix ready .
One of the arguments in favor Firefox over IE is the more rapid security updates .
Two , Mozilla withholds features until a security update is necessary .
I ca n't see any advantage to doing this , but there 's a few obvious downsides ( like withholding a perfectly good feature until someone finds something we 're supposed to be hoping is not there ) .
Unless I 'm missing something ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>will be replaced with feature updates for Firefox 3.6 that will be rolled out with security updatesThis seems to be a horrible idea to me, unless I'm misinterpreting it.
I can see this being implemented in two ways: 

One, Mozilla withholds security updates until there is a feature ready to go, which is just stupid - don't leave a hole if you've got a fix ready.
One of the arguments in favor Firefox over IE is the more rapid security updates.
Two, Mozilla withholds features until a security update is necessary.
I can't see any advantage to doing this, but there's a few obvious downsides (like withholding a perfectly good feature until someone finds something we're supposed to be hoping is not there).
Unless I'm missing something?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780934</id>
	<title>Quick date calculations</title>
	<author>dark\_panda</author>
	<datestamp>1263580680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>"Mozilla would roll out Firefox 3.6 and 3.7 over the course of 2009, each bringing minor improvements to the browser. However, a steady stream of delays to Firefox 3.6 has rendered that goal unobtainable."</i></p><p><tt>[jay@gobstopper ~]\% date<br>Fri 15 Jan 2010 12:32:18 EST</tt></p><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... Okay guys, looks like this math checks out. It seems that releasing Firefox 3.6 and 3.7 in 2009 is an unobtainable goal at this point in time. You know, in 2010.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Mozilla would roll out Firefox 3.6 and 3.7 over the course of 2009 , each bringing minor improvements to the browser .
However , a steady stream of delays to Firefox 3.6 has rendered that goal unobtainable .
" [ jay @ gobstopper ~ ] \ % dateFri 15 Jan 2010 12 : 32 : 18 EST ... ... Okay guys , looks like this math checks out .
It seems that releasing Firefox 3.6 and 3.7 in 2009 is an unobtainable goal at this point in time .
You know , in 2010 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Mozilla would roll out Firefox 3.6 and 3.7 over the course of 2009, each bringing minor improvements to the browser.
However, a steady stream of delays to Firefox 3.6 has rendered that goal unobtainable.
"[jay@gobstopper ~]\% dateFri 15 Jan 2010 12:32:18 EST ... ... Okay guys, looks like this math checks out.
It seems that releasing Firefox 3.6 and 3.7 in 2009 is an unobtainable goal at this point in time.
You know, in 2010.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780794</id>
	<title>Re:Firefox Needs to Be Dropped, Period</title>
	<author>HouseOfMisterE</author>
	<datestamp>1263580020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe I'm lucky (conversely, maybe you are unlucky), but 32-bit Firefox 3.5x is 100\%* rock-solid stable on my PCs.  I can't compare this to IE's stability, as I never, ever, use IE.  Granted, I only have 4 add-ons installed (ColorfulTabs, Flashblock, ForecastFox, and Oldbar), but Firefox simply works.</p><p>*Actually, I can remember 1 time that Firefox locked up on me, months ago, so its stability is 100\% minus one\_event.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe I 'm lucky ( conversely , maybe you are unlucky ) , but 32-bit Firefox 3.5x is 100 \ % * rock-solid stable on my PCs .
I ca n't compare this to IE 's stability , as I never , ever , use IE .
Granted , I only have 4 add-ons installed ( ColorfulTabs , Flashblock , ForecastFox , and Oldbar ) , but Firefox simply works .
* Actually , I can remember 1 time that Firefox locked up on me , months ago , so its stability is 100 \ % minus one \ _event .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe I'm lucky (conversely, maybe you are unlucky), but 32-bit Firefox 3.5x is 100\%* rock-solid stable on my PCs.
I can't compare this to IE's stability, as I never, ever, use IE.
Granted, I only have 4 add-ons installed (ColorfulTabs, Flashblock, ForecastFox, and Oldbar), but Firefox simply works.
*Actually, I can remember 1 time that Firefox locked up on me, months ago, so its stability is 100\% minus one\_event.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30785396</id>
	<title>All I want from Firefox is a 64-bit implementation</title>
	<author>wwphx</author>
	<datestamp>1263557340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And better memory management.  It's annoying that it doesn't seem to do garbage collection when I close tabs and pages in Snow Leopard.  I end up closing it and having it reload my pages and tabs at least once a day to shrink its memory footprint.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And better memory management .
It 's annoying that it does n't seem to do garbage collection when I close tabs and pages in Snow Leopard .
I end up closing it and having it reload my pages and tabs at least once a day to shrink its memory footprint .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And better memory management.
It's annoying that it doesn't seem to do garbage collection when I close tabs and pages in Snow Leopard.
I end up closing it and having it reload my pages and tabs at least once a day to shrink its memory footprint.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780224</id>
	<title>Meaning what?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263577860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's the difference between "Firefox 3.0 with updates" and "Firefox 3.7"?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's the difference between " Firefox 3.0 with updates " and " Firefox 3.7 " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's the difference between "Firefox 3.0 with updates" and "Firefox 3.7"?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780292</id>
	<title>Multithreading</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263578100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People have said Firefox is multithreaded, and I'm no coder, but I know when a piece of software is using all available resources.<br>Firefox never goes above 25\% CPU usage when I open up a new window (which in turn loads about 15 tabs). Maybe the Gecko rendering engine can't render two pages at once. All I know is that the Firefox becomes unusable/unresponsive on my quad core for about 5 seconds while everything loads. Chrome hits much higher CPU usage-- but it doesn't have [true] adblock.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People have said Firefox is multithreaded , and I 'm no coder , but I know when a piece of software is using all available resources.Firefox never goes above 25 \ % CPU usage when I open up a new window ( which in turn loads about 15 tabs ) .
Maybe the Gecko rendering engine ca n't render two pages at once .
All I know is that the Firefox becomes unusable/unresponsive on my quad core for about 5 seconds while everything loads .
Chrome hits much higher CPU usage-- but it does n't have [ true ] adblock .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People have said Firefox is multithreaded, and I'm no coder, but I know when a piece of software is using all available resources.Firefox never goes above 25\% CPU usage when I open up a new window (which in turn loads about 15 tabs).
Maybe the Gecko rendering engine can't render two pages at once.
All I know is that the Firefox becomes unusable/unresponsive on my quad core for about 5 seconds while everything loads.
Chrome hits much higher CPU usage-- but it doesn't have [true] adblock.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782762</id>
	<title>Re:Minefield</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1263588060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Tick... And with every second... tick... the likeliness of you stepping... tick... on a mine, gets... <strong>BOOOM</strong>!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Tick... And with every second... tick... the likeliness of you stepping... tick... on a mine , gets... BOOOM ! ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tick... And with every second... tick... the likeliness of you stepping... tick... on a mine, gets... BOOOM! ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780896</id>
	<title>Re:So much for Windows 7 support</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263580500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Last I saw tab previews in the taskbar was the default for Firefox 3.6, I had to disable it any time I did a clean install.</p><p>browser.taskbar.previews.enable in about:config</p><p>IMO it entirely defeat the point of having tabs in ONE program, so only one app wastes taskbar space, even preview space</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Last I saw tab previews in the taskbar was the default for Firefox 3.6 , I had to disable it any time I did a clean install.browser.taskbar.previews.enable in about : configIMO it entirely defeat the point of having tabs in ONE program , so only one app wastes taskbar space , even preview space</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Last I saw tab previews in the taskbar was the default for Firefox 3.6, I had to disable it any time I did a clean install.browser.taskbar.previews.enable in about:configIMO it entirely defeat the point of having tabs in ONE program, so only one app wastes taskbar space, even preview space</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780304</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782962</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the meat?</title>
	<author>MostAwesomeDude</author>
	<datestamp>1263588960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh yeah? Well, content shouldn't be used in place of numbers! Never trust those numbers; always hire hard-working letters instead. Alphabetic supremacist for life!</p><p>Oh, and I heard you're a lesbian. All livin' it up on your little island of Lesbos with all the other lesbians, am I right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh yeah ?
Well , content should n't be used in place of numbers !
Never trust those numbers ; always hire hard-working letters instead .
Alphabetic supremacist for life ! Oh , and I heard you 're a lesbian .
All livin ' it up on your little island of Lesbos with all the other lesbians , am I right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh yeah?
Well, content shouldn't be used in place of numbers!
Never trust those numbers; always hire hard-working letters instead.
Alphabetic supremacist for life!Oh, and I heard you're a lesbian.
All livin' it up on your little island of Lesbos with all the other lesbians, am I right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781010</id>
	<title>Re:Multithreading</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1263580920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is multithreaded, but when you have one GUI thread (which is the way Windows works) per process, and almost your entire workload is displaying things on the GUI, then multithreading doesn't appear so useful.</p><p>I write an app which uses Gecko embedded, I can assure you that Gecko support multithreading.</p><p>There just isn't currently a lot of stuff that actually uses threads.  I blame part of this on the crappy process you have to go through to use multiple threads from JavaScript.  Since FireFox relies heavily on JS, and switching JS code to be thread safe is a whore with XPCOM and all the proxy objects you have to create manually no one is in a big hurry.</p><p>For instance, I have a bit of JavaScript that starts a thread, downloads an XML file, parses data out of it and saves the processed data to disk, all the while updating a popup progress dialog with progress bars and stuff.  The XML parsing is bloated (intentionally for debuggng purposes) as far as SLOC is concerned.  Looking at the code that does this, it takes more code to setup the proxies to deal with updating the popup dialog (because it has to run on the main GUI thread) than to do everything else.</p><p>As such, thats the only part of our app that uses threads from Gecko.</p><p>FireFox will be shitty from a threading standpoint until they fix basic stuff like auto proxying of GUI related things as needed so a developer can just write code rather than worrying about which thread the event needs to run on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is multithreaded , but when you have one GUI thread ( which is the way Windows works ) per process , and almost your entire workload is displaying things on the GUI , then multithreading does n't appear so useful.I write an app which uses Gecko embedded , I can assure you that Gecko support multithreading.There just is n't currently a lot of stuff that actually uses threads .
