<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_26_1944230</id>
	<title>Google Gets Its iPhone Voice</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1264496880000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>snydeq writes <i>"Google has found a way to <a href="http://infoworld.com/d/mobilize/google-voice-finally-gets-iphone-browser-web-app-562">let iPhone owners use Google Voice</a>, launching a Google Voice Web app that runs on iPhone 3.0 OS devices, as well as on Palm WebOS devices. The Google Voice application leverages HTML 5's functionality for running sophisticated Web applications on a browser at speeds matching those of native applications, Google said. The <a href="//apple.slashdot.org/story/09/07/28/1839241/Apple-Kills-Google-Voice-Apps-On-the-iPhone">Google Voice-iPhone conflict</a> is one of several issues putting the companies on a collision course, the latest of which involves Apple potentially courting Microsoft to tap <a href="//search.slashdot.org/story/10/01/20/2353254/Bing-To-Become-Default-iPhone-Search?art\_pos=1">Bing as the iPhone's default search</a>."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>snydeq writes " Google has found a way to let iPhone owners use Google Voice , launching a Google Voice Web app that runs on iPhone 3.0 OS devices , as well as on Palm WebOS devices .
The Google Voice application leverages HTML 5 's functionality for running sophisticated Web applications on a browser at speeds matching those of native applications , Google said .
The Google Voice-iPhone conflict is one of several issues putting the companies on a collision course , the latest of which involves Apple potentially courting Microsoft to tap Bing as the iPhone 's default search .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>snydeq writes "Google has found a way to let iPhone owners use Google Voice, launching a Google Voice Web app that runs on iPhone 3.0 OS devices, as well as on Palm WebOS devices.
The Google Voice application leverages HTML 5's functionality for running sophisticated Web applications on a browser at speeds matching those of native applications, Google said.
The Google Voice-iPhone conflict is one of several issues putting the companies on a collision course, the latest of which involves Apple potentially courting Microsoft to tap Bing as the iPhone's default search.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911898</id>
	<title>Re:Dear Apple</title>
	<author>dingen</author>
	<datestamp>1264510860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Moving from iWork to MS Office can hardly be described as "upgrading".</htmltext>
<tokenext>Moving from iWork to MS Office can hardly be described as " upgrading " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Moving from iWork to MS Office can hardly be described as "upgrading".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910274</id>
	<title>The next step</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264502100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now if they can just manage to invent websites which let you check the weather or news, then the entire App Store model will be history!</p><p>Seriously, games I get, but for any app which is only useful when you're connected to the network anyway... why not just use a website?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now if they can just manage to invent websites which let you check the weather or news , then the entire App Store model will be history ! Seriously , games I get , but for any app which is only useful when you 're connected to the network anyway... why not just use a website ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now if they can just manage to invent websites which let you check the weather or news, then the entire App Store model will be history!Seriously, games I get, but for any app which is only useful when you're connected to the network anyway... why not just use a website?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910614</id>
	<title>Oh great...</title>
	<author>mackinaw\_apx </author>
	<datestamp>1264503360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Have fun with the Bing! crap.  VZW shoved that down the throats of some (or possibly most, I'm not certain) BlackBerry and Droid users.  Come to use my phone one day, with the Bing! app icon on my BBs "desktop", and the default search in the web browser set to Bing as well.....


Dammit, let me have my Google, please.  (In all fairness, I can still use Google... I was just ticked at the fact they went ahead and shoved Bing on my phone)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Have fun with the Bing !
crap. VZW shoved that down the throats of some ( or possibly most , I 'm not certain ) BlackBerry and Droid users .
Come to use my phone one day , with the Bing !
app icon on my BBs " desktop " , and the default search in the web browser set to Bing as well.... . Dammit , let me have my Google , please .
( In all fairness , I can still use Google... I was just ticked at the fact they went ahead and shoved Bing on my phone )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have fun with the Bing!
crap.  VZW shoved that down the throats of some (or possibly most, I'm not certain) BlackBerry and Droid users.
Come to use my phone one day, with the Bing!
app icon on my BBs "desktop", and the default search in the web browser set to Bing as well.....


Dammit, let me have my Google, please.
(In all fairness, I can still use Google... I was just ticked at the fact they went ahead and shoved Bing on my phone)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911014</id>
	<title>Re:Don't listen to this guy, Apple.</title>
	<author>metamatic</author>
	<datestamp>1264505340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The sad thing is, I confidently predict that the Apple tablet will be crippled the same way as the iPhone--which means that I won't be buying one no matter how good it is, even though I'm a long time Mac user.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The sad thing is , I confidently predict that the Apple tablet will be crippled the same way as the iPhone--which means that I wo n't be buying one no matter how good it is , even though I 'm a long time Mac user .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The sad thing is, I confidently predict that the Apple tablet will be crippled the same way as the iPhone--which means that I won't be buying one no matter how good it is, even though I'm a long time Mac user.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910192</id>
	<title>iPod Touch Fails</title>
	<author>Jedi Holocron</author>
	<datestamp>1264501680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, this is impressive, but it will not function properly on an iPod Touch. Google needs to have a way to switch to a different mode of operation that is Touch compatible.</p><p>Yeah, I could use the Skype App....but then I'd have to pay.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , this is impressive , but it will not function properly on an iPod Touch .
Google needs to have a way to switch to a different mode of operation that is Touch compatible.Yeah , I could use the Skype App....but then I 'd have to pay .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, this is impressive, but it will not function properly on an iPod Touch.
Google needs to have a way to switch to a different mode of operation that is Touch compatible.Yeah, I could use the Skype App....but then I'd have to pay.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910846</id>
	<title>Re:Experience?</title>
	<author>Sandbags</author>
	<datestamp>1264504440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>unfortunately, no 3G on AT&amp;T means on any provider available, coice and data on the nexus one concurrently is not possible.  That's a BIG problem for me.  i concurrently use voice and data (taking a call or important SMS while reading e-mail, news, weather, etc or using GPS) about 20 times a day.</p><p>Also, get your facts straight.  it;s not Apple stopping the app.  Initially it was Apple enforcing AT&amp;T's "no VoIP" contract terms, which AT&amp;T did lift, but AT&amp;T is NOT the only provider, nor are they the only prospective provider, and several others still enforce no VoIP apps over cell data network rules.</p><p>No, Google Voice is not a VoIP app, but it is a call redirection app, and actually, to the provider, that's worse.  (most data plans have caps, but "in" minutes or "my 5" have no limit, plus it also permits SMS redirection allowing unlimited free TXT service without a text plan.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>unfortunately , no 3G on AT&amp;T means on any provider available , coice and data on the nexus one concurrently is not possible .
That 's a BIG problem for me .
i concurrently use voice and data ( taking a call or important SMS while reading e-mail , news , weather , etc or using GPS ) about 20 times a day.Also , get your facts straight .
it ; s not Apple stopping the app .
Initially it was Apple enforcing AT&amp;T 's " no VoIP " contract terms , which AT&amp;T did lift , but AT&amp;T is NOT the only provider , nor are they the only prospective provider , and several others still enforce no VoIP apps over cell data network rules.No , Google Voice is not a VoIP app , but it is a call redirection app , and actually , to the provider , that 's worse .
( most data plans have caps , but " in " minutes or " my 5 " have no limit , plus it also permits SMS redirection allowing unlimited free TXT service without a text plan .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>unfortunately, no 3G on AT&amp;T means on any provider available, coice and data on the nexus one concurrently is not possible.
That's a BIG problem for me.
i concurrently use voice and data (taking a call or important SMS while reading e-mail, news, weather, etc or using GPS) about 20 times a day.Also, get your facts straight.
it;s not Apple stopping the app.
Initially it was Apple enforcing AT&amp;T's "no VoIP" contract terms, which AT&amp;T did lift, but AT&amp;T is NOT the only provider, nor are they the only prospective provider, and several others still enforce no VoIP apps over cell data network rules.No, Google Voice is not a VoIP app, but it is a call redirection app, and actually, to the provider, that's worse.
(most data plans have caps, but "in" minutes or "my 5" have no limit, plus it also permits SMS redirection allowing unlimited free TXT service without a text plan.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910374</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30916540</id>
	<title>Nice fellas over at Apple...</title>
	<author>alfielee</author>
	<datestamp>1264604340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well done Google! Better programmers, better people, as for Apple, you belong in the toilet with Microsoft. You're turning into a little version of the same company. Scum!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well done Google !
Better programmers , better people , as for Apple , you belong in the toilet with Microsoft .
You 're turning into a little version of the same company .
Scum !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well done Google!
Better programmers, better people, as for Apple, you belong in the toilet with Microsoft.
You're turning into a little version of the same company.
Scum!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910240</id>
	<title>Re:Kind of scary that it works....</title>
	<author>dgatwood</author>
	<datestamp>1264501920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't think there is a way to get access to the microphone from a web page.  On iPhone, Safari doesn't allow any plug-ins to load.  From the description, it sounds like this just tells the phone to make a local call over the cell network to a special number that then forwards your call to the desired destination.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think there is a way to get access to the microphone from a web page .
On iPhone , Safari does n't allow any plug-ins to load .
From the description , it sounds like this just tells the phone to make a local call over the cell network to a special number that then forwards your call to the desired destination .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think there is a way to get access to the microphone from a web page.
On iPhone, Safari doesn't allow any plug-ins to load.
From the description, it sounds like this just tells the phone to make a local call over the cell network to a special number that then forwards your call to the desired destination.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30917680</id>
	<title>So another webpage</title>
	<author>Snaller</author>
	<datestamp>1264609200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Woopti do.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Woopti do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Woopti do.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910546</id>
	<title>Re:Does that mean</title>
	<author>b0bby</author>
	<datestamp>1264503060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think you'd set the call up over the web, but then Google Voice will call you, then connect you to whoever you're trying to reach. I think the downside for AT&amp;T is that on some plans you can pick 5 or so numbers that don't count towards your minutes, so if you make your Google voice number one of those you'd have unlimited calling &amp; never touch your minutes. (Except for people not on your list who call you, I guess.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you 'd set the call up over the web , but then Google Voice will call you , then connect you to whoever you 're trying to reach .
I think the downside for AT&amp;T is that on some plans you can pick 5 or so numbers that do n't count towards your minutes , so if you make your Google voice number one of those you 'd have unlimited calling &amp; never touch your minutes .
( Except for people not on your list who call you , I guess .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you'd set the call up over the web, but then Google Voice will call you, then connect you to whoever you're trying to reach.
I think the downside for AT&amp;T is that on some plans you can pick 5 or so numbers that don't count towards your minutes, so if you make your Google voice number one of those you'd have unlimited calling &amp; never touch your minutes.
(Except for people not on your list who call you, I guess.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910036</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910612</id>
	<title>Re:iPod Touch Fails</title>
	<author>DragonWriter</author>
	<datestamp>1264503360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Yeah, this is impressive, but it will not function properly on an iPod Touch. Google needs to have a way to switch to a different mode of operation that is Touch compatible.</p></div></blockquote><p>Google Voice isn't a VoIP service, its an SMS, voice mail, call routing and contact management service that requires an actual phone line to route voice calls to (or take them from); the only "mode of operation" that would be Touch compatible is the dial-back mode used on the basic website where placing a call has Google Voice call one of your phones to complete the call. Which I suppose might be useful if you had a touch and access to a phone that didn't have its own web connection.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , this is impressive , but it will not function properly on an iPod Touch .
Google needs to have a way to switch to a different mode of operation that is Touch compatible.Google Voice is n't a VoIP service , its an SMS , voice mail , call routing and contact management service that requires an actual phone line to route voice calls to ( or take them from ) ; the only " mode of operation " that would be Touch compatible is the dial-back mode used on the basic website where placing a call has Google Voice call one of your phones to complete the call .
Which I suppose might be useful if you had a touch and access to a phone that did n't have its own web connection .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, this is impressive, but it will not function properly on an iPod Touch.
Google needs to have a way to switch to a different mode of operation that is Touch compatible.Google Voice isn't a VoIP service, its an SMS, voice mail, call routing and contact management service that requires an actual phone line to route voice calls to (or take them from); the only "mode of operation" that would be Touch compatible is the dial-back mode used on the basic website where placing a call has Google Voice call one of your phones to complete the call.