I blame part of this on the crappy process you have to go through to use multiple threads from JavaScript .
Since FireFox relies heavily on JS , and switching JS code to be thread safe is a whore with XPCOM and all the proxy objects you have to create manually no one is in a big hurry.For instance , I have a bit of JavaScript that starts a thread , downloads an XML file , parses data out of it and saves the processed data to disk , all the while updating a popup progress dialog with progress bars and stuff .
The XML parsing is bloated ( intentionally for debuggng purposes ) as far as SLOC is concerned .
Looking at the code that does this , it takes more code to setup the proxies to deal with updating the popup dialog ( because it has to run on the main GUI thread ) than to do everything else.As such , thats the only part of our app that uses threads from Gecko.FireFox will be shitty from a threading standpoint until they fix basic stuff like auto proxying of GUI related things as needed so a developer can just write code rather than worrying about which thread the event needs to run on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is multithreaded, but when you have one GUI thread (which is the way Windows works) per process, and almost your entire workload is displaying things on the GUI, then multithreading doesn't appear so useful.I write an app which uses Gecko embedded, I can assure you that Gecko support multithreading.There just isn't currently a lot of stuff that actually uses threads.
I blame part of this on the crappy process you have to go through to use multiple threads from JavaScript.
Since FireFox relies heavily on JS, and switching JS code to be thread safe is a whore with XPCOM and all the proxy objects you have to create manually no one is in a big hurry.For instance, I have a bit of JavaScript that starts a thread, downloads an XML file, parses data out of it and saves the processed data to disk, all the while updating a popup progress dialog with progress bars and stuff.
The XML parsing is bloated (intentionally for debuggng purposes) as far as SLOC is concerned.
Looking at the code that does this, it takes more code to setup the proxies to deal with updating the popup dialog (because it has to run on the main GUI thread) than to do everything else.As such, thats the only part of our app that uses threads from Gecko.FireFox will be shitty from a threading standpoint until they fix basic stuff like auto proxying of GUI related things as needed so a developer can just write code rather than worrying about which thread the event needs to run on.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780292</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782888</id>
	<title>Re:Et tu, Mozilla?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263588660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Which is why Iceweasel exists. The sane free version of Firefox.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Which is why Iceweasel exists .
The sane free version of Firefox .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which is why Iceweasel exists.
The sane free version of Firefox.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780538</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780944</id>
	<title>Re:Combining security and feature updates, bad ide</title>
	<author>BZ</author>
	<datestamp>1263580680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think you're missing two things:</p><p>1)  The article's first paragraph is taking a proposal for a possible future plan of action<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; and claiming that it is the plan of action.<br>2)  Right now (Firefox 3.0 and Firefox 3.5) there are no features shipped as minor updates;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; all features are "withheld" as you put it until the next major version.</p><p>The only firm current plan here is that one particular feature, namely out-of-process plug-ins, is currently planned to be backported to Firefox 3.6 and shipped in some form in one of the minor updates.  Once it's judged ready and so forth.  Since minor updates are all about security and stability, this particular feature fits well in their scope (for example, a significant fraction of Firefox crashes are actually Flash crashes).</p><p>There is also talk of possibly backporting some other small features (mostly performance-related) to the stable branch as they become ready.  This may or may not happen.  There is also discussion about what and when the next Firefox major update will be, and discussion about what and when the next Gecko release will be.  These may not happen at the same time.  None of that is decided.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you 're missing two things : 1 ) The article 's first paragraph is taking a proposal for a possible future plan of action         and claiming that it is the plan of action.2 ) Right now ( Firefox 3.0 and Firefox 3.5 ) there are no features shipped as minor updates ;         all features are " withheld " as you put it until the next major version.The only firm current plan here is that one particular feature , namely out-of-process plug-ins , is currently planned to be backported to Firefox 3.6 and shipped in some form in one of the minor updates .
Once it 's judged ready and so forth .
Since minor updates are all about security and stability , this particular feature fits well in their scope ( for example , a significant fraction of Firefox crashes are actually Flash crashes ) .There is also talk of possibly backporting some other small features ( mostly performance-related ) to the stable branch as they become ready .
This may or may not happen .
There is also discussion about what and when the next Firefox major update will be , and discussion about what and when the next Gecko release will be .
These may not happen at the same time .
None of that is decided .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you're missing two things:1)  The article's first paragraph is taking a proposal for a possible future plan of action
        and claiming that it is the plan of action.2)  Right now (Firefox 3.0 and Firefox 3.5) there are no features shipped as minor updates;
        all features are "withheld" as you put it until the next major version.The only firm current plan here is that one particular feature, namely out-of-process plug-ins, is currently planned to be backported to Firefox 3.6 and shipped in some form in one of the minor updates.
Once it's judged ready and so forth.
Since minor updates are all about security and stability, this particular feature fits well in their scope (for example, a significant fraction of Firefox crashes are actually Flash crashes).There is also talk of possibly backporting some other small features (mostly performance-related) to the stable branch as they become ready.
This may or may not happen.
There is also discussion about what and when the next Firefox major update will be, and discussion about what and when the next Gecko release will be.
These may not happen at the same time.
None of that is decided.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780980</id>
	<title>Re:Et tu, Mozilla?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263580800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree this is not a good practise, but I can see why they did it -- it was commercially necessary if they want to keep up with Chrome. Personally what they should have done is adopted Chrome's stable/beta channel strategy, with automatic updates for both channels by default. Who knows, maybe that's exactly what they'll do.</p><p>(I know they release betas already, but the notion of a Chrome beta channel is that you're permanently on the beta, trying out new features. If you're more adventuresome you can be on the developer channel, which essentially gives you very frequent updates.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree this is not a good practise , but I can see why they did it -- it was commercially necessary if they want to keep up with Chrome .
Personally what they should have done is adopted Chrome 's stable/beta channel strategy , with automatic updates for both channels by default .
Who knows , maybe that 's exactly what they 'll do .
( I know they release betas already , but the notion of a Chrome beta channel is that you 're permanently on the beta , trying out new features .
If you 're more adventuresome you can be on the developer channel , which essentially gives you very frequent updates .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree this is not a good practise, but I can see why they did it -- it was commercially necessary if they want to keep up with Chrome.
Personally what they should have done is adopted Chrome's stable/beta channel strategy, with automatic updates for both channels by default.
Who knows, maybe that's exactly what they'll do.
(I know they release betas already, but the notion of a Chrome beta channel is that you're permanently on the beta, trying out new features.
If you're more adventuresome you can be on the developer channel, which essentially gives you very frequent updates.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780538</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782676</id>
	<title>I want multithreading!</title>
	<author>thue</author>
	<datestamp>1263587820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The far and away priority one feature should be Multithreading. Each tab and each plugin should have its own process and its own memory space, so that a crash of one tab/plugin, or one tab/plugin using loads of CPU power, should have practically no effect on my other tabs/plugins on my 4-core CPU.</p><p>So I don't care about copying Chrome's GUI. But copying Chrome's sandboxing and multithreading architecture I very much care about!</p><p>There is <a href="https://wiki.mozilla.org/Content\_Processes" title="mozilla.org">a Mozilla project to implement this</a> [mozilla.org], but the project page hasn't been updated in months, as far as I can tell.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The far and away priority one feature should be Multithreading .
Each tab and each plugin should have its own process and its own memory space , so that a crash of one tab/plugin , or one tab/plugin using loads of CPU power , should have practically no effect on my other tabs/plugins on my 4-core CPU.So I do n't care about copying Chrome 's GUI .
But copying Chrome 's sandboxing and multithreading architecture I very much care about ! There is a Mozilla project to implement this [ mozilla.org ] , but the project page has n't been updated in months , as far as I can tell .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The far and away priority one feature should be Multithreading.
Each tab and each plugin should have its own process and its own memory space, so that a crash of one tab/plugin, or one tab/plugin using loads of CPU power, should have practically no effect on my other tabs/plugins on my 4-core CPU.So I don't care about copying Chrome's GUI.
But copying Chrome's sandboxing and multithreading architecture I very much care about!There is a Mozilla project to implement this [mozilla.org], but the project page hasn't been updated in months, as far as I can tell.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30783062</id>
	<title>Re:Quick date calculations</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1263546360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>~ $ head -n 2 mozilla-installer-3.7.sh<br>#!/bin/sh<br>date `date +\%m\%d\%H\%M2009.\%S` # make sure it's 2009</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>~ $ head -n 2 mozilla-installer-3.7.sh # ! /bin/shdate ` date + \ % m \ % d \ % H \ % M2009. \ % S ` # make sure it 's 2009</tokentext>
<sentencetext>~ $ head -n 2 mozilla-installer-3.7.sh#!/bin/shdate `date +\%m\%d\%H\%M2009.\%S` # make sure it's 2009
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780934</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30783352</id>
	<title>Re:So much for Windows 7 support</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263547680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>if it bothers you that much, use Opera</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>if it bothers you that much , use Opera</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if it bothers you that much, use Opera</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780304</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780602</id>
	<title>Re:Combining security and feature updates, bad ide</title>
	<author>Zocalo</author>
	<datestamp>1263579300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Perhaps they intend to roll out new features to 3.6 in the same manner as they do security updates; one 3.6.x release might be a bug fix, another might be new features and another a combination of the two.  You don't <em>have</em> to bring out new features on major releases, so this might even mean that we'll get features added to 3.6 sooner than we would have done waiting until 3.7 before releasing them all in one go.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps they intend to roll out new features to 3.6 in the same manner as they do security updates ; one 3.6.x release might be a bug fix , another might be new features and another a combination of the two .
You do n't have to bring out new features on major releases , so this might even mean that we 'll get features added to 3.6 sooner than we would have done waiting until 3.7 before releasing them all in one go .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps they intend to roll out new features to 3.6 in the same manner as they do security updates; one 3.6.x release might be a bug fix, another might be new features and another a combination of the two.