Which I suppose might be useful if you had a touch and access to a phone that didn't have its own web connection.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910192</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30912926</id>
	<title>So Steve Jobs was right?</title>
	<author>Above</author>
	<datestamp>1264519560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Early on Steve Jobs said the iPhone didn't need an API because everything you wanted to do could be done with web apps.</p><p>Did Google just prove that for him?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Early on Steve Jobs said the iPhone did n't need an API because everything you wanted to do could be done with web apps.Did Google just prove that for him ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Early on Steve Jobs said the iPhone didn't need an API because everything you wanted to do could be done with web apps.Did Google just prove that for him?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910472</id>
	<title>Re:Dear Apple</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264502880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Office for Mac is quite nice. You should upgrade to it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Office for Mac is quite nice .
You should upgrade to it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Office for Mac is quite nice.
You should upgrade to it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911486</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Apple, let the Apps through already!</title>
	<author>Cyberllama</author>
	<datestamp>1264508280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since we'll know for sure tomorrow, I'd just like to toss out a crazy conspiracy theory.  I think tomorrow there's a chance, perhaps not a very large one, that Apple will announce integrated Google Voice support in iPhone OS 4.0.  I think it's just the sort of curve ball Apple likes to throw, especially since it makes their past bad behavior/decisions look magically justified to the fanboys.   That's exactly the sort of thing Apple likes to do:</p><p>"You know how we've stuck with the single button mouse all these years? It wasn't a display of terrible judgment and stubbornness at all! We just wanted to do the mouse *right* and do multi-touch with it!  This was our plan all along!"</p><p>"I know we said we didn't think people wanted a video ipod -- but that's because we knew nobody would want it without the amazing video service we're now prepared to offer via iTunes.  Now everybody WILL want it!"</p><p>"We were always going to add Copy and Paste! We just wanted to take our time and and ensure we delivered the quality, simple Apple experience that we knew you'd want!"</p><p>etc, etc.</p><p>Apple loves turn their negatives into positives and get carried off the stage by packs of rabid apple fanboys.  So it wouldn't surprise me a bit if Apple did something completely unexpected like built-in Google voice support if it scores them a win, catches the press off guard, and gets the FCC off their back.  When you think about it, there's really no good reason not to.  Sure they might want to stick it Google now that they are direct competitors, but it won't honestly make much difference either way.  Frankly, they're better off in that competition supporting anything that android can already do since it's not like Apple has a competing product to Google Voice.</p><p>Ok, I'm grounding enough in reality to realize that this probably *won't* happen.  But I do think it *could* happen and it definitely *should* happen.  Fingers crossed!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since we 'll know for sure tomorrow , I 'd just like to toss out a crazy conspiracy theory .
I think tomorrow there 's a chance , perhaps not a very large one , that Apple will announce integrated Google Voice support in iPhone OS 4.0 .
I think it 's just the sort of curve ball Apple likes to throw , especially since it makes their past bad behavior/decisions look magically justified to the fanboys .
That 's exactly the sort of thing Apple likes to do : " You know how we 've stuck with the single button mouse all these years ?
It was n't a display of terrible judgment and stubbornness at all !
We just wanted to do the mouse * right * and do multi-touch with it !
This was our plan all along !
" " I know we said we did n't think people wanted a video ipod -- but that 's because we knew nobody would want it without the amazing video service we 're now prepared to offer via iTunes .
Now everybody WILL want it !
" " We were always going to add Copy and Paste !
We just wanted to take our time and and ensure we delivered the quality , simple Apple experience that we knew you 'd want !
" etc , etc.Apple loves turn their negatives into positives and get carried off the stage by packs of rabid apple fanboys .
So it would n't surprise me a bit if Apple did something completely unexpected like built-in Google voice support if it scores them a win , catches the press off guard , and gets the FCC off their back .
When you think about it , there 's really no good reason not to .
Sure they might want to stick it Google now that they are direct competitors , but it wo n't honestly make much difference either way .
Frankly , they 're better off in that competition supporting anything that android can already do since it 's not like Apple has a competing product to Google Voice.Ok , I 'm grounding enough in reality to realize that this probably * wo n't * happen .
But I do think it * could * happen and it definitely * should * happen .
Fingers crossed !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since we'll know for sure tomorrow, I'd just like to toss out a crazy conspiracy theory.
I think tomorrow there's a chance, perhaps not a very large one, that Apple will announce integrated Google Voice support in iPhone OS 4.0.
I think it's just the sort of curve ball Apple likes to throw, especially since it makes their past bad behavior/decisions look magically justified to the fanboys.
That's exactly the sort of thing Apple likes to do:"You know how we've stuck with the single button mouse all these years?
It wasn't a display of terrible judgment and stubbornness at all!
We just wanted to do the mouse *right* and do multi-touch with it!
This was our plan all along!
""I know we said we didn't think people wanted a video ipod -- but that's because we knew nobody would want it without the amazing video service we're now prepared to offer via iTunes.
Now everybody WILL want it!
""We were always going to add Copy and Paste!
We just wanted to take our time and and ensure we delivered the quality, simple Apple experience that we knew you'd want!
"etc, etc.Apple loves turn their negatives into positives and get carried off the stage by packs of rabid apple fanboys.
So it wouldn't surprise me a bit if Apple did something completely unexpected like built-in Google voice support if it scores them a win, catches the press off guard, and gets the FCC off their back.
When you think about it, there's really no good reason not to.
Sure they might want to stick it Google now that they are direct competitors, but it won't honestly make much difference either way.
Frankly, they're better off in that competition supporting anything that android can already do since it's not like Apple has a competing product to Google Voice.Ok, I'm grounding enough in reality to realize that this probably *won't* happen.
But I do think it *could* happen and it definitely *should* happen.
Fingers crossed!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909964</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30912230</id>
	<title>Re:Google getting a bit too cocky.</title>
	<author>DragonWriter</author>
	<datestamp>1264513500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Do you think perhaps that for the tens of millions of people who've bought an iPhone and seemingly like it, really don't care that much?</p></div></blockquote><p>I bought an iPhone -- seemed to be the best price for features at the time I bought it -- and I like it, but I do, in fact, care about the walled garden, and its the one big negative of the phone, and the biggest reason that (1) I expect to replace it with something else, probably Android-based, when the time comes to replace it, and (2) I don't by expensive apps for the phone, as a direct consequence of #1.</p><p>Though, ironically perhaps, if good rich HTML5 apps that work on the iPhone take off, I might stay with iPhone (though I still wouldn't buy expensive native apps through the app store), so, for me at least, Google is mitigating my concerns with the walled garden rather than highlighting them.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you think perhaps that for the tens of millions of people who 've bought an iPhone and seemingly like it , really do n't care that much ? I bought an iPhone -- seemed to be the best price for features at the time I bought it -- and I like it , but I do , in fact , care about the walled garden , and its the one big negative of the phone , and the biggest reason that ( 1 ) I expect to replace it with something else , probably Android-based , when the time comes to replace it , and ( 2 ) I do n't by expensive apps for the phone , as a direct consequence of # 1.Though , ironically perhaps , if good rich HTML5 apps that work on the iPhone take off , I might stay with iPhone ( though I still would n't buy expensive native apps through the app store ) , so , for me at least , Google is mitigating my concerns with the walled garden rather than highlighting them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you think perhaps that for the tens of millions of people who've bought an iPhone and seemingly like it, really don't care that much?I bought an iPhone -- seemed to be the best price for features at the time I bought it -- and I like it, but I do, in fact, care about the walled garden, and its the one big negative of the phone, and the biggest reason that (1) I expect to replace it with something else, probably Android-based, when the time comes to replace it, and (2) I don't by expensive apps for the phone, as a direct consequence of #1.Though, ironically perhaps, if good rich HTML5 apps that work on the iPhone take off, I might stay with iPhone (though I still wouldn't buy expensive native apps through the app store), so, for me at least, Google is mitigating my concerns with the walled garden rather than highlighting them.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910410</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30913388</id>
	<title>Re:Google getting a bit too cocky.</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1264524600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow, 10 million phones out of a market that sells about a billion a year. Wow. I guess the remaining 99\% actually do care then.</p><p><i>that come with the iPhone then just jailbreak the bloody thing</i></p><p>Yeah, here we have it. Only earlier today, we had the story about Iphone viruses, and morons were pleading "But you only have this problem if you jailbreak, and no one would be stupid enough to do that". Yet, here you are, telling us we need to jailbreak it to get basic functionality working.</p><p>Which is it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , 10 million phones out of a market that sells about a billion a year .
Wow. I guess the remaining 99 \ % actually do care then.that come with the iPhone then just jailbreak the bloody thingYeah , here we have it .
Only earlier today , we had the story about Iphone viruses , and morons were pleading " But you only have this problem if you jailbreak , and no one would be stupid enough to do that " .
Yet , here you are , telling us we need to jailbreak it to get basic functionality working.Which is it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, 10 million phones out of a market that sells about a billion a year.
Wow. I guess the remaining 99\% actually do care then.that come with the iPhone then just jailbreak the bloody thingYeah, here we have it.
Only earlier today, we had the story about Iphone viruses, and morons were pleading "But you only have this problem if you jailbreak, and no one would be stupid enough to do that".
Yet, here you are, telling us we need to jailbreak it to get basic functionality working.Which is it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910410</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911148</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Apple, let the Apps through already!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264506060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bing<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... BAH! Microsoft had their chance<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... they got big, fat and happy<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... then complacent. And now Bing, like everything else from Microsoft in recent years, is a steaming pile of junk. It's like the kid who doesn't want to be left behind and screams "Look! Me too! I can do it too!" I just don't trust them anymore<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... they blew it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bing ... BAH ! Microsoft had their chance ... they got big , fat and happy ... then complacent .
And now Bing , like everything else from Microsoft in recent years , is a steaming pile of junk .
It 's like the kid who does n't want to be left behind and screams " Look !
Me too !
I can do it too !
" I just do n't trust them anymore ... they blew it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bing ... BAH! Microsoft had their chance ... they got big, fat and happy ... then complacent.
And now Bing, like everything else from Microsoft in recent years, is a steaming pile of junk.
It's like the kid who doesn't want to be left behind and screams "Look!
Me too!
I can do it too!
" I just don't trust them anymore ... they blew it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909964</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911502</id>
	<title>Re:Oh great...</title>
	<author>Archangel Michael</author>
	<datestamp>1264508400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It isn't your phone. AND You're not the customer.</p><p>I wonder if there is a lawsuit for that?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is n't your phone .
AND You 're not the customer.I wonder if there is a lawsuit for that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It isn't your phone.
AND You're not the customer.I wonder if there is a lawsuit for that?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910614</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30912392</id>
	<title>Re:Google getting a bit too cocky.</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1264514640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most people outside of slashdot don't give a shit.  I know what they do and I don't give a shit, I'd much rather have Apple monitoring the app store and pay for apps at the risk of reduced functionality than to randomly download software from someone else, with no checking and find out tomorrow that the app stole all my contacts using an exploit.</p><p>Reality check: slashdot's crowd is in no way normal, and generally consists of a bunch of wanna be techies who are completely out of touch with both real techies and normal people.</p><p>Google and slashdot can bitch, moan, and scream all day long, and people will still buy an iPhone because no one gives a shit.  They'd prefer the interface and reliability of a closed system to the crap that is called android.  Google is good at a lot of things, making a phone OS isn't one of them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most people outside of slashdot do n't give a shit .
I know what they do and I do n't give a shit , I 'd much rather have Apple monitoring the app store and pay for apps at the risk of reduced functionality than to randomly download software from someone else , with no checking and find out tomorrow that the app stole all my contacts using an exploit.Reality check : slashdot 's crowd is in no way normal , and generally consists of a bunch of wan na be techies who are completely out of touch with both real techies and normal people.Google and slashdot can bitch , moan , and scream all day long , and people will still buy an iPhone because no one gives a shit .
They 'd prefer the interface and reliability of a closed system to the crap that is called android .
Google is good at a lot of things , making a phone OS is n't one of them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most people outside of slashdot don't give a shit.
I know what they do and I don't give a shit, I'd much rather have Apple monitoring the app store and pay for apps at the risk of reduced functionality than to randomly download software from someone else, with no checking and find out tomorrow that the app stole all my contacts using an exploit.Reality check: slashdot's crowd is in no way normal, and generally consists of a bunch of wanna be techies who are completely out of touch with both real techies and normal people.Google and slashdot can bitch, moan, and scream all day long, and people will still buy an iPhone because no one gives a shit.