You don't have to bring out new features on major releases, so this might even mean that we'll get features added to 3.6 sooner than we would have done waiting until 3.7 before releasing them all in one go.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30783428</id>
	<title>Firefox 4 features?</title>
	<author>mlippert</author>
	<datestamp>1263548040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anyone know what features are being planned for Firefox 4?</p><p>From the rumors I've heard, it's likely I won't want to upgrade to Firefox 4.</p><p>I've heard things about replacing the menu and toolbar with a ribbon. I despise the ribbon concept, finding it eats up my screen real estate, and for me is much harder to find things in.</p><p>And there were a couple of other things I heard which turned me off, but I don't remember what they were right now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone know what features are being planned for Firefox 4 ? From the rumors I 've heard , it 's likely I wo n't want to upgrade to Firefox 4.I 've heard things about replacing the menu and toolbar with a ribbon .
I despise the ribbon concept , finding it eats up my screen real estate , and for me is much harder to find things in.And there were a couple of other things I heard which turned me off , but I do n't remember what they were right now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone know what features are being planned for Firefox 4?From the rumors I've heard, it's likely I won't want to upgrade to Firefox 4.I've heard things about replacing the menu and toolbar with a ribbon.
I despise the ribbon concept, finding it eats up my screen real estate, and for me is much harder to find things in.And there were a couple of other things I heard which turned me off, but I don't remember what they were right now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780812</id>
	<title>SetProcessAffinity &amp;/or SetThreadAffinity</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263580140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Per my subject-line above: Perhaps Mozilla/FireFox's dev. team need to check out those API calls on Win32, &amp; find analogs for them on all the other OS platforms they port to + use them...</p><p>That is, provided you're telling it how it is for you, well? Well, those tools above in my subject-line, work.</p><p>Now: As far as your subject, in "multithreading"?</p><p>Well -  There are "drawbacks" to what you state in using it @ times though, &amp; not EVERYTHING lends itself well to that...</p><p>(In fact, below? I provide a math example in the URL in my P.S. (that one points to where I did a simple math example of when multithreading doesn't help, &amp; in fact, where it can hinder &amp; slow up code too (single CPU/single CORE systems)), where I went thru that with the article writers @ hardwareanalysis.com iirc, &amp; where multithreading makes you gains, &amp; where/when/how/why it does not in others (&amp; that too, depends on the types of multithreading involved, coarse (which this sounds like in your case, diff. datasets run on diff. threads, easier &amp; less "race conditions" possible too) vs. fine-grained (multiple threads working on the SAME data concurrently, harder to do, more prone to "race conditions" imo @ least)).</p><p>As far as FireFox? Well, I'd let them know what you're seeing (who/what/when/where/why/how IF you can provide that much detail), because they DO help, &amp; in person @ times!</p><p>E.G.-&gt; I've pointed out bugs to their dev teams before, &amp; in dealing w/ a "home-grown" forums engine @ NTCompatible (the author wrote the dev tool for their forums engine, &amp; it was having troubles w/ FireFox early on (few years back now)). I wrote the dev team @ Mozilla, &amp; they even showed up @ the forums in the thread we spoke of this on with they there, &amp; guess what?</p><p>They fixed it, right on the spot, that very next day...</p><p>(I was impressed, &amp; "talk about personable service"... point this out to them, but I wager they're trying to use those types of API call features available to their best advantage anyhow (still, one never knows, so... it may be worth noting to they!))</p><p>APK</p><p>P.S.=&gt; Earlier this month, on this very topic (yours) in fact, &amp; in regards to FireFox? Well - <b>I put out more SPECIFIC material on that note</b>, here -&gt; <b>Testing a Pre-Release, Parallel Firefox</b> <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1497542&amp;cid=30653170" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1497542&amp;cid=30653170</a> [slashdot.org] <b>in fact, &amp; in regards to what your subject line was, in "Multithreading"</b>. If you're interested, take a read, if not, then just "blow it off" etc. et al... apk</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Per my subject-line above : Perhaps Mozilla/FireFox 's dev .
team need to check out those API calls on Win32 , &amp; find analogs for them on all the other OS platforms they port to + use them...That is , provided you 're telling it how it is for you , well ?
Well , those tools above in my subject-line , work.Now : As far as your subject , in " multithreading " ? Well - There are " drawbacks " to what you state in using it @ times though , &amp; not EVERYTHING lends itself well to that... ( In fact , below ?
I provide a math example in the URL in my P.S .
( that one points to where I did a simple math example of when multithreading does n't help , &amp; in fact , where it can hinder &amp; slow up code too ( single CPU/single CORE systems ) ) , where I went thru that with the article writers @ hardwareanalysis.com iirc , &amp; where multithreading makes you gains , &amp; where/when/how/why it does not in others ( &amp; that too , depends on the types of multithreading involved , coarse ( which this sounds like in your case , diff .
datasets run on diff .
threads , easier &amp; less " race conditions " possible too ) vs. fine-grained ( multiple threads working on the SAME data concurrently , harder to do , more prone to " race conditions " imo @ least ) ) .As far as FireFox ?
Well , I 'd let them know what you 're seeing ( who/what/when/where/why/how IF you can provide that much detail ) , because they DO help , &amp; in person @ times ! E.G.- &gt; I 've pointed out bugs to their dev teams before , &amp; in dealing w/ a " home-grown " forums engine @ NTCompatible ( the author wrote the dev tool for their forums engine , &amp; it was having troubles w/ FireFox early on ( few years back now ) ) .
I wrote the dev team @ Mozilla , &amp; they even showed up @ the forums in the thread we spoke of this on with they there , &amp; guess what ? They fixed it , right on the spot , that very next day... ( I was impressed , &amp; " talk about personable service " ... point this out to them , but I wager they 're trying to use those types of API call features available to their best advantage anyhow ( still , one never knows , so... it may be worth noting to they !
) ) APKP.S. = &gt; Earlier this month , on this very topic ( yours ) in fact , &amp; in regards to FireFox ?
Well - I put out more SPECIFIC material on that note , here - &gt; Testing a Pre-Release , Parallel Firefox http : //tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1497542&amp;cid = 30653170 [ slashdot.org ] in fact , &amp; in regards to what your subject line was , in " Multithreading " .
If you 're interested , take a read , if not , then just " blow it off " etc .
et al... apk</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Per my subject-line above: Perhaps Mozilla/FireFox's dev.
team need to check out those API calls on Win32, &amp; find analogs for them on all the other OS platforms they port to + use them...That is, provided you're telling it how it is for you, well?
Well, those tools above in my subject-line, work.Now: As far as your subject, in "multithreading"?Well -  There are "drawbacks" to what you state in using it @ times though, &amp; not EVERYTHING lends itself well to that...(In fact, below?
I provide a math example in the URL in my P.S.
(that one points to where I did a simple math example of when multithreading doesn't help, &amp; in fact, where it can hinder &amp; slow up code too (single CPU/single CORE systems)), where I went thru that with the article writers @ hardwareanalysis.com iirc, &amp; where multithreading makes you gains, &amp; where/when/how/why it does not in others (&amp; that too, depends on the types of multithreading involved, coarse (which this sounds like in your case, diff.
datasets run on diff.
threads, easier &amp; less "race conditions" possible too) vs. fine-grained (multiple threads working on the SAME data concurrently, harder to do, more prone to "race conditions" imo @ least)).As far as FireFox?
Well, I'd let them know what you're seeing (who/what/when/where/why/how IF you can provide that much detail), because they DO help, &amp; in person @ times!E.G.-&gt; I've pointed out bugs to their dev teams before, &amp; in dealing w/ a "home-grown" forums engine @ NTCompatible (the author wrote the dev tool for their forums engine, &amp; it was having troubles w/ FireFox early on (few years back now)).
I wrote the dev team @ Mozilla, &amp; they even showed up @ the forums in the thread we spoke of this on with they there, &amp; guess what?They fixed it, right on the spot, that very next day...(I was impressed, &amp; "talk about personable service"... point this out to them, but I wager they're trying to use those types of API call features available to their best advantage anyhow (still, one never knows, so... it may be worth noting to they!
))APKP.S.=&gt; Earlier this month, on this very topic (yours) in fact, &amp; in regards to FireFox?
Well - I put out more SPECIFIC material on that note, here -&gt; Testing a Pre-Release, Parallel Firefox http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1497542&amp;cid=30653170 [slashdot.org] in fact, &amp; in regards to what your subject line was, in "Multithreading".
If you're interested, take a read, if not, then just "blow it off" etc.
et al... apk</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780292</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780538</id>
	<title>Et tu, Mozilla?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263579060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Security updates should never be combined with feature updates. Anyone who doesn't want the feature update is then in the unfortunate position to decide whether they'll get the unwanted features or keep the unwanted vulnerabilities. Bad Mozilla.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Security updates should never be combined with feature updates .
Anyone who does n't want the feature update is then in the unfortunate position to decide whether they 'll get the unwanted features or keep the unwanted vulnerabilities .
Bad Mozilla .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Security updates should never be combined with feature updates.
Anyone who doesn't want the feature update is then in the unfortunate position to decide whether they'll get the unwanted features or keep the unwanted vulnerabilities.
Bad Mozilla.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30785616</id>
	<title>Re:I want multithreading!</title>
	<author>hughk</author>
	<datestamp>1263558480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Too right! If you want to multitask and a poor website/plugin combo is hurting you, it can get really annoying.</p><p>I know about the project to change the add-on model (Jetpack) but simply limiting the interface may compromise functionality and I would rather have something like what you mention. </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Too right !
If you want to multitask and a poor website/plugin combo is hurting you , it can get really annoying.I know about the project to change the add-on model ( Jetpack ) but simply limiting the interface may compromise functionality and I would rather have something like what you mention .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Too right!
If you want to multitask and a poor website/plugin combo is hurting you, it can get really annoying.I know about the project to change the add-on model (Jetpack) but simply limiting the interface may compromise functionality and I would rather have something like what you mention. </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782676</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780198</id>
	<title>Gecko 1.9.3 and SVG animation</title>
	<author>compro01</author>
	<datestamp>1263577740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder what effect this is going to have on the implementation of SVG animation, which is part of gecko 1.9.3, which was to be used in 3.7.  Is it going to be slotted into 3.6 sometime or will it get pushed to 4?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder what effect this is going to have on the implementation of SVG animation , which is part of gecko 1.9.3 , which was to be used in 3.7 .
Is it going to be slotted into 3.6 sometime or will it get pushed to 4 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder what effect this is going to have on the implementation of SVG animation, which is part of gecko 1.9.3, which was to be used in 3.7.