They'd prefer the interface and reliability of a closed system to the crap that is called android.
Google is good at a lot of things, making a phone OS isn't one of them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910084</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910374</id>
	<title>Re:Experience?</title>
	<author>ktandaeo</author>
	<datestamp>1264502460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use Google Voice all the time.  The fact that Apple didn't allow it on the IPhone is what made me buy the Nexus One instead and drop my IPhone.</p><p>Best purchase I ever made.</p><p>The complete integration with Google Voice makes the Nexus One better than the IPhone hands down.  Even though this new web workaround technically works, the fully integrated experience is 10 times better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use Google Voice all the time .
The fact that Apple did n't allow it on the IPhone is what made me buy the Nexus One instead and drop my IPhone.Best purchase I ever made.The complete integration with Google Voice makes the Nexus One better than the IPhone hands down .
Even though this new web workaround technically works , the fully integrated experience is 10 times better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use Google Voice all the time.
The fact that Apple didn't allow it on the IPhone is what made me buy the Nexus One instead and drop my IPhone.Best purchase I ever made.The complete integration with Google Voice makes the Nexus One better than the IPhone hands down.
Even though this new web workaround technically works, the fully integrated experience is 10 times better.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30913776</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Apple, let the Apps through already!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264529100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perhaps != would better compare a Slashdot read to the average consumer?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps ! = would better compare a Slashdot read to the average consumer ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps != would better compare a Slashdot read to the average consumer?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911068</id>
	<title>In 100\% seriousness</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264505640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>FUCK BING! It doesn't show me shit I want to find.</htmltext>
<tokenext>FUCK BING !
It does n't show me shit I want to find .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FUCK BING!
It doesn't show me shit I want to find.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910704</id>
	<title>Re:Dear Apple</title>
	<author>Enderandrew</author>
	<datestamp>1264503780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is actually a very good Google app that not only gives you quick access to Google features (Gmail, maps, search, etc) but also has a voice search. Talk into your phone and get Google search results.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is actually a very good Google app that not only gives you quick access to Google features ( Gmail , maps , search , etc ) but also has a voice search .
Talk into your phone and get Google search results .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is actually a very good Google app that not only gives you quick access to Google features (Gmail, maps, search, etc) but also has a voice search.
Talk into your phone and get Google search results.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30912136</id>
	<title>To each their own, I guess</title>
	<author>rsborg</author>
	<datestamp>1264512660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>...the web is a massive step backwards. Even MFC development was more enjoyable.</p></div></blockquote><p>Javascript is amazing and flexible, especially given the new VMs like V8,Squirrelfish,Tracemonkey and advances in DOM... but then again, for our internal app devleopment, we don't care to do special support for IE, if it works with Firefox, Safari and Chrome, it's considered standard enough (for the IE stragglers, we alert to use ChromeFrame as a workaround)</p><p>Also, I really loved making sure everyone was on the latest patch release of my client back when I had to deploy my thick-client/client-server app to internal machines... that was great fun &lt;/sarcasm&gt;</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...the web is a massive step backwards .
Even MFC development was more enjoyable.Javascript is amazing and flexible , especially given the new VMs like V8,Squirrelfish,Tracemonkey and advances in DOM... but then again , for our internal app devleopment , we do n't care to do special support for IE , if it works with Firefox , Safari and Chrome , it 's considered standard enough ( for the IE stragglers , we alert to use ChromeFrame as a workaround ) Also , I really loved making sure everyone was on the latest patch release of my client back when I had to deploy my thick-client/client-server app to internal machines... that was great fun</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...the web is a massive step backwards.
Even MFC development was more enjoyable.Javascript is amazing and flexible, especially given the new VMs like V8,Squirrelfish,Tracemonkey and advances in DOM... but then again, for our internal app devleopment, we don't care to do special support for IE, if it works with Firefox, Safari and Chrome, it's considered standard enough (for the IE stragglers, we alert to use ChromeFrame as a workaround)Also, I really loved making sure everyone was on the latest patch release of my client back when I had to deploy my thick-client/client-server app to internal machines... that was great fun 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910268</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30912318</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Apple, let the Apps through already!</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1264514100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Really?  I keep hearing this but I really don't see anyone even coming close to drawing in the crowds of people that Apple does.</p><p>If what Apple is doing is shooting themselves in the foot, please hand me a gun so I can shoot myself in the foot too, I want to make money hand over fist as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Really ?
I keep hearing this but I really do n't see anyone even coming close to drawing in the crowds of people that Apple does.If what Apple is doing is shooting themselves in the foot , please hand me a gun so I can shoot myself in the foot too , I want to make money hand over fist as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really?
I keep hearing this but I really don't see anyone even coming close to drawing in the crowds of people that Apple does.If what Apple is doing is shooting themselves in the foot, please hand me a gun so I can shoot myself in the foot too, I want to make money hand over fist as well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909964</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911044</id>
	<title>Re:Google getting a bit too cocky.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264505520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's not what Google did.</p><p>Apple refused Google Voice in the app store. So Google's not dealing with the app store.</p><p>So they just rewrite it for the web: Javascript, HTML, and CSS. This happens to work on the iPhone, and if they add some enhancements for iPhone users who want this program, how's that anything bad? This also runs on Palm's WebOS, and perhaps other smart phones with modern browers. This is a good thing... many people want this, and if Google had to write a phone-specific version for every phone, some people might be left behind. And in fact, this is the future... many apps will be written this way. WebOS, in fact, is largely based on using Javascript, HTML, and CSS to deliver applications. With Palm and Apple and various others fighting to get better Javascript benchmarks, this was only a matter of time.</p><p>They have a nice and very functional Google Voice app for Android, which will work just dandy, and better than an iPhone app would anyway, since it can run background servers. If you can run the program you want on your iPhone, aren't you better served? Why should you have to put up with Apple's plans.</p><p>It's kind of amazing... Microsoft, for years, did stupid little things to ensure their future dominance. They were usually keel-hauled for it, in forums like this. Didn't change anything<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. they still did it. Well, up though Vista, which is where this "we're building an OS for us, but charging you for it" really caused them problems. So they backed off a bit.</p><p>Apple, on the other hand, is taking a hard-line approach, with draconic censoring of applications. So you can't run a Commodore 64 emulator on your iPhone, because its ability to run "programs Apple doesn't get paid for" is a major threat to Apple's future. And you can't run Java programs, for the same reason. And you'll never get Flash or Shockwave, for the same reason... it doesn't even matter that this makes iPhone a second-class web browsing engine.. Apple cares more about a few more pennies from users than it does about you getting what you think you paid for (eg, the often touted best pocket web browsing experience... which it's not anymore, not by a long shot).</p><p>Javascript was the only loophole... the only method of code execution that Apple didn't cut out of your typical web browser experience. And they made it fast... last year, they were faster than Android and twice as fast as WebOS, even though most WebOS needed the speed (this changed in WebOS 1.3 and, more still, in WebOS 1.4). Palm has pretty much shown the way... while there won't be a serious level of video games done this way, for many pocket-sized applications, web-based apps work fine. They're going to run on Palm, on Android, on Nokia, and, unless Apple further works to break their support of the Web's official and de-facto standards, on iPhone.</p><p>And the funny thing... Apple is pushing developers toward this kind of development, through their approval policies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's not what Google did.Apple refused Google Voice in the app store .
So Google 's not dealing with the app store.So they just rewrite it for the web : Javascript , HTML , and CSS .
This happens to work on the iPhone , and if they add some enhancements for iPhone users who want this program , how 's that anything bad ?
This also runs on Palm 's WebOS , and perhaps other smart phones with modern browers .
This is a good thing... many people want this , and if Google had to write a phone-specific version for every phone , some people might be left behind .
And in fact , this is the future... many apps will be written this way .
WebOS , in fact , is largely based on using Javascript , HTML , and CSS to deliver applications .
With Palm and Apple and various others fighting to get better Javascript benchmarks , this was only a matter of time.They have a nice and very functional Google Voice app for Android , which will work just dandy , and better than an iPhone app would anyway , since it can run background servers .
If you can run the program you want on your iPhone , are n't you better served ?
Why should you have to put up with Apple 's plans.It 's kind of amazing... Microsoft , for years , did stupid little things to ensure their future dominance .
They were usually keel-hauled for it , in forums like this .
Did n't change anything .. they still did it .
Well , up though Vista , which is where this " we 're building an OS for us , but charging you for it " really caused them problems .
So they backed off a bit.Apple , on the other hand , is taking a hard-line approach , with draconic censoring of applications .
So you ca n't run a Commodore 64 emulator on your iPhone , because its ability to run " programs Apple does n't get paid for " is a major threat to Apple 's future .
And you ca n't run Java programs , for the same reason .
And you 'll never get Flash or Shockwave , for the same reason... it does n't even matter that this makes iPhone a second-class web browsing engine.. Apple cares more about a few more pennies from users than it does about you getting what you think you paid for ( eg , the often touted best pocket web browsing experience... which it 's not anymore , not by a long shot ) .Javascript was the only loophole... the only method of code execution that Apple did n't cut out of your typical web browser experience .
And they made it fast... last year , they were faster than Android and twice as fast as WebOS , even though most WebOS needed the speed ( this changed in WebOS 1.3 and , more still , in WebOS 1.4 ) .
Palm has pretty much shown the way... while there wo n't be a serious level of video games done this way , for many pocket-sized applications , web-based apps work fine .
They 're going to run on Palm , on Android , on Nokia , and , unless Apple further works to break their support of the Web 's official and de-facto standards , on iPhone.And the funny thing... Apple is pushing developers toward this kind of development , through their approval policies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's not what Google did.Apple refused Google Voice in the app store.
So Google's not dealing with the app store.So they just rewrite it for the web: Javascript, HTML, and CSS.
This happens to work on the iPhone, and if they add some enhancements for iPhone users who want this program, how's that anything bad?
This also runs on Palm's WebOS, and perhaps other smart phones with modern browers.
This is a good thing... many people want this, and if Google had to write a phone-specific version for every phone, some people might be left behind.
And in fact, this is the future... many apps will be written this way.
WebOS, in fact, is largely based on using Javascript, HTML, and CSS to deliver applications.
With Palm and Apple and various others fighting to get better Javascript benchmarks, this was only a matter of time.They have a nice and very functional Google Voice app for Android, which will work just dandy, and better than an iPhone app would anyway, since it can run background servers.
If you can run the program you want on your iPhone, aren't you better served?
Why should you have to put up with Apple's plans.It's kind of amazing... Microsoft, for years, did stupid little things to ensure their future dominance.
They were usually keel-hauled for it, in forums like this.
Didn't change anything .. they still did it.
Well, up though Vista, which is where this "we're building an OS for us, but charging you for it" really caused them problems.
So they backed off a bit.Apple, on the other hand, is taking a hard-line approach, with draconic censoring of applications.
So you can't run a Commodore 64 emulator on your iPhone, because its ability to run "programs Apple doesn't get paid for" is a major threat to Apple's future.
And you can't run Java programs, for the same reason.
And you'll never get Flash or Shockwave, for the same reason... it doesn't even matter that this makes iPhone a second-class web browsing engine.. Apple cares more about a few more pennies from users than it does about you getting what you think you paid for (eg, the often touted best pocket web browsing experience... which it's not anymore, not by a long shot).Javascript was the only loophole... the only method of code execution that Apple didn't cut out of your typical web browser experience.
And they made it fast... last year, they were faster than Android and twice as fast as WebOS, even though most WebOS needed the speed (this changed in WebOS 1.3 and, more still, in WebOS 1.4).
Palm has pretty much shown the way... while there won't be a serious level of video games done this way, for many pocket-sized applications, web-based apps work fine.
They're going to run on Palm, on Android, on Nokia, and, unless Apple further works to break their support of the Web's official and de-facto standards, on iPhone.And the funny thing... Apple is pushing developers toward this kind of development, through their approval policies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910010</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910894</id>
	<title>Re:Kind of scary that it works....</title>
	<author>Locutus</author>
	<datestamp>1264504740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>or it uses the web interface to Google Voice, lets you search your phonebook or select a person to call and is prepositioned so that your iPhone number is the forwarding number. With just these parts, Google Voice will call your iPhone and once you pick it up, they'll then make the call out to that person you wanted to call.  The phone number the other person will see is your Google Voice number, not your iPhone number.<br><br>ie, not a VOIP app.  I could be completely wrong too.<br><br>LoB</htmltext>
<tokenext>or it uses the web interface to Google Voice , lets you search your phonebook or select a person to call and is prepositioned so that your iPhone number is the forwarding number .
With just these parts , Google Voice will call your iPhone and once you pick it up , they 'll then make the call out to that person you wanted to call .
The phone number the other person will see is your Google Voice number , not your iPhone number.ie , not a VOIP app .
I could be completely wrong too.LoB</tokentext>
<sentencetext>or it uses the web interface to Google Voice, lets you search your phonebook or select a person to call and is prepositioned so that your iPhone number is the forwarding number.
With just these parts, Google Voice will call your iPhone and once you pick it up, they'll then make the call out to that person you wanted to call.
The phone number the other person will see is your Google Voice number, not your iPhone number.ie, not a VOIP app.
I could be completely wrong too.LoB</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910240</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910330</id>
	<title>Ipod Touch too?</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1264502280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We do have wifi, and a mic.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We do have wifi , and a mic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We do have wifi, and a mic.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910494</id>
	<title>Re:Experience?</title>
	<author>PGGreens</author>
	<datestamp>1264502940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have Google Voice and an Android phone, but I haven't found it that useful. This is partly because I only use one phone in my day-to-day life, and GV would really come in handy if you were using it to manage multiple lines (home, work, cell, etc).

It's been said already, but you cannot use it to get free minutes.
However, you can use it for free texting. That could be a big deal for some people, but I rarely approach my limit, anyway.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have Google Voice and an Android phone , but I have n't found it that useful .
This is partly because I only use one phone in my day-to-day life , and GV would really come in handy if you were using it to manage multiple lines ( home , work , cell , etc ) .
It 's been said already , but you can not use it to get free minutes .
However , you can use it for free texting .
That could be a big deal for some people , but I rarely approach my limit , anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have Google Voice and an Android phone, but I haven't found it that useful.
This is partly because I only use one phone in my day-to-day life, and GV would really come in handy if you were using it to manage multiple lines (home, work, cell, etc).
It's been said already, but you cannot use it to get free minutes.
However, you can use it for free texting.
That could be a big deal for some people, but I rarely approach my limit, anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30914968</id>
	<title>Re:Experience?</title>
	<author>klui</author>
	<datestamp>1264590780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I generally like the service. But I wanted to turn off my cell when I'm at home though I can't do that because I have a T-Mobile prepaid card. That number tends to picks up first and by the 3rd ring, it will go into voice mail. By the time I can pick up at home (hearing the home phone ring once) I cannot answer the caller.</p><p>Tried the GSM codes to change this but they don't work. Called their customer support but they cannot do it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I generally like the service .
But I wanted to turn off my cell when I 'm at home though I ca n't do that because I have a T-Mobile prepaid card .
That number tends to picks up first and by the 3rd ring , it will go into voice mail .
By the time I can pick up at home ( hearing the home phone ring once ) I can not answer the caller.Tried the GSM codes to change this but they do n't work .
Called their customer support but they can not do it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I generally like the service.
But I wanted to turn off my cell when I'm at home though I can't do that because I have a T-Mobile prepaid card.
That number tends to picks up first and by the 3rd ring, it will go into voice mail.
By the time I can pick up at home (hearing the home phone ring once) I cannot answer the caller.Tried the GSM codes to change this but they don't work.
Called their customer support but they cannot do it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910558</id>
	<title>Not VOIP</title>
	<author>Archangel Michael</author>
	<datestamp>1264503120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And Google has (Temporarily) killed the best VOIP service out there: Gizmo5.</p><p>I only wish I picked up a Gizmo SIP while I had a chance. I'm extremely depressed that I didn't.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p><p>Google, please bring it back!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And Google has ( Temporarily ) killed the best VOIP service out there : Gizmo5.I only wish I picked up a Gizmo SIP while I had a chance .
I 'm extremely depressed that I did n't .
: ( Google , please bring it back !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And Google has (Temporarily) killed the best VOIP service out there: Gizmo5.I only wish I picked up a Gizmo SIP while I had a chance.
I'm extremely depressed that I didn't.
:(Google, please bring it back!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911124</id>
	<title>Re:Woohoo!</title>
	<author>hazydave</author>
	<datestamp>1264505940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Given the large footprint of the iPhone, HTML/CSS/Javascript is the only "alternate app" hole they haven't closed. Given Palm's WebOS using this stuff as their "native" application development environment, it does rather suggest that some applications can be written this way without big problem. Yeah, it's a mess, but less work than four or five smartphone-specific versions? Perhaps not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Given the large footprint of the iPhone , HTML/CSS/Javascript is the only " alternate app " hole they have n't closed .
Given Palm 's WebOS using this stuff as their " native " application development environment , it does rather suggest that some applications can be written this way without big problem .
Yeah , it 's a mess , but less work than four or five smartphone-specific versions ?
Perhaps not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Given the large footprint of the iPhone, HTML/CSS/Javascript is the only "alternate app" hole they haven't closed.
Given Palm's WebOS using this stuff as their "native" application development environment, it does rather suggest that some applications can be written this way without big problem.
Yeah, it's a mess, but less work than four or five smartphone-specific versions?
Perhaps not.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910268</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911484</id>
	<title>Re:Kind of scary that it works....</title>
	<author>argent</author>
	<datestamp>1264508280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would say that's one of the many reasons I don't like flash, but there at least you have to enable it explicitly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would say that 's one of the many reasons I do n't like flash , but there at least you have to enable it explicitly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would say that's one of the many reasons I don't like flash, but there at least you have to enable it explicitly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910152</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30914172</id>
	<title>Macs can't protect you from Microsoft</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264533780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I switched to Mac so I wouldn't have to use a Microsoft product ever again.</p></div></blockquote><p>
I switched to <em>Freedom</em> (a.k.a. Linux) so that nobody would ever be able to make choices for me again, including the choice to use Microsoft.  With Apple, you will always be one strategic decision made in Steve Jobs' office -- one software upgrade -- away from being a Microsoft user in some form.
</p><p>
I don't think it's stupid to switch to Macs (in some ways, they're nice computers), but yes, it really truly is stupid to switch to Macs to get away from Microsoft and/or whatever it is about Microsoft that you may find objectionable.  Mac OS is <em>culturally</em> identical to Windows in every single way.  The only real distinction it has from Windows is that Mac OS happens to be technically superior.  But a trap is still a trap, and slave to proprietary software is still a slave.  You're not making the decisions; they are.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I switched to Mac so I would n't have to use a Microsoft product ever again .
I switched to Freedom ( a.k.a .
Linux ) so that nobody would ever be able to make choices for me again , including the choice to use Microsoft .
With Apple , you will always be one strategic decision made in Steve Jobs ' office -- one software upgrade -- away from being a Microsoft user in some form .
I do n't think it 's stupid to switch to Macs ( in some ways , they 're nice computers ) , but yes , it really truly is stupid to switch to Macs to get away from Microsoft and/or whatever it is about Microsoft that you may find objectionable .
Mac OS is culturally identical to Windows in every single way .
The only real distinction it has from Windows is that Mac OS happens to be technically superior .
But a trap is still a trap , and slave to proprietary software is still a slave .
You 're not making the decisions ; they are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I switched to Mac so I wouldn't have to use a Microsoft product ever again.
I switched to Freedom (a.k.a.
Linux) so that nobody would ever be able to make choices for me again, including the choice to use Microsoft.
With Apple, you will always be one strategic decision made in Steve Jobs' office -- one software upgrade -- away from being a Microsoft user in some form.
I don't think it's stupid to switch to Macs (in some ways, they're nice computers), but yes, it really truly is stupid to switch to Macs to get away from Microsoft and/or whatever it is about Microsoft that you may find objectionable.
Mac OS is culturally identical to Windows in every single way.
The only real distinction it has from Windows is that Mac OS happens to be technically superior.
But a trap is still a trap, and slave to proprietary software is still a slave.
You're not making the decisions; they are.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910284</id>
	<title>Re:Does that mean</title>
	<author>Sandbags</author>
	<datestamp>1264502100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, Google Voice is NOT a Voip technology.  The app simple helps you place/connect calls to your multiple phones.  The advantage of the app on the iPhone really boils down to a) managing your Google contacts better and b) when you place a call from your cell phone, the target sees your Google voice on their caller ID, not your cell number, so when they call back, it;s routed through Google voice.  With a native app and notifications, if you choose not to pass through caller ID the app would be able to tell you who's calling while caller ID simply displays your Google voice number.  (this was originally a good idea that might have enabled free calling to/from your Google voice number if you added it to your "list" but providers quickly began IDing google voice numbers and auto-remove them from your list as it;s against their ToS to use call redirection technology.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , Google Voice is NOT a Voip technology .
The app simple helps you place/connect calls to your multiple phones .
The advantage of the app on the iPhone really boils down to a ) managing your Google contacts better and b ) when you place a call from your cell phone , the target sees your Google voice on their caller ID , not your cell number , so when they call back , it ; s routed through Google voice .
With a native app and notifications , if you choose not to pass through caller ID the app would be able to tell you who 's calling while caller ID simply displays your Google voice number .
( this was originally a good idea that might have enabled free calling to/from your Google voice number if you added it to your " list " but providers quickly began IDing google voice numbers and auto-remove them from your list as it ; s against their ToS to use call redirection technology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, Google Voice is NOT a Voip technology.
The app simple helps you place/connect calls to your multiple phones.
The advantage of the app on the iPhone really boils down to a) managing your Google contacts better and b) when you place a call from your cell phone, the target sees your Google voice on their caller ID, not your cell number, so when they call back, it;s routed through Google voice.
With a native app and notifications, if you choose not to pass through caller ID the app would be able to tell you who's calling while caller ID simply displays your Google voice number.
(this was originally a good idea that might have enabled free calling to/from your Google voice number if you added it to your "list" but providers quickly began IDing google voice numbers and auto-remove them from your list as it;s against their ToS to use call redirection technology.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910036</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910696</id>
	<title>Re:Google getting a bit too cocky.</title>
	<author>greywire</author>
	<datestamp>1264503720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Is it just me or does Google have this disgusting sense of righteousness that makes them think they should have the right to deliver their product to whoever wants it. "</p><p>There, fixed that for you..</p><p>Or more accurately, the converse statement:</p><p>"Is it just me or does Apple have this disgusting sense of righteousness that makes them think they can dictate what their customers are allowed to do with their own devices after they've paid for them?"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Is it just me or does Google have this disgusting sense of righteousness that makes them think they should have the right to deliver their product to whoever wants it .
" There , fixed that for you..Or more accurately , the converse statement : " Is it just me or does Apple have this disgusting sense of righteousness that makes them think they can dictate what their customers are allowed to do with their own devices after they 've paid for them ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Is it just me or does Google have this disgusting sense of righteousness that makes them think they should have the right to deliver their product to whoever wants it.
"There, fixed that for you..Or more accurately, the converse statement:"Is it just me or does Apple have this disgusting sense of righteousness that makes them think they can dictate what their customers are allowed to do with their own devices after they've paid for them?
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910010</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910460</id>
	<title>Re:Kind of scary that it works....</title>
	<author>Trashman</author>
	<datestamp>1264502820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wrong, Thanks for playing.  The website does not use the mic.    You clearly have never used it or you wouldn't have posted this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wrong , Thanks for playing .
The website does not use the mic .
You clearly have never used it or you would n't have posted this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wrong, Thanks for playing.
The website does not use the mic.
You clearly have never used it or you wouldn't have posted this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910362</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Apple, let the Apps through already!</title>
	<author>whisper\_jeff</author>
	<datestamp>1264502400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Oh Apple, let the Apps through already! You're just shooting yourself in the foot otherwise.</p></div><p>
Sorry, but I keep seeing people say this but I have yet to see any evidence to support it (and, quite frankly, have seen nothing but mountains of evidence to the contrary...). <br> <br>
\_YOU\_ may be annoyed with Apple because they operate in a closed garden but the \_VAST\_ majority of users really don't care all that much. Slashdot reader =/= average consumer.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh Apple , let the Apps through already !
You 're just shooting yourself in the foot otherwise .
Sorry , but I keep seeing people say this but I have yet to see any evidence to support it ( and , quite frankly , have seen nothing but mountains of evidence to the contrary... ) .
\ _YOU \ _ may be annoyed with Apple because they operate in a closed garden but the \ _VAST \ _ majority of users really do n't care all that much .