Is it going to be slotted into 3.6 sometime or will it get pushed to 4?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780978</id>
	<title>Re:Et tu, Mozilla?</title>
	<author>BZ</author>
	<datestamp>1263580800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you read the article carefully, the only feature that is planned to ship as part of the security+stability releases so far (note the "stability" part) is out-of-process plugins.  And the point there is stability.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you read the article carefully , the only feature that is planned to ship as part of the security + stability releases so far ( note the " stability " part ) is out-of-process plugins .
And the point there is stability .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you read the article carefully, the only feature that is planned to ship as part of the security+stability releases so far (note the "stability" part) is out-of-process plugins.
And the point there is stability.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780538</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782094</id>
	<title>ma8e</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263585120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>started work on = 1440 NetBSD By BSDI who sell</htmltext>
<tokenext>started work on = 1440 NetBSD By BSDI who sell</tokentext>
<sentencetext>started work on = 1440 NetBSD By BSDI who sell</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781098</id>
	<title>You do want corporate support, don't you?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263581280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Small feature updates are not conducive to getting corporate support. With large updates, a company can say, "We support Firefox 3.5+", and they can be reasonably confident that they don't need to fully test every minor release of Firefox 3.5. With small updates they have to say, "We support Firefox 3.6.7", and can't be sure that they will actually be able to support 3.6.8 without fully testing it. If you want corporate support, you have to have feature freezes, or support stops being worth the testing time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Small feature updates are not conducive to getting corporate support .
With large updates , a company can say , " We support Firefox 3.5 + " , and they can be reasonably confident that they do n't need to fully test every minor release of Firefox 3.5 .
With small updates they have to say , " We support Firefox 3.6.7 " , and ca n't be sure that they will actually be able to support 3.6.8 without fully testing it .
If you want corporate support , you have to have feature freezes , or support stops being worth the testing time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Small feature updates are not conducive to getting corporate support.
With large updates, a company can say, "We support Firefox 3.5+", and they can be reasonably confident that they don't need to fully test every minor release of Firefox 3.5.
With small updates they have to say, "We support Firefox 3.6.7", and can't be sure that they will actually be able to support 3.6.8 without fully testing it.
If you want corporate support, you have to have feature freezes, or support stops being worth the testing time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781294</id>
	<title>Re:Combining security and feature updates, bad ide</title>
	<author>DragonWriter</author>
	<datestamp>1263581940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Unless I'm missing something?</p></div></blockquote><p>You're missing this:<br>(3) Mozilla does individual security fixes and feature updates for 3.6 as they are completed (maybe grouping the two together in an update if they happen to be ready at the same time, but not holding either to wait for the other), but doesn't have one big list of featur updates that must be complete for a "v3.7" that are released all at once. The "feature updates that will be rolled out with security updates", in this case, would mean that the feature updates are rolled into the usual chain of flowing, as-completed security update point releases rather than bundled together into a minor version release, not that each individual feature update must accompany at least one security fix.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unless I 'm missing something ? You 're missing this : ( 3 ) Mozilla does individual security fixes and feature updates for 3.6 as they are completed ( maybe grouping the two together in an update if they happen to be ready at the same time , but not holding either to wait for the other ) , but does n't have one big list of featur updates that must be complete for a " v3.7 " that are released all at once .
The " feature updates that will be rolled out with security updates " , in this case , would mean that the feature updates are rolled into the usual chain of flowing , as-completed security update point releases rather than bundled together into a minor version release , not that each individual feature update must accompany at least one security fix .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unless I'm missing something?You're missing this:(3) Mozilla does individual security fixes and feature updates for 3.6 as they are completed (maybe grouping the two together in an update if they happen to be ready at the same time, but not holding either to wait for the other), but doesn't have one big list of featur updates that must be complete for a "v3.7" that are released all at once.
The "feature updates that will be rolled out with security updates", in this case, would mean that the feature updates are rolled into the usual chain of flowing, as-completed security update point releases rather than bundled together into a minor version release, not that each individual feature update must accompany at least one security fix.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782342</id>
	<title>Re:Minefield</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263586260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well good, then they can place a bug report that would possibly still be seen in the final version.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well good , then they can place a bug report that would possibly still be seen in the final version .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well good, then they can place a bug report that would possibly still be seen in the final version.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780336</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780722</id>
	<title>Re:So much for Windows 7 support</title>
	<author>R.Mo\_Robert</author>
	<datestamp>1263579780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So now we have to wait until 2011 for Firefox 4 to get tab previews in the taskbar? Time to investigate ad-block addons for IE8.</p></div><p>That's what IE does, and I hate it--then it takes even more work to switch back to my browser when I'm in another application. (Instead of my windows, I see all my tabs, making the list much longer and harder to navigate since I have to remember which tab I was on, unless I want to jar my experience by unintentionally switching tabs.)</p><p>But, if that's the way Windows 7 is "supposed" to work, I suppose it will be more consistent...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So now we have to wait until 2011 for Firefox 4 to get tab previews in the taskbar ?
Time to investigate ad-block addons for IE8.That 's what IE does , and I hate it--then it takes even more work to switch back to my browser when I 'm in another application .
( Instead of my windows , I see all my tabs , making the list much longer and harder to navigate since I have to remember which tab I was on , unless I want to jar my experience by unintentionally switching tabs .
) But , if that 's the way Windows 7 is " supposed " to work , I suppose it will be more consistent.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So now we have to wait until 2011 for Firefox 4 to get tab previews in the taskbar?
Time to investigate ad-block addons for IE8.That's what IE does, and I hate it--then it takes even more work to switch back to my browser when I'm in another application.
(Instead of my windows, I see all my tabs, making the list much longer and harder to navigate since I have to remember which tab I was on, unless I want to jar my experience by unintentionally switching tabs.
)But, if that's the way Windows 7 is "supposed" to work, I suppose it will be more consistent...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780304</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781028</id>
	<title>Re:So much for Windows 7 support</title>
	<author>bheer</author>
	<datestamp>1263580980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I used the early Firefox 3.6 betas which had this feature. It was distracting once you had more than 3 tabs. I was glad when they killed this feature in one of the later betas.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I used the early Firefox 3.6 betas which had this feature .
It was distracting once you had more than 3 tabs .
I was glad when they killed this feature in one of the later betas .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used the early Firefox 3.6 betas which had this feature.
It was distracting once you had more than 3 tabs.
I was glad when they killed this feature in one of the later betas.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780304</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780306</id>
	<title>Minefield</title>
	<author>killmenow</author>
	<datestamp>1263578160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm using it already as my predominant web browser of choice. Works like a champ so far. I know it's not even pre-release blah blah. It works for me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm using it already as my predominant web browser of choice .
Works like a champ so far .
I know it 's not even pre-release blah blah .
It works for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm using it already as my predominant web browser of choice.
Works like a champ so far.
I know it's not even pre-release blah blah.
It works for me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30783176</id>
	<title>4.0 Browser Makes Sense</title>
	<author>WraithKenny</author>
	<datestamp>1263546960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because Safari 4 is out, and Chrome 4 is in beta, Having Firefox move to 4.0 sooner rather then later makes a great deal of sense based on that alone. It also seems that the features planed for what used to be 3.7 and the stuff shortly included in 3.6 when its released seems to be the second half of the 3.5 version jump justification.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because Safari 4 is out , and Chrome 4 is in beta , Having Firefox move to 4.0 sooner rather then later makes a great deal of sense based on that alone .
It also seems that the features planed for what used to be 3.7 and the stuff shortly included in 3.6 when its released seems to be the second half of the 3.5 version jump justification .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because Safari 4 is out, and Chrome 4 is in beta, Having Firefox move to 4.0 sooner rather then later makes a great deal of sense based on that alone.
It also seems that the features planed for what used to be 3.7 and the stuff shortly included in 3.6 when its released seems to be the second half of the 3.5 version jump justification.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30786624</id>
	<title>Mac optimized build of Firefox 3.7 rocks!</title>
	<author>Mr. Cancelled</author>
	<datestamp>1263565440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>For all you Snow Leopard users...
<br> <br>
In case you did not know, you can download optimized Mac versions of a number of browsers from <a href="http://www.latko.org/downloads/" title="latko.org">here</a> [latko.org]
<br> <br>
Specifically, one of the browsers available is a 64-bit optimized version of FF 3.7 for Snow Leopard.
<br> <br>
I finally installed it the other night, after eyeing it warily for the last month or so (as I worked through the latest 3.6 optimized builds). I finally installed it last night, and have to say that it's the biggest improvement to FF that I've came across.
<br> <br>
It loads faster, uses less CPU &amp; memory than previous builds, and it's mega fast. My impressions are that it's now as fast as Safari is on a Mac.
<br> <br>
It's now my main browser. If you run Snow Leopard, you should check it out.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For all you Snow Leopard users.. . In case you did not know , you can download optimized Mac versions of a number of browsers from here [ latko.org ] Specifically , one of the browsers available is a 64-bit optimized version of FF 3.7 for Snow Leopard .
I finally installed it the other night , after eyeing it warily for the last month or so ( as I worked through the latest 3.6 optimized builds ) .
I finally installed it last night , and have to say that it 's the biggest improvement to FF that I 've came across .
It loads faster , uses less CPU &amp; memory than previous builds , and it 's mega fast .
My impressions are that it 's now as fast as Safari is on a Mac .
It 's now my main browser .
If you run Snow Leopard , you should check it out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For all you Snow Leopard users...
 
In case you did not know, you can download optimized Mac versions of a number of browsers from here [latko.org]
 
Specifically, one of the browsers available is a 64-bit optimized version of FF 3.7 for Snow Leopard.
I finally installed it the other night, after eyeing it warily for the last month or so (as I worked through the latest 3.6 optimized builds).
I finally installed it last night, and have to say that it's the biggest improvement to FF that I've came across.
It loads faster, uses less CPU &amp; memory than previous builds, and it's mega fast.
My impressions are that it's now as fast as Safari is on a Mac.
It's now my main browser.