Slashdot reader = / = average consumer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh Apple, let the Apps through already!
You're just shooting yourself in the foot otherwise.
Sorry, but I keep seeing people say this but I have yet to see any evidence to support it (and, quite frankly, have seen nothing but mountains of evidence to the contrary...).
\_YOU\_ may be annoyed with Apple because they operate in a closed garden but the \_VAST\_ majority of users really don't care all that much.
Slashdot reader =/= average consumer.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909964</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910508</id>
	<title>Re:Experience?</title>
	<author>spuke4000</author>
	<datestamp>1264502940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use it, and I quite like it.  I don't use the number that google provides, but I have linked my voice mail to gvoice so that rather than going to my Tmobile vmail messages go to Google voice.  The transcriber is not so great.  You can usually get the gist of a message, but it makes a lot of mistakes.  That said, the other voice mail functionality is much better than Tmobile's standard offering, so on the whole the voice mail is much better.</p><p>Also, even without using the google voice number I can initate calls to Canada for free, which is nice.</p><p>If I did use the google voice number you get a lot more features (recording calls, etc.  You can look them up).  But I find it quite awkward.  For instance, if I give everyone my google voice number then they can call and text me there.  But if I call them directly, without going through google voice, their caller ID is going to show my tmobile assigned number.  I could initiate the call through google voice, but that's a bit of a pain in the ass.</p><p>I have a blackberry, and the google voice app for bberry should make some of this easier, but it's pretty terrible.  It's very slow, and lately it's been throwing errors saying it can validate google voice's SSL certificate.  It's really not ready for primetime.</p><p>So, I do like google voice, considering it's free it adds some value, especially the voice mail functionality.   But it's got a lot of rough edges.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use it , and I quite like it .
I do n't use the number that google provides , but I have linked my voice mail to gvoice so that rather than going to my Tmobile vmail messages go to Google voice .
The transcriber is not so great .
You can usually get the gist of a message , but it makes a lot of mistakes .
That said , the other voice mail functionality is much better than Tmobile 's standard offering , so on the whole the voice mail is much better.Also , even without using the google voice number I can initate calls to Canada for free , which is nice.If I did use the google voice number you get a lot more features ( recording calls , etc .
You can look them up ) .
But I find it quite awkward .
For instance , if I give everyone my google voice number then they can call and text me there .
But if I call them directly , without going through google voice , their caller ID is going to show my tmobile assigned number .
I could initiate the call through google voice , but that 's a bit of a pain in the ass.I have a blackberry , and the google voice app for bberry should make some of this easier , but it 's pretty terrible .
It 's very slow , and lately it 's been throwing errors saying it can validate google voice 's SSL certificate .
It 's really not ready for primetime.So , I do like google voice , considering it 's free it adds some value , especially the voice mail functionality .
But it 's got a lot of rough edges .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use it, and I quite like it.
I don't use the number that google provides, but I have linked my voice mail to gvoice so that rather than going to my Tmobile vmail messages go to Google voice.
The transcriber is not so great.
You can usually get the gist of a message, but it makes a lot of mistakes.
That said, the other voice mail functionality is much better than Tmobile's standard offering, so on the whole the voice mail is much better.Also, even without using the google voice number I can initate calls to Canada for free, which is nice.If I did use the google voice number you get a lot more features (recording calls, etc.
You can look them up).
But I find it quite awkward.
For instance, if I give everyone my google voice number then they can call and text me there.
But if I call them directly, without going through google voice, their caller ID is going to show my tmobile assigned number.
I could initiate the call through google voice, but that's a bit of a pain in the ass.I have a blackberry, and the google voice app for bberry should make some of this easier, but it's pretty terrible.
It's very slow, and lately it's been throwing errors saying it can validate google voice's SSL certificate.
It's really not ready for primetime.So, I do like google voice, considering it's free it adds some value, especially the voice mail functionality.
But it's got a lot of rough edges.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910416</id>
	<title>Re:Ipod Touch too?</title>
	<author>cbhacking</author>
	<datestamp>1264502640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But, you don't have phone capability... which is what is required for this. The "app" just uses the phone capability to place a call to a Google-owned number, which then routes the call to your destination such that it shows as coming from your Google Voice number, rather than your iPhone number.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But , you do n't have phone capability... which is what is required for this .
The " app " just uses the phone capability to place a call to a Google-owned number , which then routes the call to your destination such that it shows as coming from your Google Voice number , rather than your iPhone number .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But, you don't have phone capability... which is what is required for this.
The "app" just uses the phone capability to place a call to a Google-owned number, which then routes the call to your destination such that it shows as coming from your Google Voice number, rather than your iPhone number.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30912460</id>
	<title>Re:Kind of scary that it works....</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1264515000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Which is exactly how it works on every phone, even android.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Which is exactly how it works on every phone , even android .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which is exactly how it works on every phone, even android.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910240</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910542</id>
	<title>Re:Experience?</title>
	<author>pdragon04</author>
	<datestamp>1264503060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I got a GV number to replace a second line I bought for my business. Just have it forward to my existing cell number and don't have to spend that extra money anymore. Worked great even before I got an Android phone and now it works even better with it nearly fully integrated into the phone.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I got a GV number to replace a second line I bought for my business .
Just have it forward to my existing cell number and do n't have to spend that extra money anymore .
Worked great even before I got an Android phone and now it works even better with it nearly fully integrated into the phone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I got a GV number to replace a second line I bought for my business.
Just have it forward to my existing cell number and don't have to spend that extra money anymore.
Worked great even before I got an Android phone and now it works even better with it nearly fully integrated into the phone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910152</id>
	<title>Re:Kind of scary that it works....</title>
	<author>\_bug\_</author>
	<datestamp>1264501560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Flash has been allowing this for years. Along with web cam access.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Flash has been allowing this for years .
Along with web cam access .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Flash has been allowing this for years.
Along with web cam access.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911566</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Apple, let the Apps through already!</title>
	<author>interkin3tic</author>
	<datestamp>1264508760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You're just shooting yourself in the foot otherwise.</p></div><p>No see, there's an app for that, but apple rejected it, so they are in fact not shooting themselves in the foot.  They might be shooting their users in the feet, but we convinced ourselves it is the hip thing to do now.  The bullets and the bandages are white, so it matches.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're just shooting yourself in the foot otherwise.No see , there 's an app for that , but apple rejected it , so they are in fact not shooting themselves in the foot .
They might be shooting their users in the feet , but we convinced ourselves it is the hip thing to do now .
The bullets and the bandages are white , so it matches .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're just shooting yourself in the foot otherwise.No see, there's an app for that, but apple rejected it, so they are in fact not shooting themselves in the foot.
They might be shooting their users in the feet, but we convinced ourselves it is the hip thing to do now.
The bullets and the bandages are white, so it matches.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909964</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910410</id>
	<title>Re:Google getting a bit too cocky.</title>
	<author>soupd</author>
	<datestamp>1264502640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Most people outside of Slashdot don't know how ridiculous Apple's policies are with the iPhone,</p></div><p>Do you think perhaps that for the tens of millions of people who've bought an iPhone and seemingly like it, really don't care that much? Apple are making $$$ hand over fist and the phone is still selling like crazy.

Little in this world comes without strings attached and if you don't like the strings that come with the iPhone then just jailbreak the bloody thing or move on and buy something else but quit whining that the world doesn't work how you think it should.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Most people outside of Slashdot do n't know how ridiculous Apple 's policies are with the iPhone,Do you think perhaps that for the tens of millions of people who 've bought an iPhone and seemingly like it , really do n't care that much ?
Apple are making $ $ $ hand over fist and the phone is still selling like crazy .
Little in this world comes without strings attached and if you do n't like the strings that come with the iPhone then just jailbreak the bloody thing or move on and buy something else but quit whining that the world does n't work how you think it should .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most people outside of Slashdot don't know how ridiculous Apple's policies are with the iPhone,Do you think perhaps that for the tens of millions of people who've bought an iPhone and seemingly like it, really don't care that much?
Apple are making $$$ hand over fist and the phone is still selling like crazy.
Little in this world comes without strings attached and if you don't like the strings that come with the iPhone then just jailbreak the bloody thing or move on and buy something else but quit whining that the world doesn't work how you think it should.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910084</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910256</id>
	<title>Don't listen to this guy, Apple.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264501920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple, the iPhone is the greatest cell phone in history.  You cannot build them fast enough and your profit is rising year on year by 50\%.  This is all directly attributable to your brilliant tightly managed closed application ecosystem strategy.  YOU hold all the cards, and developers have no choice but to play by the rules, meaning that you can tailor the end user experience to maximize profitability, no matter how much developers complain about the process.</p><p>I sure hope that when the iTablet is released tomorrow, you will upscale this app model to it as well, and really as an investor, I'd like to see the same thing brought to OS X in general, so that developers for all Apple platforms have to go through you FIRST before they can be allowed to make software that may damage the reputation of the company.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple , the iPhone is the greatest cell phone in history .
You can not build them fast enough and your profit is rising year on year by 50 \ % .
This is all directly attributable to your brilliant tightly managed closed application ecosystem strategy .
YOU hold all the cards , and developers have no choice but to play by the rules , meaning that you can tailor the end user experience to maximize profitability , no matter how much developers complain about the process.I sure hope that when the iTablet is released tomorrow , you will upscale this app model to it as well , and really as an investor , I 'd like to see the same thing brought to OS X in general , so that developers for all Apple platforms have to go through you FIRST before they can be allowed to make software that may damage the reputation of the company .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple, the iPhone is the greatest cell phone in history.
You cannot build them fast enough and your profit is rising year on year by 50\%.
This is all directly attributable to your brilliant tightly managed closed application ecosystem strategy.
YOU hold all the cards, and developers have no choice but to play by the rules, meaning that you can tailor the end user experience to maximize profitability, no matter how much developers complain about the process.I sure hope that when the iTablet is released tomorrow, you will upscale this app model to it as well, and really as an investor, I'd like to see the same thing brought to OS X in general, so that developers for all Apple platforms have to go through you FIRST before they can be allowed to make software that may damage the reputation of the company.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909964</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30913170</id>
	<title>Re:Does that mean</title>
	<author>Dare nMc</author>
	<datestamp>1264522260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You missed the best features 1) Voice to text of all voicemail, search-able... 2) the lowest international call rates.  3) follow me on incoming calls (can dial your home+work+cell you pick the cheapest/convenient) 4) app to transfer, 3 way calling... although this is where voice or data cdma might suck. (not sure if the google app could do some in-band dtmf to transfer data on top of your open call?)<br>All theory, I have a GV number but no smart-phone to make worth messing with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You missed the best features 1 ) Voice to text of all voicemail , search-able... 2 ) the lowest international call rates .
3 ) follow me on incoming calls ( can dial your home + work + cell you pick the cheapest/convenient ) 4 ) app to transfer , 3 way calling... although this is where voice or data cdma might suck .
( not sure if the google app could do some in-band dtmf to transfer data on top of your open call ?
) All theory , I have a GV number but no smart-phone to make worth messing with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You missed the best features 1) Voice to text of all voicemail, search-able... 2) the lowest international call rates.
3) follow me on incoming calls (can dial your home+work+cell you pick the cheapest/convenient) 4) app to transfer, 3 way calling... although this is where voice or data cdma might suck.
(not sure if the google app could do some in-band dtmf to transfer data on top of your open call?
)All theory, I have a GV number but no smart-phone to make worth messing with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910284</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30912458</id>
	<title>Device vs. Service</title>
	<author>Nogami\_Saeko</author>
	<datestamp>1264515000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I see a decision looming on the horizon.  The choice between a device and a service.</p><p>Apple provides a method of access - a hardware platform to access information.  The design and implementation are second to none.<br>Google provides information to be accessed through hardware.  The type of information and the services they provide as second to none.</p><p>Which is more expendable?  The information, or the method through which people can access the information...</p><p>I have a feeling that Google may be ahead in the longrun, even if they are playing catchup in the short term.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I see a decision looming on the horizon .
The choice between a device and a service.Apple provides a method of access - a hardware platform to access information .
The design and implementation are second to none.Google provides information to be accessed through hardware .
The type of information and the services they provide as second to none.Which is more expendable ?
The information , or the method through which people can access the information...I have a feeling that Google may be ahead in the longrun , even if they are playing catchup in the short term .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I see a decision looming on the horizon.