If you run Snow Leopard, you should check it out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780636</id>
	<title>Chrome</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263579420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As far as I'm concerned, Firefox jumped the shark within the last year.<br>I was getting sooo tired of constant nagging and add-on updates just<br>about the time Chrome came out and saved the day.</p><p>Now in a couple of years, Chrome will have bloated to include add-ons, etc<br>and I'll be looking for a replacement for it...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As far as I 'm concerned , Firefox jumped the shark within the last year.I was getting sooo tired of constant nagging and add-on updates justabout the time Chrome came out and saved the day.Now in a couple of years , Chrome will have bloated to include add-ons , etcand I 'll be looking for a replacement for it.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As far as I'm concerned, Firefox jumped the shark within the last year.I was getting sooo tired of constant nagging and add-on updates justabout the time Chrome came out and saved the day.Now in a couple of years, Chrome will have bloated to include add-ons, etcand I'll be looking for a replacement for it...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781322</id>
	<title>Re:Gecko 1.9.3 and SVG animation</title>
	<author>BESTouff</author>
	<datestamp>1263582060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have the very same question about WebGL. I've been waiting for that feature for a while<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have the very same question about WebGL .
I 've been waiting for that feature for a while .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have the very same question about WebGL.
I've been waiting for that feature for a while ...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781590</id>
	<title>So what?</title>
	<author>MonsterTrimble</author>
	<datestamp>1263583140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And the issue is what? Seriously. So no major overhauls until FF4, continuous minor updates both feature &amp; security wise. This is what Microsoft, Linux, Amarok, Opera nd others do. Why would Mozilla be different?</p><p>Mountain out of a molehill. Start worrying if Mozilla stops talking about FF4. </p><p> Note: I know Amarok isn't in the same league as the other three up there, but I was going over their changelog yesterday and there were some pretty big updates done on a minor point change. Finally looking like it's back to all the functions of 1.4.10. Now if it would now get stuck scanning my collection at 49\% I'd be gold</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And the issue is what ?
Seriously. So no major overhauls until FF4 , continuous minor updates both feature &amp; security wise .
This is what Microsoft , Linux , Amarok , Opera nd others do .
Why would Mozilla be different ? Mountain out of a molehill .
Start worrying if Mozilla stops talking about FF4 .
Note : I know Amarok is n't in the same league as the other three up there , but I was going over their changelog yesterday and there were some pretty big updates done on a minor point change .
Finally looking like it 's back to all the functions of 1.4.10 .
Now if it would now get stuck scanning my collection at 49 \ % I 'd be gold</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And the issue is what?
Seriously. So no major overhauls until FF4, continuous minor updates both feature &amp; security wise.
This is what Microsoft, Linux, Amarok, Opera nd others do.
Why would Mozilla be different?Mountain out of a molehill.
Start worrying if Mozilla stops talking about FF4.
Note: I know Amarok isn't in the same league as the other three up there, but I was going over their changelog yesterday and there were some pretty big updates done on a minor point change.
Finally looking like it's back to all the functions of 1.4.10.
Now if it would now get stuck scanning my collection at 49\% I'd be gold</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782138</id>
	<title>Re:Combining security and feature updates, bad ide</title>
	<author>TejWC</author>
	<datestamp>1263585300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't find official documentation on this subject. However, based on the updates that I get, there are 4 numbers in a given Firefox Version:<br>A.B.C.D<br>A= Major revision<br>B= Minor revision<br>C= Small feature revision<br>D= Bug / security fix</p><p>It now appears that features that was going to be in 3.7 will now be put into 3.6 feature by feature. So you may see an update like 3.6.0.2 which is just security/bug fixes from 3.6.0.1. When you see an update like 3.6.1.0, it means it has a new feature that would have been in 3.7 but was put into 3.6 instead.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't find official documentation on this subject .
However , based on the updates that I get , there are 4 numbers in a given Firefox Version : A.B.C.DA = Major revisionB = Minor revisionC = Small feature revisionD = Bug / security fixIt now appears that features that was going to be in 3.7 will now be put into 3.6 feature by feature .
So you may see an update like 3.6.0.2 which is just security/bug fixes from 3.6.0.1 .
When you see an update like 3.6.1.0 , it means it has a new feature that would have been in 3.7 but was put into 3.6 instead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't find official documentation on this subject.
However, based on the updates that I get, there are 4 numbers in a given Firefox Version:A.B.C.DA= Major revisionB= Minor revisionC= Small feature revisionD= Bug / security fixIt now appears that features that was going to be in 3.7 will now be put into 3.6 feature by feature.
So you may see an update like 3.6.0.2 which is just security/bug fixes from 3.6.0.1.
When you see an update like 3.6.1.0, it means it has a new feature that would have been in 3.7 but was put into 3.6 instead.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782604</id>
	<title>Re:So much for Windows 7 support</title>
	<author>Jorl17</author>
	<datestamp>1263587460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>You sir, depress me. Don't forget to send postcards from IE-land.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You sir , depress me .
Do n't forget to send postcards from IE-land .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You sir, depress me.
Don't forget to send postcards from IE-land.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780304</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780866</id>
	<title>Re:Et tu, Mozilla?</title>
	<author>albedoa</author>
	<datestamp>1263580380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The same can be said for a feature update that is released before any other security updates. Are you suggesting that Mozilla releases every feature as an elective add-on?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The same can be said for a feature update that is released before any other security updates .
Are you suggesting that Mozilla releases every feature as an elective add-on ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The same can be said for a feature update that is released before any other security updates.
Are you suggesting that Mozilla releases every feature as an elective add-on?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780538</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782092</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the meat?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263585120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Political and media relations are great reasons when you are doing battle with the Dragon (Microsoft) and the white-knight(Google)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Political and media relations are great reasons when you are doing battle with the Dragon ( Microsoft ) and the white-knight ( Google )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Political and media relations are great reasons when you are doing battle with the Dragon (Microsoft) and the white-knight(Google)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781806</id>
	<title>Re:So much for Windows 7 support</title>
	<author>Ant P.</author>
	<datestamp>1263583920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You'd use a piece of trash software just for the sake of getting one piece of pointless eye-candy?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 'd use a piece of trash software just for the sake of getting one piece of pointless eye-candy ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You'd use a piece of trash software just for the sake of getting one piece of pointless eye-candy?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780304</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781438</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the meat?</title>
	<author>sabt-pestnu</author>
	<datestamp>1263582480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>$LAME\_CAR\_ANALOGY</p><p>$Snide\_comment\_about\_GP</p><p>$Lameness\_Filter\_whine</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>$ LAME \ _CAR \ _ANALOGY $ Snide \ _comment \ _about \ _GP $ Lameness \ _Filter \ _whine</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$LAME\_CAR\_ANALOGY$Snide\_comment\_about\_GP$Lameness\_Filter\_whine</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780162</id>
	<title>Firesucks my a$$</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263577560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FP ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FP ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FP ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780752</id>
	<title>Re:So much for Windows 7 support</title>
	<author>Captain Splendid</author>
	<datestamp>1263579840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>You're thinking of moving to IE because you can't get tab previews in the taskbar?  Man, that's weak.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're thinking of moving to IE because you ca n't get tab previews in the taskbar ?
Man , that 's weak .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're thinking of moving to IE because you can't get tab previews in the taskbar?
Man, that's weak.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780304</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782196</id>
	<title>Re:Minefield (ob CollegeHumor)</title>
	<author>ArundelCastle</author>
	<datestamp>1263585660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"WHY ARE THESE MINES EVEN HERE???"<br><a href="http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1770138" title="collegehumor.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1770138</a> [collegehumor.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" WHY ARE THESE MINES EVEN HERE ? ? ?
" http : //www.collegehumor.com/video : 1770138 [ collegehumor.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"WHY ARE THESE MINES EVEN HERE???
"http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1770138 [collegehumor.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780360</id>
	<title>Deja vu, I predict</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263578400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This should free up the team to work on the next major release, Firefox 4, slated for the last quarter of 2010, which is expected to follow the same development process.</p></div><p>Firefox will be dead before it hits <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netscape\_5" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">version 5.0</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This should free up the team to work on the next major release , Firefox 4 , slated for the last quarter of 2010 , which is expected to follow the same development process.Firefox will be dead before it hits version 5.0 [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This should free up the team to work on the next major release, Firefox 4, slated for the last quarter of 2010, which is expected to follow the same development process.Firefox will be dead before it hits version 5.0 [wikipedia.org].
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781414</id>
	<title>Re:Multithreading</title>
	<author>BZ</author>
	<datestamp>1263582420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Firefox is multithreaded in the sense that multiple threads are used for multiple different tasks.</p><p>However all layout currently happens on one thread.  So yes, 25\% CPU on a quad-core in your situation is what I would expect.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Firefox is multithreaded in the sense that multiple threads are used for multiple different tasks.However all layout currently happens on one thread .
So yes , 25 \ % CPU on a quad-core in your situation is what I would expect .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Firefox is multithreaded in the sense that multiple threads are used for multiple different tasks.However all layout currently happens on one thread.
So yes, 25\% CPU on a quad-core in your situation is what I would expect.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780292</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30789626</id>
	<title>Re:I want multithreading!</title>
	<author>Dr.Ruud</author>
	<datestamp>1263649080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You don't want multithreading, you want forking.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't want multithreading , you want forking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't want multithreading, you want forking.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782676</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30783610</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the meat?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263548820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Delays are inevitable in any software development project.</p></div><p>If it's inevitable then sack the project manager, agree a scope you can actually deliver, get the appropriate amount of resources and get it done.</p><p>It's really not that hard to do things on time, y'know.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Delays are inevitable in any software development project.If it 's inevitable then sack the project manager , agree a scope you can actually deliver , get the appropriate amount of resources and get it done.It 's really not that hard to do things on time , y'know .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Delays are inevitable in any software development project.If it's inevitable then sack the project manager, agree a scope you can actually deliver, get the appropriate amount of resources and get it done.It's really not that hard to do things on time, y'know.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780304</id>
	<title>So much for Windows 7 support</title>
	<author>Chaos Incarnate</author>
	<datestamp>1263578160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>So now we have to wait until 2011 for Firefox 4 to get tab previews in the taskbar? Time to investigate ad-block addons for IE8.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So now we have to wait until 2011 for Firefox 4 to get tab previews in the taskbar ?