The choice between a device and a service.Apple provides a method of access - a hardware platform to access information.
The design and implementation are second to none.Google provides information to be accessed through hardware.
The type of information and the services they provide as second to none.Which is more expendable?
The information, or the method through which people can access the information...I have a feeling that Google may be ahead in the longrun, even if they are playing catchup in the short term.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910036</id>
	<title>Does that mean</title>
	<author>Monkeedude1212</author>
	<datestamp>1264501020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I run out of minutes I can use my data package?</p><p>If I had an Iphone, which I don't...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I run out of minutes I can use my data package ? If I had an Iphone , which I do n't.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I run out of minutes I can use my data package?If I had an Iphone, which I don't...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910672</id>
	<title>Re:Experience?</title>
	<author>Trashman</author>
	<datestamp>1264503660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <a href="http://arstechnica.com/telecom/news/2009/08/a-rundown-of-google-voice-for-the-uninitiated.ars" title="arstechnica.com" rel="nofollow">  Arstechnica </a> [arstechnica.com] has a pretty good  write-up on what it is and how it works.   I've been using it for several months now.   I don't give out my real number anymore and trying to get people to delete my old number and use my Google Voice number to reach me.   As It gives much more control.</p><p>And yeah, it's somewhat cumbersome to initiate a call from the website but (much) less so than it is to do that from your phone.   A native iPhone app would solve most of the hassles of initiating calls..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Arstechnica [ arstechnica.com ] has a pretty good write-up on what it is and how it works .
I 've been using it for several months now .
I do n't give out my real number anymore and trying to get people to delete my old number and use my Google Voice number to reach me .
As It gives much more control.And yeah , it 's somewhat cumbersome to initiate a call from the website but ( much ) less so than it is to do that from your phone .
A native iPhone app would solve most of the hassles of initiating calls. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>   Arstechnica  [arstechnica.com] has a pretty good  write-up on what it is and how it works.
I've been using it for several months now.
I don't give out my real number anymore and trying to get people to delete my old number and use my Google Voice number to reach me.
As It gives much more control.And yeah, it's somewhat cumbersome to initiate a call from the website but (much) less so than it is to do that from your phone.
A native iPhone app would solve most of the hassles of initiating calls..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910554</id>
	<title>Re:Kind of scary that it works....</title>
	<author>DragonWriter</author>
	<datestamp>1264503120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>sure wouldn't have thought letting a website access the microphone was a good idea.</p></div></blockquote><p>Websites can't access the microphone, I don't think, but its immaterial, since Google Voice isn't a VoIP app and wouldn't have a use for the microphone.</p><p>Websites can request the phone to dial a number, which creates a pop-up window and requires active user confirmation to actually dial. It is this functionality which the Google Voice iPhone web app uses to place calls (it calls a Google Voice phone number, which is set up to route your call to the actual number you dialed via the web interface.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>sure would n't have thought letting a website access the microphone was a good idea.Websites ca n't access the microphone , I do n't think , but its immaterial , since Google Voice is n't a VoIP app and would n't have a use for the microphone.Websites can request the phone to dial a number , which creates a pop-up window and requires active user confirmation to actually dial .
It is this functionality which the Google Voice iPhone web app uses to place calls ( it calls a Google Voice phone number , which is set up to route your call to the actual number you dialed via the web interface .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>sure wouldn't have thought letting a website access the microphone was a good idea.Websites can't access the microphone, I don't think, but its immaterial, since Google Voice isn't a VoIP app and wouldn't have a use for the microphone.Websites can request the phone to dial a number, which creates a pop-up window and requires active user confirmation to actually dial.
It is this functionality which the Google Voice iPhone web app uses to place calls (it calls a Google Voice phone number, which is set up to route your call to the actual number you dialed via the web interface.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910482</id>
	<title>Re:Google getting a bit too cocky.</title>
	<author>TooMuchToDo</author>
	<datestamp>1264502880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Apple didn't purchase the iPhone, the user did. So Apple can go suck a bowl of dicks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple did n't purchase the iPhone , the user did .
So Apple can go suck a bowl of dicks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple didn't purchase the iPhone, the user did.
So Apple can go suck a bowl of dicks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910010</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910380</id>
	<title>Re:Experience?</title>
	<author>AlexBirch</author>
	<datestamp>1264502460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Google voice is awesome... free texting, I can mark incoming calls as spam, you can listen to a voicemail while it's being recorded and can actually pick up the call.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google voice is awesome... free texting , I can mark incoming calls as spam , you can listen to a voicemail while it 's being recorded and can actually pick up the call .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google voice is awesome... free texting, I can mark incoming calls as spam, you can listen to a voicemail while it's being recorded and can actually pick up the call.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30912624</id>
	<title>Re:iPod Touch Fails</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264516260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You needed a Gizmo5 account to do calls on the iPod Touch.  It works on mine, but they have closed new regs since Google bought them out...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You needed a Gizmo5 account to do calls on the iPod Touch .
It works on mine , but they have closed new regs since Google bought them out.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You needed a Gizmo5 account to do calls on the iPod Touch.
It works on mine, but they have closed new regs since Google bought them out...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910192</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30912724</id>
	<title>Re:Does that mean</title>
	<author>eldridgea</author>
	<datestamp>1264517160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you can find a SIP app to use with your iPhone, then yes - although the new app wasn't needed for this.<p>
Although, I had problems doing it with the iPod Touch.</p><p>

Works ok on the Droid though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you can find a SIP app to use with your iPhone , then yes - although the new app was n't needed for this .
Although , I had problems doing it with the iPod Touch .
Works ok on the Droid though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you can find a SIP app to use with your iPhone, then yes - although the new app wasn't needed for this.
Although, I had problems doing it with the iPod Touch.
Works ok on the Droid though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910036</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910898</id>
	<title>Re:Experience?</title>
	<author>L3370</author>
	<datestamp>1264504740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I use it for its primarily for the relatively cheap international calling. YMMV, but I do get some good rates to the countries I call, and it beats having to drive to the nearest oriental market for calling cards to asia.<br> <br>
SMS is where you can save some cash. I used to have an unlimited texting plan but I've nixed that.<br> <br>
It is great for those of us that have multiple contact numbers. You can add forwarding numbers to your GV account so people that want to contact you only need to know your google number. You can forward that number to any or all of the phone numbers you choose. Your home phone, cell, work number...or even a vacation spot.<br> <br>
I also like it as a junk call screener. I've nixed all my telemarketer calls. If I sign up for some service that needs my number, I give them the GV number. If that service provider sells my number off to other marketing groups they get nixed too.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I use it for its primarily for the relatively cheap international calling .
YMMV , but I do get some good rates to the countries I call , and it beats having to drive to the nearest oriental market for calling cards to asia .
SMS is where you can save some cash .
I used to have an unlimited texting plan but I 've nixed that .
It is great for those of us that have multiple contact numbers .
You can add forwarding numbers to your GV account so people that want to contact you only need to know your google number .
You can forward that number to any or all of the phone numbers you choose .
Your home phone , cell , work number...or even a vacation spot .
I also like it as a junk call screener .
I 've nixed all my telemarketer calls .
If I sign up for some service that needs my number , I give them the GV number .
If that service provider sells my number off to other marketing groups they get nixed too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use it for its primarily for the relatively cheap international calling.
YMMV, but I do get some good rates to the countries I call, and it beats having to drive to the nearest oriental market for calling cards to asia.
SMS is where you can save some cash.
I used to have an unlimited texting plan but I've nixed that.
It is great for those of us that have multiple contact numbers.
You can add forwarding numbers to your GV account so people that want to contact you only need to know your google number.
You can forward that number to any or all of the phone numbers you choose.
Your home phone, cell, work number...or even a vacation spot.
I also like it as a junk call screener.
I've nixed all my telemarketer calls.
If I sign up for some service that needs my number, I give them the GV number.
If that service provider sells my number off to other marketing groups they get nixed too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910862</id>
	<title>Re:Don't listen to this guy, Apple.</title>
	<author>BearRanger</author>
	<datestamp>1264504560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Of course someone named "Sandbags" would advocate "sandboxing" apps.  Like a good pusher how else could you corner the market?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course someone named " Sandbags " would advocate " sandboxing " apps .
Like a good pusher how else could you corner the market ?
; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course someone named "Sandbags" would advocate "sandboxing" apps.
Like a good pusher how else could you corner the market?
;-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910534</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910370</id>
	<title>Re:iPod Touch Fails</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264502460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a Skype account and unfortunately Google Voice cannot use the Skype account to make this work on an iPod touch. Its a bit of a disappointment but there is a lot at stake in this space and progress comes slowly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a Skype account and unfortunately Google Voice can not use the Skype account to make this work on an iPod touch .
Its a bit of a disappointment but there is a lot at stake in this space and progress comes slowly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a Skype account and unfortunately Google Voice cannot use the Skype account to make this work on an iPod touch.
Its a bit of a disappointment but there is a lot at stake in this space and progress comes slowly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910192</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910984</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Apple, let the Apps through already!</title>
	<author>oztiks</author>
	<datestamp>1264505220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I dont think its a shot in the foot but i understand the limits in innovation.</p><p>The good thing about the iPhone which i see is that you can't get a virus as opposed to an open development platform.</p><p>This will be the thing that Apple always prides themselves, that is their customers never really have to worry about anti-virus.</p><p>Opening dev, is opening a can of worms which Apple doesn't want. Google will do it not caring about this, and it took no more than a few days after its official release to have a virus out in the wild.</p><p>I really dont want to have to purchase Norton AV for my mobile<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... that would just suck.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I dont think its a shot in the foot but i understand the limits in innovation.The good thing about the iPhone which i see is that you ca n't get a virus as opposed to an open development platform.This will be the thing that Apple always prides themselves , that is their customers never really have to worry about anti-virus.Opening dev , is opening a can of worms which Apple does n't want .
Google will do it not caring about this , and it took no more than a few days after its official release to have a virus out in the wild.I really dont want to have to purchase Norton AV for my mobile ... that would just suck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I dont think its a shot in the foot but i understand the limits in innovation.The good thing about the iPhone which i see is that you can't get a virus as opposed to an open development platform.This will be the thing that Apple always prides themselves, that is their customers never really have to worry about anti-virus.Opening dev, is opening a can of worms which Apple doesn't want.
Google will do it not caring about this, and it took no more than a few days after its official release to have a virus out in the wild.I really dont want to have to purchase Norton AV for my mobile ... that would just suck.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909964</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910084</id>
	<title>Re:Google getting a bit too cocky.</title>
	<author>michaelhood</author>
	<datestamp>1264501320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Is it just me or does Google have this disgusting sense of righteousness that makes them think they are always right and can do whatever they want.</p><p>Apple told you No, stop trying to circumvent it.</p></div><p>Hi Steve,</p><p>I think Google is trying to increase the visibility, for the average user, of Apple's strong handed walled garden approach. Most people outside of Slashdot don't know how ridiculous Apple's policies are with the iPhone, so Google is helping Apple make an ass of themselves in a way Google can publicize.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it just me or does Google have this disgusting sense of righteousness that makes them think they are always right and can do whatever they want.Apple told you No , stop trying to circumvent it.Hi Steve,I think Google is trying to increase the visibility , for the average user , of Apple 's strong handed walled garden approach .
Most people outside of Slashdot do n't know how ridiculous Apple 's policies are with the iPhone , so Google is helping Apple make an ass of themselves in a way Google can publicize .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it just me or does Google have this disgusting sense of righteousness that makes them think they are always right and can do whatever they want.Apple told you No, stop trying to circumvent it.Hi Steve,I think Google is trying to increase the visibility, for the average user, of Apple's strong handed walled garden approach.
Most people outside of Slashdot don't know how ridiculous Apple's policies are with the iPhone, so Google is helping Apple make an ass of themselves in a way Google can publicize.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910010</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910316</id>
	<title>Forget Google's Web App</title>
	<author>pudge</author>
	<datestamp>1264502220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Use <a href="http://www.seankovacs.com/index.php/gv-mobile/" title="seankovacs.com">GV Mobile</a> [seankovacs.com], available through Cydia.  Much much better.  An actual app for starters.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Use GV Mobile [ seankovacs.com ] , available through Cydia .
Much much better .
An actual app for starters .
: - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Use GV Mobile [seankovacs.com], available through Cydia.
Much much better.
An actual app for starters.