Time to investigate ad-block addons for IE8 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So now we have to wait until 2011 for Firefox 4 to get tab previews in the taskbar?
Time to investigate ad-block addons for IE8.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30786418</id>
	<title>Re:Combining security and feature updates, bad ide</title>
	<author>/dev/trash</author>
	<datestamp>1263564060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If it's number 2, and I suspect it will be, they will do what Drupal does.  Drupal releases NO bug fixes until a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.X release.  They ONLY release<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.X releases if they have a security issue to fix.  There for a while there were months a months without security holes, which is nice, but then again there were simple bugs that just sat languishing.  The response was always:  Install the dev if you really need it, but don't ask us for help if it breaks something because you really shouldn't run anything that is in dev.</p><p>bear in mind that Drupal 7 was supposed to launch last year.  They're just now getting around to thinking about a alpha release.</p><p>I only mention this because once 7 drops, 5.x is unsupported, and you'll be told to upgrade to 6 or 7.  Which you'll do, and then a bug will be found, and perhaps you'll fix it and submit a patch, and then 9 months later, it'll get committed.  I hope your boss understands this.  Your new project can wait 9 months, right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If it 's number 2 , and I suspect it will be , they will do what Drupal does .
Drupal releases NO bug fixes until a .X release .
They ONLY release .X releases if they have a security issue to fix .
There for a while there were months a months without security holes , which is nice , but then again there were simple bugs that just sat languishing .
The response was always : Install the dev if you really need it , but do n't ask us for help if it breaks something because you really should n't run anything that is in dev.bear in mind that Drupal 7 was supposed to launch last year .
They 're just now getting around to thinking about a alpha release.I only mention this because once 7 drops , 5.x is unsupported , and you 'll be told to upgrade to 6 or 7 .
Which you 'll do , and then a bug will be found , and perhaps you 'll fix it and submit a patch , and then 9 months later , it 'll get committed .
I hope your boss understands this .
Your new project can wait 9 months , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it's number 2, and I suspect it will be, they will do what Drupal does.
Drupal releases NO bug fixes until a .X release.
They ONLY release .X releases if they have a security issue to fix.
There for a while there were months a months without security holes, which is nice, but then again there were simple bugs that just sat languishing.
The response was always:  Install the dev if you really need it, but don't ask us for help if it breaks something because you really shouldn't run anything that is in dev.bear in mind that Drupal 7 was supposed to launch last year.
They're just now getting around to thinking about a alpha release.I only mention this because once 7 drops, 5.x is unsupported, and you'll be told to upgrade to 6 or 7.
Which you'll do, and then a bug will be found, and perhaps you'll fix it and submit a patch, and then 9 months later, it'll get committed.
I hope your boss understands this.
Your new project can wait 9 months, right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781866</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the meat?</title>
	<author>Pinchiukas</author>
	<datestamp>1263584100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's so good they skipped a number.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's so good they skipped a number .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's so good they skipped a number.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30785812</id>
	<title>Re:Minefield</title>
	<author>Randle\_Revar</author>
	<datestamp>1263559740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have been running Firefox and Mozilla/SeaMonkey nightlies as my primary browsers for many years. Back in Mozilla 0.9 - 1.5 days, early nightlies could be pretty rough, but now I rarely have any issues, even when big changes land on the trunk.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have been running Firefox and Mozilla/SeaMonkey nightlies as my primary browsers for many years .
Back in Mozilla 0.9 - 1.5 days , early nightlies could be pretty rough , but now I rarely have any issues , even when big changes land on the trunk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have been running Firefox and Mozilla/SeaMonkey nightlies as my primary browsers for many years.
Back in Mozilla 0.9 - 1.5 days, early nightlies could be pretty rough, but now I rarely have any issues, even when big changes land on the trunk.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781456</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the meat?</title>
	<author>DragonWriter</author>
	<datestamp>1263582600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>What purpose does it serve to skip version numbers, except for some political or media-relations reason?</p></div></blockquote><p>The difference between doing a 3.7 minor version release and a series of 3.6.x point releases as features are completed means that there aren't a set of "must-do" features for the 3.7 version, main "roadmapped" development can shift to 4.0, and individual enhancements to 3.6 that get completed get pushed out as point releases rather than getting aggregated into a combined minor version release. It also means that, essentially, anything not in 3.6 isn't committed to be done in the 3.x series at all.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What purpose does it serve to skip version numbers , except for some political or media-relations reason ? The difference between doing a 3.7 minor version release and a series of 3.6.x point releases as features are completed means that there are n't a set of " must-do " features for the 3.7 version , main " roadmapped " development can shift to 4.0 , and individual enhancements to 3.6 that get completed get pushed out as point releases rather than getting aggregated into a combined minor version release .
It also means that , essentially , anything not in 3.6 is n't committed to be done in the 3.x series at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What purpose does it serve to skip version numbers, except for some political or media-relations reason?The difference between doing a 3.7 minor version release and a series of 3.6.x point releases as features are completed means that there aren't a set of "must-do" features for the 3.7 version, main "roadmapped" development can shift to 4.0, and individual enhancements to 3.6 that get completed get pushed out as point releases rather than getting aggregated into a combined minor version release.
It also means that, essentially, anything not in 3.6 isn't committed to be done in the 3.x series at all.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782040</id>
	<title>Re:Et tu, Mozilla?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263584940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And they almost certainly wont be, christ people, can't you understand that they might roll out some extra updates between security updates, maybe along with non critical bugfixes, to implement the new functionality?</p><p>I realise this is<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. and therefore you're all twelve yearold kids with ADHD, but please, think for a moment before hammering your keyboard next time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And they almost certainly wont be , christ people , ca n't you understand that they might roll out some extra updates between security updates , maybe along with non critical bugfixes , to implement the new functionality ? I realise this is / .
and therefore you 're all twelve yearold kids with ADHD , but please , think for a moment before hammering your keyboard next time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And they almost certainly wont be, christ people, can't you understand that they might roll out some extra updates between security updates, maybe along with non critical bugfixes, to implement the new functionality?I realise this is /.
and therefore you're all twelve yearold kids with ADHD, but please, think for a moment before hammering your keyboard next time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780538</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780332</id>
	<title>Firefox Needs to Be Dropped, Period</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263578280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I admit firefox was a great program when it was first released and 2.0 was not too bad either.  However, when 3.x came along Firefox became an unstable memory hog, moreso than Internet Exploder.  In fact Firefox is too crash prone for my tastes.  Even Shiretoko, the 64-Bit version of Firefox, is unstable and more crash prone than IE.  What conclusion did Mozilla come to?  Naturally it is either a feature or it is the result of plugins and addons. In other words they are taking the advice of Microsoft developers of the 1990s and they do not want to fix their problems.  Until Mozilla gets around to fixing the fatal flaws in Firefox(which does not look likely in 3.x or 4.x)  people should avoid Firefox like the plague and go for other solutions such as Opera, Chrome, Safari, or even Lynx.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I admit firefox was a great program when it was first released and 2.0 was not too bad either .
However , when 3.x came along Firefox became an unstable memory hog , moreso than Internet Exploder .
In fact Firefox is too crash prone for my tastes .
Even Shiretoko , the 64-Bit version of Firefox , is unstable and more crash prone than IE .
What conclusion did Mozilla come to ?
Naturally it is either a feature or it is the result of plugins and addons .
In other words they are taking the advice of Microsoft developers of the 1990s and they do not want to fix their problems .
Until Mozilla gets around to fixing the fatal flaws in Firefox ( which does not look likely in 3.x or 4.x ) people should avoid Firefox like the plague and go for other solutions such as Opera , Chrome , Safari , or even Lynx .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I admit firefox was a great program when it was first released and 2.0 was not too bad either.
However, when 3.x came along Firefox became an unstable memory hog, moreso than Internet Exploder.
In fact Firefox is too crash prone for my tastes.
Even Shiretoko, the 64-Bit version of Firefox, is unstable and more crash prone than IE.
What conclusion did Mozilla come to?
Naturally it is either a feature or it is the result of plugins and addons.
In other words they are taking the advice of Microsoft developers of the 1990s and they do not want to fix their problems.
Until Mozilla gets around to fixing the fatal flaws in Firefox(which does not look likely in 3.x or 4.x)  people should avoid Firefox like the plague and go for other solutions such as Opera, Chrome, Safari, or even Lynx.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782836</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the meat?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1263588420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, 3.x to 4.0 would not be skipping anything. The major version number usually denotes changes in the architecture that do not try to keep compatibility. The minor number is more for smaller, gradual changes. (The third number would be for bugfixes. And the zeroth number, which for most projects usually means a name change and/or a complete rewrite (SeaMonkey -&gt; Firefox), is unfortunately often not talked about.)</p><p>So I don&rsquo;t see the problem you have here. Maybe a misunderstanding. Care to explain?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , 3.x to 4.0 would not be skipping anything .
The major version number usually denotes changes in the architecture that do not try to keep compatibility .
The minor number is more for smaller , gradual changes .
( The third number would be for bugfixes .
And the zeroth number , which for most projects usually means a name change and/or a complete rewrite ( SeaMonkey - &gt; Firefox ) , is unfortunately often not talked about .
) So I don    t see the problem you have here .
Maybe a misunderstanding .
Care to explain ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, 3.x to 4.0 would not be skipping anything.
The major version number usually denotes changes in the architecture that do not try to keep compatibility.
The minor number is more for smaller, gradual changes.
(The third number would be for bugfixes.
And the zeroth number, which for most projects usually means a name change and/or a complete rewrite (SeaMonkey -&gt; Firefox), is unfortunately often not talked about.
)So I don’t see the problem you have here.
Maybe a misunderstanding.
Care to explain?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780336</id>
	<title>Re:Minefield</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263578340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just like when running through actual minefields, others may not be as lucky as you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just like when running through actual minefields , others may not be as lucky as you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just like when running through actual minefields, others may not be as lucky as you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782274</id>
	<title>Re:So much for Windows 7 support</title>
	<author>Quantumstate</author>
	<datestamp>1263585960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem with this change is that it causes major issues for people like me who have a lot of tabs open.  I currently have 29 open because I have been researching some maths stuff.  I could close some of them if I wanted to but that involves effort and I would probably close one which I would need again.  It is much easier to close them all at once when I have finished.  Just think about 29 tab previews in the task bar, it would be horrible.  Maybe for a lot of people who keep about 5 tabs open it is ok but for people who use more it makes things worse and regressions always need careful thought and testing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with this change is that it causes major issues for people like me who have a lot of tabs open .
I currently have 29 open because I have been researching some maths stuff .
I could close some of them if I wanted to but that involves effort and I would probably close one which I would need again .
It is much easier to close them all at once when I have finished .
Just think about 29 tab previews in the task bar , it would be horrible .
Maybe for a lot of people who keep about 5 tabs open it is ok but for people who use more it makes things worse and regressions always need careful thought and testing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with this change is that it causes major issues for people like me who have a lot of tabs open.
I currently have 29 open because I have been researching some maths stuff.
I could close some of them if I wanted to but that involves effort and I would probably close one which I would need again.
It is much easier to close them all at once when I have finished.
Just think about 29 tab previews in the task bar, it would be horrible.
Maybe for a lot of people who keep about 5 tabs open it is ok but for people who use more it makes things worse and regressions always need careful thought and testing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780304</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780312</id>
	<title>no more daily 3.7 alpha updates then?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263578220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been running the 3.7alpha nightlies for a while now (codename: Minefield...which is now, possibly, ironic) and it's been quite good.   Shame to see it dropped, but hopefully they can move the code into 3.6 quickly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been running the 3.7alpha nightlies for a while now ( codename : Minefield...which is now , possibly , ironic ) and it 's been quite good .
Shame to see it dropped , but hopefully they can move the code into 3.6 quickly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been running the 3.7alpha nightlies for a while now (codename: Minefield...which is now, possibly, ironic) and it's been quite good.
Shame to see it dropped, but hopefully they can move the code into 3.6 quickly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30786936</id>
	<title>Re:I want multithreading!</title>
	<author>AbRASiON</author>
	<datestamp>1263567840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mod this guy +6 - I couldn't agree more.<br>Also would a native 64bit version help any time soon? The enthusiasts are starting to run 64bit Windows with 4/6/8 and 12 gb of ram now. No gamer would be caught dead with less than 4.</p><p>We mostly have dual or quad core chips, I just want to see firefox as fast as humanly possible, I spend 10 hours a dya in it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mod this guy + 6 - I could n't agree more.Also would a native 64bit version help any time soon ?
The enthusiasts are starting to run 64bit Windows with 4/6/8 and 12 gb of ram now .
No gamer would be caught dead with less than 4.We mostly have dual or quad core chips , I just want to see firefox as fast as humanly possible , I spend 10 hours a dya in it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mod this guy +6 - I couldn't agree more.Also would a native 64bit version help any time soon?
The enthusiasts are starting to run 64bit Windows with 4/6/8 and 12 gb of ram now.
No gamer would be caught dead with less than 4.We mostly have dual or quad core chips, I just want to see firefox as fast as humanly possible, I spend 10 hours a dya in it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782676</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30783622</id>
	<title>Re:Minefield</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263548940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I bit the bullet a week ago and got Minefield. I try to stay away from FF by using Iron (typing on it right now), Chrome, Safari and other browsers.<br>Minefield's golden nugget for Firefox version 3.7 is the chance to move flash to a separate process. It greatly increases responsiveness in my pages even on my single core machine.</p><p>The great drawback is that it causes pages like google StreetView to crash every time I try to load it. Loading youtube with other interactive flash pages also crashes. I submitted the crash report last monday during my short honeymoon with the porgram. Minefield is (was?) only available through nightly builds from Mozilla, and I wonder if the news means that they'll pull the build offline, while 3.6 is updated and beta tested.</p><p>I'm pretty sure the multiprocess stuff is going to take till 2011 to come down the update pipe, which is sad. I would just use IE8 for their current multiprocess stuff, except that I know every time IE upgrades happen, all my PC's get slower overall. Iron is pretty fine for me so far.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I bit the bullet a week ago and got Minefield .
I try to stay away from FF by using Iron ( typing on it right now ) , Chrome , Safari and other browsers.Minefield 's golden nugget for Firefox version 3.7 is the chance to move flash to a separate process .
It greatly increases responsiveness in my pages even on my single core machine.The great drawback is that it causes pages like google StreetView to crash every time I try to load it .
Loading youtube with other interactive flash pages also crashes .
I submitted the crash report last monday during my short honeymoon with the porgram .
Minefield is ( was ?
) only available through nightly builds from Mozilla , and I wonder if the news means that they 'll pull the build offline , while 3.6 is updated and beta tested.I 'm pretty sure the multiprocess stuff is going to take till 2011 to come down the update pipe , which is sad .
I would just use IE8 for their current multiprocess stuff , except that I know every time IE upgrades happen , all my PC 's get slower overall .
Iron is pretty fine for me so far .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I bit the bullet a week ago and got Minefield.
I try to stay away from FF by using Iron (typing on it right now), Chrome, Safari and other browsers.Minefield's golden nugget for Firefox version 3.7 is the chance to move flash to a separate process.
It greatly increases responsiveness in my pages even on my single core machine.The great drawback is that it causes pages like google StreetView to crash every time I try to load it.
Loading youtube with other interactive flash pages also crashes.
I submitted the crash report last monday during my short honeymoon with the porgram.
Minefield is (was?
) only available through nightly builds from Mozilla, and I wonder if the news means that they'll pull the build offline, while 3.6 is updated and beta tested.I'm pretty sure the multiprocess stuff is going to take till 2011 to come down the update pipe, which is sad.
I would just use IE8 for their current multiprocess stuff, except that I know every time IE upgrades happen, all my PC's get slower overall.
Iron is pretty fine for me so far.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30784402</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the meat?</title>
	<author>Mike McTernan</author>
	<datestamp>1263552060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>3.7 stands for a feature set on the <a href="https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Roadmap" title="mozilla.org">Firefox roadmap</a> [mozilla.org].</p><p>
Skipping that number signifies that the planned release has changed form.  Avoiding use of that number then neatly avoids confusion about what the new planned releases will contain since Firefox 3.7 already has an attached meaning.  It also allows retrospective discussion of what was planned for 3.7; useful if the roadmap is being updated.
</p><p>
If you don't have a published roadmap with promised features, keeping the next release as n + 1 is no problem.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>3.7 stands for a feature set on the Firefox roadmap [ mozilla.org ] .
Skipping that number signifies that the planned release has changed form .
Avoiding use of that number then neatly avoids confusion about what the new planned releases will contain since Firefox 3.7 already has an attached meaning .
It also allows retrospective discussion of what was planned for 3.7 ; useful if the roadmap is being updated .
If you do n't have a published roadmap with promised features , keeping the next release as n + 1 is no problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>3.7 stands for a feature set on the Firefox roadmap [mozilla.org].
Skipping that number signifies that the planned release has changed form.
Avoiding use of that number then neatly avoids confusion about what the new planned releases will contain since Firefox 3.7 already has an attached meaning.
It also allows retrospective discussion of what was planned for 3.7; useful if the roadmap is being updated.
If you don't have a published roadmap with promised features, keeping the next release as n + 1 is no problem.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30786288</id>
	<title>Re:Et tu, Mozilla?</title>
	<author>BZ</author>
	<datestamp>1263563220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Firefox has had an update beta channel for years now (since about Firefox 2, as I recall).  If you're on the beta channel, you get updated to the next beta.</p><p>Similar for the nightly update channel, where you're updated to the new tip build every day....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Firefox has had an update beta channel for years now ( since about Firefox 2 , as I recall ) .
If you 're on the beta channel , you get updated to the next beta.Similar for the nightly update channel , where you 're updated to the new tip build every day... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Firefox has had an update beta channel for years now (since about Firefox 2, as I recall).
If you're on the beta channel, you get updated to the next beta.Similar for the nightly update channel, where you're updated to the new tip build every day....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780980</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781922</id>
	<title>Re:Firefox Needs to Be Dropped, Period</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263584400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Strange, 2.x and below were massive memory hogs and somewhat unstable in my experience, when 3.x came along and they started worrying about memory usage and plugging the memory leaks of old by firefox experience did improve, especially on older hardware. Chrome is the biggest memory hog of current browsers, this is very much by design.</p><p>Shiretoko? isn't that the codename for an old unstable/testing version of firefox? I would certainly expect that to be unstable and crashprone.</p><p>Not that i don't think firefox is starting to lag behind, the XUL GUI is just feeling impossibly slow at this point, but less FUD and more substance next time, please, ok?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Strange , 2.x and below were massive memory hogs and somewhat unstable in my experience , when 3.x came along and they started worrying about memory usage and plugging the memory leaks of old by firefox experience did improve , especially on older hardware .
Chrome is the biggest memory hog of current browsers , this is very much by design.Shiretoko ?
is n't that the codename for an old unstable/testing version of firefox ?
I would certainly expect that to be unstable and crashprone.Not that i do n't think firefox is starting to lag behind , the XUL GUI is just feeling impossibly slow at this point , but less FUD and more substance next time , please , ok ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Strange, 2.x and below were massive memory hogs and somewhat unstable in my experience, when 3.x came along and they started worrying about memory usage and plugging the memory leaks of old by firefox experience did improve, especially on older hardware.
Chrome is the biggest memory hog of current browsers, this is very much by design.Shiretoko?
isn't that the codename for an old unstable/testing version of firefox?
I would certainly expect that to be unstable and crashprone.Not that i don't think firefox is starting to lag behind, the XUL GUI is just feeling impossibly slow at this point, but less FUD and more substance next time, please, ok?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30785624</id>
	<title>Same development process ...</title>
	<author>fahrbot-bot</author>
	<datestamp>1263558480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Firefox 4, slated for the last quarter of 2010, which is expected to follow the same development process.</p></div>
</blockquote><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>... of being unobtainable and late?  I'm confused<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Firefox 4 , slated for the last quarter of 2010 , which is expected to follow the same development process .
... of being unobtainable and late ?
I 'm confused : - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Firefox 4, slated for the last quarter of 2010, which is expected to follow the same development process.
... of being unobtainable and late?