:-)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910300</id>
	<title>Re:Google getting a bit too cocky.</title>
	<author>Aeros</author>
	<datestamp>1264502160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>yea I also think its just you. Apple didn't want them to have their app on iphone for business reasons that were bad for Apple.  People got upset about it and Google needs this to be more available in order to make it a business for them. So of course they're going to keep pushing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>yea I also think its just you .
Apple did n't want them to have their app on iphone for business reasons that were bad for Apple .
People got upset about it and Google needs this to be more available in order to make it a business for them .
So of course they 're going to keep pushing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yea I also think its just you.
Apple didn't want them to have their app on iphone for business reasons that were bad for Apple.
People got upset about it and Google needs this to be more available in order to make it a business for them.
So of course they're going to keep pushing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910010</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910414</id>
	<title>Re:Experience?</title>
	<author>Sandbags</author>
	<datestamp>1264502640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1 good thing, i can now call any of my contacts in my google contact list, and on their caller ID they see my google number, not my cell phone number.  there's also a generic dilaer so i can call anyone.<br>The individual pages from the app have unique icons if you save them to the home screen (dial pad, voice mail, contacts), so you can have single click equivalents to the native iPhone apps.<br>It;s a nice interface to the voicemail system as well, and you can also access your call history on the run (and block those pesky numbers you don't like, or add a new number to an existing contact, or manage calling groups).  Basically, you no longer need to sit at a PC to manage the account.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 good thing , i can now call any of my contacts in my google contact list , and on their caller ID they see my google number , not my cell phone number .
there 's also a generic dilaer so i can call anyone.The individual pages from the app have unique icons if you save them to the home screen ( dial pad , voice mail , contacts ) , so you can have single click equivalents to the native iPhone apps.It ; s a nice interface to the voicemail system as well , and you can also access your call history on the run ( and block those pesky numbers you do n't like , or add a new number to an existing contact , or manage calling groups ) .
Basically , you no longer need to sit at a PC to manage the account .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1 good thing, i can now call any of my contacts in my google contact list, and on their caller ID they see my google number, not my cell phone number.
there's also a generic dilaer so i can call anyone.The individual pages from the app have unique icons if you save them to the home screen (dial pad, voice mail, contacts), so you can have single click equivalents to the native iPhone apps.It;s a nice interface to the voicemail system as well, and you can also access your call history on the run (and block those pesky numbers you don't like, or add a new number to an existing contact, or manage calling groups).
Basically, you no longer need to sit at a PC to manage the account.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.31066218</id>
	<title>iphone</title>
	<author>suzieque</author>
	<datestamp>1265628360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Surely there will be a buy out between the big 2 at some point.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Surely there will be a buy out between the big 2 at some point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Surely there will be a buy out between the big 2 at some point.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909980</id>
	<title>Anyone else think...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264500780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>that the headline could have been a lot better?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>that the headline could have been a lot better ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that the headline could have been a lot better?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910454</id>
	<title>Re:Experience?</title>
	<author>brindle</author>
	<datestamp>1264502820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Its very useful. Here are a few of the ones I have come across.</p><p>Voice to text transcription of voicemails. You can read a message a lot faster than you can listen to one.</p><p>All email and voicemails can be emailed to you. Voicemails will have the sound file and the transcription</p><p>Reply to text messages through your email client</p><p>You can assign different missed-call messages for your different contact groups.</p><p>You can create a missed-call message for a single contact</p><p>You can record phone conversations</p><p>You can send specific callers directly to voice mail.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Its very useful .
Here are a few of the ones I have come across.Voice to text transcription of voicemails .
You can read a message a lot faster than you can listen to one.All email and voicemails can be emailed to you .
Voicemails will have the sound file and the transcriptionReply to text messages through your email clientYou can assign different missed-call messages for your different contact groups.You can create a missed-call message for a single contactYou can record phone conversationsYou can send specific callers directly to voice mail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its very useful.
Here are a few of the ones I have come across.Voice to text transcription of voicemails.
You can read a message a lot faster than you can listen to one.All email and voicemails can be emailed to you.
Voicemails will have the sound file and the transcriptionReply to text messages through your email clientYou can assign different missed-call messages for your different contact groups.You can create a missed-call message for a single contactYou can record phone conversationsYou can send specific callers directly to voice mail.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910268</id>
	<title>Re:Woohoo!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264502040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wait, you consider this to be a positive thing? HTML, CSS and JavaScript provide the least-desirable development platform that I've worked with in the past 20 years. I mean, compared to late-1980s technology like NeXTSTEP and its class libraries, the web is a massive step backwards. Even MFC development was more enjoyable.</p><p>And really, how is this progress? I mean, they're doing something that was possible using Flash five years ago, Java applets 10 years ago, and NPAPI plugins 15 years ago. That's not progress. That's just reinventing the wheel.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait , you consider this to be a positive thing ?
HTML , CSS and JavaScript provide the least-desirable development platform that I 've worked with in the past 20 years .
I mean , compared to late-1980s technology like NeXTSTEP and its class libraries , the web is a massive step backwards .
Even MFC development was more enjoyable.And really , how is this progress ?
I mean , they 're doing something that was possible using Flash five years ago , Java applets 10 years ago , and NPAPI plugins 15 years ago .
That 's not progress .
That 's just reinventing the wheel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait, you consider this to be a positive thing?
HTML, CSS and JavaScript provide the least-desirable development platform that I've worked with in the past 20 years.
I mean, compared to late-1980s technology like NeXTSTEP and its class libraries, the web is a massive step backwards.
Even MFC development was more enjoyable.And really, how is this progress?
I mean, they're doing something that was possible using Flash five years ago, Java applets 10 years ago, and NPAPI plugins 15 years ago.
That's not progress.
That's just reinventing the wheel.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910102</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910826</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Apple, let the Apps through already!</title>
	<author>Yvanhoe</author>
	<datestamp>1264504380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>No, Apple, please do continue to act this way. Most people are confused about whether or not you are a closed-source company. This makes things perfectly clear.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , Apple , please do continue to act this way .
Most people are confused about whether or not you are a closed-source company .
This makes things perfectly clear .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, Apple, please do continue to act this way.
Most people are confused about whether or not you are a closed-source company.
This makes things perfectly clear.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909964</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30913452</id>
	<title>Tablet predictions</title>
	<author>Singularity42</author>
	<datestamp>1264525560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Be nice--it's somewhat on-topic and I wanted to stamp my predictions.  Post McGraw (dang it).  I got the iPhone OS 4.0 already by the way.  Here we go.</p><p>The tablet will have<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.n wireless, 1280x720 resolution, OLED deluxe model, front facing camera, 32/64 GB.  Runs a variant of iPhone OS 4.0--thus 4.0 will be described as well.  $799/$999 (OLED)--no subsidies yet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Be nice--it 's somewhat on-topic and I wanted to stamp my predictions .
Post McGraw ( dang it ) .
I got the iPhone OS 4.0 already by the way .
Here we go.The tablet will have .n wireless , 1280x720 resolution , OLED deluxe model , front facing camera , 32/64 GB .
Runs a variant of iPhone OS 4.0--thus 4.0 will be described as well .
$ 799/ $ 999 ( OLED ) --no subsidies yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Be nice--it's somewhat on-topic and I wanted to stamp my predictions.
Post McGraw (dang it).
I got the iPhone OS 4.0 already by the way.
Here we go.The tablet will have .n wireless, 1280x720 resolution, OLED deluxe model, front facing camera, 32/64 GB.
Runs a variant of iPhone OS 4.0--thus 4.0 will be described as well.
$799/$999 (OLED)--no subsidies yet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910244</id>
	<title>I don't think so</title>
	<author>jollyreaper</author>
	<datestamp>1264501920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Google has found a way to let iPhone owners use Google Voice."</p><p>Really? There's a patch for that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Google has found a way to let iPhone owners use Google Voice. " Really ?
There 's a patch for that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Google has found a way to let iPhone owners use Google Voice."Really?
There's a patch for that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910802</id>
	<title>Re:Experience?</title>
	<author>natehoy</author>
	<datestamp>1264504200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Love it.  I have one phone number, and it rings all of my phones based on a schedule I set up.  When I'm at work, I get no cell signal at my desk, so I answer my work phone.  When I'm on the road, my cell is the only one I'm near, so I answer that.  When I'm at home, I answer my Gizmo line so I don't use cell minutes.</p><p>The beauty is, if you want to reach me, you don't have to know where I am.  You don't have to keep track of three or more numbers to reach me.  You just dial my Google Voice number and, if I'm reachable, I answer.  And if I'm not, you leave me a voicemail.  I get an SMS on my phone with a transcription of that voicemail, and a copy of the transcription is sent to my Gmail account.  Plus I can always call Google from any of my phones and listen to your voicemail directly, or listen to it over the Web.</p><p>And if you are a telemarketer who calls me a lot, you get my "go away" message and I never have to be aware of your existence again.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Love it .
I have one phone number , and it rings all of my phones based on a schedule I set up .
When I 'm at work , I get no cell signal at my desk , so I answer my work phone .
When I 'm on the road , my cell is the only one I 'm near , so I answer that .
When I 'm at home , I answer my Gizmo line so I do n't use cell minutes.The beauty is , if you want to reach me , you do n't have to know where I am .
You do n't have to keep track of three or more numbers to reach me .
You just dial my Google Voice number and , if I 'm reachable , I answer .
And if I 'm not , you leave me a voicemail .
I get an SMS on my phone with a transcription of that voicemail , and a copy of the transcription is sent to my Gmail account .
Plus I can always call Google from any of my phones and listen to your voicemail directly , or listen to it over the Web.And if you are a telemarketer who calls me a lot , you get my " go away " message and I never have to be aware of your existence again .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Love it.
I have one phone number, and it rings all of my phones based on a schedule I set up.
When I'm at work, I get no cell signal at my desk, so I answer my work phone.
When I'm on the road, my cell is the only one I'm near, so I answer that.
When I'm at home, I answer my Gizmo line so I don't use cell minutes.The beauty is, if you want to reach me, you don't have to know where I am.
You don't have to keep track of three or more numbers to reach me.
You just dial my Google Voice number and, if I'm reachable, I answer.
And if I'm not, you leave me a voicemail.
I get an SMS on my phone with a transcription of that voicemail, and a copy of the transcription is sent to my Gmail account.
Plus I can always call Google from any of my phones and listen to your voicemail directly, or listen to it over the Web.And if you are a telemarketer who calls me a lot, you get my "go away" message and I never have to be aware of your existence again.
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910480</id>
	<title>Re:Experience?</title>
	<author>Itninja</author>
	<datestamp>1264502880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Been using GV on my Android for about 3 months now. Works pretty good. One big complaint is poor call quality. Making a call with my T-Mobile service is fine. But making the same call, from the same location, with GV gives me echos, 1+ seconds delays, and a few other oddities. However the transcribed voice mail is cool, albeit marginally accurate.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Been using GV on my Android for about 3 months now .
Works pretty good .
One big complaint is poor call quality .
Making a call with my T-Mobile service is fine .
But making the same call , from the same location , with GV gives me echos , 1 + seconds delays , and a few other oddities .
However the transcribed voice mail is cool , albeit marginally accurate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Been using GV on my Android for about 3 months now.
Works pretty good.
One big complaint is poor call quality.
Making a call with my T-Mobile service is fine.
But making the same call, from the same location, with GV gives me echos, 1+ seconds delays, and a few other oddities.
However the transcribed voice mail is cool, albeit marginally accurate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910280</id>
	<title>Re:Google getting a bit too cocky.</title>
	<author>ElSupreme</author>
	<datestamp>1264502100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who the fuck cares if Apple said no. If I owned an iPhone and wanted Google voice I could now have it.<br>
<br>
Why anyone would want either is beyond me. I alreay give up enough freedoms.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who the fuck cares if Apple said no .
If I owned an iPhone and wanted Google voice I could now have it .
Why anyone would want either is beyond me .
I alreay give up enough freedoms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who the fuck cares if Apple said no.
If I owned an iPhone and wanted Google voice I could now have it.
Why anyone would want either is beyond me.
I alreay give up enough freedoms.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910010</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910534</id>
	<title>Re:Don't listen to this guy, Apple.</title>
	<author>Sandbags</author>
	<datestamp>1264503060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, I would not mind seeing a case for ALL OS vendors where all apps must be signed in order to be run.  Not really a process of review, but simply complete validation of who published an app so if it turns out to have illegal content the owner can be quickly found, and so that viruses basically become obsolete unless they're honest vulnerability exploits that can bypass that system (ie, no more mailware or trojans or gernal viruses, only outright hacks could infect a system).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , I would not mind seeing a case for ALL OS vendors where all apps must be signed in order to be run .