I'm confused :-)
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781454</id>
	<title>Re:So much for Windows 7 support</title>
	<author>Enderandrew</author>
	<datestamp>1263582600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Run nightly trunk and you can have it today.</p><p>I believe Chrome 4 beta does it today. I recommend AdThwart extension with it, but sadly it still renders the ad in the background and hides it. Running Chrome on Windows, I find files downloading and trying to open that I didn't download. I've seen executables try to open themselves. Firefox and Adblock plus stops the ad from rendering at all, which blocks a lot of that crap.</p><p>Chrome is nice, but until I can get a better ad blocking solution, I'm largely sticking with Firefox.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Run nightly trunk and you can have it today.I believe Chrome 4 beta does it today .
I recommend AdThwart extension with it , but sadly it still renders the ad in the background and hides it .
Running Chrome on Windows , I find files downloading and trying to open that I did n't download .
I 've seen executables try to open themselves .
Firefox and Adblock plus stops the ad from rendering at all , which blocks a lot of that crap.Chrome is nice , but until I can get a better ad blocking solution , I 'm largely sticking with Firefox .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Run nightly trunk and you can have it today.I believe Chrome 4 beta does it today.
I recommend AdThwart extension with it, but sadly it still renders the ad in the background and hides it.
Running Chrome on Windows, I find files downloading and trying to open that I didn't download.
I've seen executables try to open themselves.
Firefox and Adblock plus stops the ad from rendering at all, which blocks a lot of that crap.Chrome is nice, but until I can get a better ad blocking solution, I'm largely sticking with Firefox.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780304</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781762</id>
	<title>Re:Firefox Needs to Be Dropped, Period</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263583800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So you think the firefox team should just quit and that the people currently using firefox should switch to another browser? Just like that?</p><p>Clearly, your opinion of what counts as a "fatal flaw" is not widely held or firefox's market share wouldn't continue to grow as it has. People will continue to use firefox until they find another browser that is more appealing to them and as long as there's enough users to justify further development, the firefox team will continue to work on the code-base.</p><p>Out of curiosity, what are the "fatal flaws" as you see them?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So you think the firefox team should just quit and that the people currently using firefox should switch to another browser ?
Just like that ? Clearly , your opinion of what counts as a " fatal flaw " is not widely held or firefox 's market share would n't continue to grow as it has .
People will continue to use firefox until they find another browser that is more appealing to them and as long as there 's enough users to justify further development , the firefox team will continue to work on the code-base.Out of curiosity , what are the " fatal flaws " as you see them ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you think the firefox team should just quit and that the people currently using firefox should switch to another browser?
Just like that?Clearly, your opinion of what counts as a "fatal flaw" is not widely held or firefox's market share wouldn't continue to grow as it has.
People will continue to use firefox until they find another browser that is more appealing to them and as long as there's enough users to justify further development, the firefox team will continue to work on the code-base.Out of curiosity, what are the "fatal flaws" as you see them?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30785542</id>
	<title>Re:SetProcessAffinity &amp;/or SetThreadAffinity</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263558060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Awe look, someone who thinks they know threading talks about how to do it<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>By default, you have no reason to make those API calls unless you want to limit to a certain CPU or set of CPUs, out of the box, by default, all CPUs are fair game for any thread.  Unless you have a reason to stay on a particular core or set of cores, than you really shouldn't be prevent the OS from doing its job.  You can only make a multithreaded app use less processing power with those API calls, but in a few cases where you know you're going to stay in L1 cache, this is good, as a general rule, a web browser running JavaScript isn't going to fall into this category until our cache sizes get to some massive size no where near where they are now.</p><p>FireFox's issue is a common Windows threading issue (holds true with OSX as well I believe), the first thread that does any GUI work, handles ALL GUI work.</p><p>A web browsers job is almost entirely GUI work, so having a bunch of threads has limited usefulness when you have to shift EVERYTHING back into the single GUI thread.  Welp, there went all your threading improvements, you know why?  The GUI is the hardest part of the work load in this sort of app.  Heavy DOM parsing and JavaScript hurts, sure, but displaying it is still harder, and lets face it, pretty much everything you do in a browser comes back to displaying.  That is, after all, its purpose.</p><p>The solution?  There are three:</p><p>Optimize your drawing so that its done outside the GUI thread, without actually using the native GUI components and then blt'd into the GUI as needed, but this is hardly ever faster.</p><p>Use multiple processes, now you have multiple GUI threads to handle the different displays.  (Hello Chrome and IE8!)</p><p>Optimize your drawing so that its done efficiently ON the GUI thread by not drawing crap that you don't have to.  This won't happen because a lot of this requires that you wait for the DOM to load and get to a solid state before displaying it, and people would much rather the page load slower but they get to see parts of it as it streams in.  Even if they did jump and go this route, its freaking HARD to do that optimization on a code base the size of Gecko this late in the game.  You might want to consider starting over (Don't say that too loud, the MozDevs are all about throwing out and starting over without a good reason)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Awe look , someone who thinks they know threading talks about how to do it ...By default , you have no reason to make those API calls unless you want to limit to a certain CPU or set of CPUs , out of the box , by default , all CPUs are fair game for any thread .
Unless you have a reason to stay on a particular core or set of cores , than you really should n't be prevent the OS from doing its job .
You can only make a multithreaded app use less processing power with those API calls , but in a few cases where you know you 're going to stay in L1 cache , this is good , as a general rule , a web browser running JavaScript is n't going to fall into this category until our cache sizes get to some massive size no where near where they are now.FireFox 's issue is a common Windows threading issue ( holds true with OSX as well I believe ) , the first thread that does any GUI work , handles ALL GUI work.A web browsers job is almost entirely GUI work , so having a bunch of threads has limited usefulness when you have to shift EVERYTHING back into the single GUI thread .
Welp , there went all your threading improvements , you know why ?
The GUI is the hardest part of the work load in this sort of app .
Heavy DOM parsing and JavaScript hurts , sure , but displaying it is still harder , and lets face it , pretty much everything you do in a browser comes back to displaying .
That is , after all , its purpose.The solution ?
There are three : Optimize your drawing so that its done outside the GUI thread , without actually using the native GUI components and then blt 'd into the GUI as needed , but this is hardly ever faster.Use multiple processes , now you have multiple GUI threads to handle the different displays .
( Hello Chrome and IE8 !
) Optimize your drawing so that its done efficiently ON the GUI thread by not drawing crap that you do n't have to .
This wo n't happen because a lot of this requires that you wait for the DOM to load and get to a solid state before displaying it , and people would much rather the page load slower but they get to see parts of it as it streams in .
Even if they did jump and go this route , its freaking HARD to do that optimization on a code base the size of Gecko this late in the game .
You might want to consider starting over ( Do n't say that too loud , the MozDevs are all about throwing out and starting over without a good reason )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Awe look, someone who thinks they know threading talks about how to do it ...By default, you have no reason to make those API calls unless you want to limit to a certain CPU or set of CPUs, out of the box, by default, all CPUs are fair game for any thread.
Unless you have a reason to stay on a particular core or set of cores, than you really shouldn't be prevent the OS from doing its job.
You can only make a multithreaded app use less processing power with those API calls, but in a few cases where you know you're going to stay in L1 cache, this is good, as a general rule, a web browser running JavaScript isn't going to fall into this category until our cache sizes get to some massive size no where near where they are now.FireFox's issue is a common Windows threading issue (holds true with OSX as well I believe), the first thread that does any GUI work, handles ALL GUI work.A web browsers job is almost entirely GUI work, so having a bunch of threads has limited usefulness when you have to shift EVERYTHING back into the single GUI thread.
Welp, there went all your threading improvements, you know why?
The GUI is the hardest part of the work load in this sort of app.
Heavy DOM parsing and JavaScript hurts, sure, but displaying it is still harder, and lets face it, pretty much everything you do in a browser comes back to displaying.
That is, after all, its purpose.The solution?
There are three:Optimize your drawing so that its done outside the GUI thread, without actually using the native GUI components and then blt'd into the GUI as needed, but this is hardly ever faster.Use multiple processes, now you have multiple GUI threads to handle the different displays.
(Hello Chrome and IE8!
)Optimize your drawing so that its done efficiently ON the GUI thread by not drawing crap that you don't have to.
This won't happen because a lot of this requires that you wait for the DOM to load and get to a solid state before displaying it, and people would much rather the page load slower but they get to see parts of it as it streams in.
Even if they did jump and go this route, its freaking HARD to do that optimization on a code base the size of Gecko this late in the game.
You might want to consider starting over (Don't say that too loud, the MozDevs are all about throwing out and starting over without a good reason)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780812</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782888
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780538
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30783062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780934
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30786936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782676
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30786418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782604
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782342
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30785616
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782676
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30783352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782762
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30785812
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30783610
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780722
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30786312
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782676
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781010
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780292
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30783622
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781762
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780332
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781322
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780198
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780944
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781294
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780706
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780198
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780538
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781438
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781922
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780332
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780538
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781414
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780292
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780538
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780752
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780616
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30786106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780198
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30785542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780812
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780292
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30789626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782676
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780332
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782796
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30784402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30786288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780980
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780538
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782962
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30784132
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780198
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30785622
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782676
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_1557218_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780896
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_1557218.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30783428
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_1557218.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782300
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_1557218.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780344
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782092
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781456
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30783610
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782962
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782836
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30784402
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782796
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781866
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781438
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_1557218.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780538
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780866
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780978
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780980
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30786288
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782040
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782888
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_1557218.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780398
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780944
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781294
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30786418
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782138
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780616
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780664
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780602
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_1557218.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781098
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_1557218.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780304
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781806
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780722
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781454
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780752
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781028
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30783352
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780896
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782274
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782604
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_1557218.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781590
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_1557218.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780224
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_1557218.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780292
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781414
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781010
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780812
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30785542
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_1557218.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780306
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782196
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30785812
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782762
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780336
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782342
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30783622
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_1557218.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30782676
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30789626
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30786936
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30785616
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30786312
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30785622
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_1557218.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780198
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781322
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780706
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30786106
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30784132
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_1557218.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780636
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_1557218.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780332
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781762
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30781922
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780794
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_1557218.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780312
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_1557218.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30780934
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_1557218.30783062
</commentlist>
</conversation>