Not really a process of review , but simply complete validation of who published an app so if it turns out to have illegal content the owner can be quickly found , and so that viruses basically become obsolete unless they 're honest vulnerability exploits that can bypass that system ( ie , no more mailware or trojans or gernal viruses , only outright hacks could infect a system ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, I would not mind seeing a case for ALL OS vendors where all apps must be signed in order to be run.
Not really a process of review, but simply complete validation of who published an app so if it turns out to have illegal content the owner can be quickly found, and so that viruses basically become obsolete unless they're honest vulnerability exploits that can bypass that system (ie, no more mailware or trojans or gernal viruses, only outright hacks could infect a system).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30913330</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Apple, let the Apps through already!</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1264524000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>\_YOU\_ may be annoyed with Apple because they operate in a closed garden but the \_VAST\_ majority of users really don't care all that much. </i></p><p>Indeed. They don't care, and they don't buy Apple.</p><p><i>Slashdot reader =/= average consumer.</i></p><p>Indeed. Only the Slashdot reader is obsessed with Apple.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>\ _YOU \ _ may be annoyed with Apple because they operate in a closed garden but the \ _VAST \ _ majority of users really do n't care all that much .
Indeed. They do n't care , and they do n't buy Apple.Slashdot reader = / = average consumer.Indeed .
Only the Slashdot reader is obsessed with Apple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>\_YOU\_ may be annoyed with Apple because they operate in a closed garden but the \_VAST\_ majority of users really don't care all that much.
Indeed. They don't care, and they don't buy Apple.Slashdot reader =/= average consumer.Indeed.
Only the Slashdot reader is obsessed with Apple.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911214</id>
	<title>Re:Don't listen to this guy, Apple.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264506600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Only problem with that case is, who'd be in charge of the app signing?</p><p>A completely impartial, large-scale(there's going to be a lot of apps), and *reliable* OS vendor/company?</p><p>Yeah, comment back when you find that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Only problem with that case is , who 'd be in charge of the app signing ? A completely impartial , large-scale ( there 's going to be a lot of apps ) , and * reliable * OS vendor/company ? Yeah , comment back when you find that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only problem with that case is, who'd be in charge of the app signing?A completely impartial, large-scale(there's going to be a lot of apps), and *reliable* OS vendor/company?Yeah, comment back when you find that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910534</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910010</id>
	<title>Google getting a bit too cocky.</title>
	<author>X-Power</author>
	<datestamp>1264500900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is it just me or does Google have this disgusting sense of righteousness that makes them think they are always right and can do whatever they want.
<br>

Apple told you No, stop trying to circumvent it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it just me or does Google have this disgusting sense of righteousness that makes them think they are always right and can do whatever they want .
Apple told you No , stop trying to circumvent it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it just me or does Google have this disgusting sense of righteousness that makes them think they are always right and can do whatever they want.
Apple told you No, stop trying to circumvent it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911932</id>
	<title>Re:Dear Apple</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264511100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Amen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Amen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Amen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911336</id>
	<title>Re:Dear Apple</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264507320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or put "www.google.com" in the URL field.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or put " www.google.com " in the URL field .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or put "www.google.com" in the URL field.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910392</id>
	<title>Re:Kind of scary that it works....</title>
	<author>nneonneo</author>
	<datestamp>1264502520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At the very least, Flash prompts for permission before accessing them (well, <a href="http://www.itbusiness.ca/IT/client/en/Home/News.asp?id=50244" title="itbusiness.ca">usually</a> [itbusiness.ca]).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At the very least , Flash prompts for permission before accessing them ( well , usually [ itbusiness.ca ] ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At the very least, Flash prompts for permission before accessing them (well, usually [itbusiness.ca]).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910152</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910346</id>
	<title>Re:Experience?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264502340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use Google Voice routed to my Gizmo5 number on a jailbroken iPhone.  The combined effect is free VOIP phone calls over 3G or wifi.  If the call quality remains reliable, I will attempt to drop the voice plan from my ATT contract entirely.</p><p>Having said that, this webapp does not provide that functionality.  It defaults to using the native phone app, skipping the Gizmo5 route entirely.  My current setup uses GV Mobile to initiate calls and Gizmo by Acrobits to answer the calls.</p><p>Even if you don't want to go the VOIP route, the free text messaging alone should save you money on your bill.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use Google Voice routed to my Gizmo5 number on a jailbroken iPhone .
The combined effect is free VOIP phone calls over 3G or wifi .
If the call quality remains reliable , I will attempt to drop the voice plan from my ATT contract entirely.Having said that , this webapp does not provide that functionality .
It defaults to using the native phone app , skipping the Gizmo5 route entirely .
My current setup uses GV Mobile to initiate calls and Gizmo by Acrobits to answer the calls.Even if you do n't want to go the VOIP route , the free text messaging alone should save you money on your bill .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use Google Voice routed to my Gizmo5 number on a jailbroken iPhone.
The combined effect is free VOIP phone calls over 3G or wifi.
If the call quality remains reliable, I will attempt to drop the voice plan from my ATT contract entirely.Having said that, this webapp does not provide that functionality.
It defaults to using the native phone app, skipping the Gizmo5 route entirely.
My current setup uses GV Mobile to initiate calls and Gizmo by Acrobits to answer the calls.Even if you don't want to go the VOIP route, the free text messaging alone should save you money on your bill.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200</id>
	<title>Experience?</title>
	<author>whisper\_jeff</author>
	<datestamp>1264501740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Anyone have some first-hand experience with Google Voice willing to share their thoughts? I find it very intriguing but am very hesitant to use it without knowing more...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone have some first-hand experience with Google Voice willing to share their thoughts ?
I find it very intriguing but am very hesitant to use it without knowing more.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone have some first-hand experience with Google Voice willing to share their thoughts?
I find it very intriguing but am very hesitant to use it without knowing more...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910312</id>
	<title>Re:Google getting a bit too cocky.</title>
	<author>Jaysyn</author>
	<datestamp>1264502220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's just you.  Personally, I think it's great to see someone get around Apple's AppStore on a non-hacked iPhone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's just you .
Personally , I think it 's great to see someone get around Apple 's AppStore on a non-hacked iPhone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's just you.
Personally, I think it's great to see someone get around Apple's AppStore on a non-hacked iPhone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910010</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910102</id>
	<title>Woohoo!</title>
	<author>SixDimensionalArray</author>
	<datestamp>1264501380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hmm.. first complex HTML5 app maybe?</p><p>I'm probably not the first person to say it, but thank GOODNESS somebody is pushing HTML and web markup tech forward again.  Even though some folks don't like some of the new elements present in HTML5, at least it's progressing again.  Let's hope this continues!</p><p>-6d</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmm.. first complex HTML5 app maybe ? I 'm probably not the first person to say it , but thank GOODNESS somebody is pushing HTML and web markup tech forward again .
Even though some folks do n't like some of the new elements present in HTML5 , at least it 's progressing again .
Let 's hope this continues ! -6d</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmm.. first complex HTML5 app maybe?I'm probably not the first person to say it, but thank GOODNESS somebody is pushing HTML and web markup tech forward again.
Even though some folks don't like some of the new elements present in HTML5, at least it's progressing again.
Let's hope this continues!-6d</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910426</id>
	<title>Re:Don't listen to this guy, Apple.</title>
	<author>ViViDboarder</author>
	<datestamp>1264502700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is it just me or did this post seem like sarcasm?<br> <br>
I really hope so.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it just me or did this post seem like sarcasm ?
I really hope so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it just me or did this post seem like sarcasm?
I really hope so.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911052</id>
	<title>Re:Woohoo!</title>
	<author>Firehed</author>
	<datestamp>1264505580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is one of the less complicated web apps I've seen, to be honest.  I'm not knocking Google for having made it, but very little if any of GV is using stuff specific to HTML5 (there may be some offline storage, but it's certainly not using it aggressively if at all in my testing) - it's mostly a polished interface made for small screens to do a lot of javascript.  Ultimately, it's just putting a lot of easy-to-click links that use the tel:// URI that Apple made up a couple of years ago as part of their short-lived web app obsession.</p><p>Mobile Gmail is a whole hell of a lot more complex. It uses the offline storage quite heavily and effectively.</p><p>That said, I'm happy to see anything that pushes forward the spec and adoption of HTML5-compatible browsers,</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is one of the less complicated web apps I 've seen , to be honest .
I 'm not knocking Google for having made it , but very little if any of GV is using stuff specific to HTML5 ( there may be some offline storage , but it 's certainly not using it aggressively if at all in my testing ) - it 's mostly a polished interface made for small screens to do a lot of javascript .
Ultimately , it 's just putting a lot of easy-to-click links that use the tel : // URI that Apple made up a couple of years ago as part of their short-lived web app obsession.Mobile Gmail is a whole hell of a lot more complex .
It uses the offline storage quite heavily and effectively.That said , I 'm happy to see anything that pushes forward the spec and adoption of HTML5-compatible browsers,</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is one of the less complicated web apps I've seen, to be honest.
I'm not knocking Google for having made it, but very little if any of GV is using stuff specific to HTML5 (there may be some offline storage, but it's certainly not using it aggressively if at all in my testing) - it's mostly a polished interface made for small screens to do a lot of javascript.
Ultimately, it's just putting a lot of easy-to-click links that use the tel:// URI that Apple made up a couple of years ago as part of their short-lived web app obsession.Mobile Gmail is a whole hell of a lot more complex.
It uses the offline storage quite heavily and effectively.That said, I'm happy to see anything that pushes forward the spec and adoption of HTML5-compatible browsers,</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910102</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910242</id>
	<title>Not really.</title>
	<author>Stavr0</author>
	<datestamp>1264501920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is not the same as the iPhone Skype implementation:  The only trick they did is to allow access to the Google Voice web page.  The useful stuff, making a call and receiving a call is done by forwarding incoming calls to your iPhone's number and by setting up a 3-way call where GV's PBX where it dials your iPhone and the dialed number.
<p>
In short: this does not work with an iPod Touch.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is not the same as the iPhone Skype implementation : The only trick they did is to allow access to the Google Voice web page .
The useful stuff , making a call and receiving a call is done by forwarding incoming calls to your iPhone 's number and by setting up a 3-way call where GV 's PBX where it dials your iPhone and the dialed number .
In short : this does not work with an iPod Touch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is not the same as the iPhone Skype implementation:  The only trick they did is to allow access to the Google Voice web page.
The useful stuff, making a call and receiving a call is done by forwarding incoming calls to your iPhone's number and by setting up a 3-way call where GV's PBX where it dials your iPhone and the dialed number.
In short: this does not work with an iPod Touch.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30912444</id>
	<title>Re:Google getting a bit too cocky.</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1264514880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If by 'getting around' you mean using the original method of developing apps for the iPhone, before there was an SDK, and which has never had any restrictions at all<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... then sure, they got around it<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>They didn't make an app, they updated their google voice web page to better support the iPhone.</p><p>I've been using GVoice for a while on my phone, its not like you couldn't do the important things already.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If by 'getting around ' you mean using the original method of developing apps for the iPhone , before there was an SDK , and which has never had any restrictions at all ... then sure , they got around it ...They did n't make an app , they updated their google voice web page to better support the iPhone.I 've been using GVoice for a while on my phone , its not like you could n't do the important things already .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If by 'getting around' you mean using the original method of developing apps for the iPhone, before there was an SDK, and which has never had any restrictions at all ... then sure, they got around it ...They didn't make an app, they updated their google voice web page to better support the iPhone.I've been using GVoice for a while on my phone, its not like you couldn't do the important things already.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910312</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910390</id>
	<title>Re:Experience?</title>
	<author>Trashman</author>
	<datestamp>1264502520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Anyone have some first-hand experience with Google Voice willing to share their thoughts? I find it very intriguing but am very hesitant to use it without knowing more...</p></div><p>What do you want to know?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone have some first-hand experience with Google Voice willing to share their thoughts ?
I find it very intriguing but am very hesitant to use it without knowing more...What do you want to know ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone have some first-hand experience with Google Voice willing to share their thoughts?
I find it very intriguing but am very hesitant to use it without knowing more...What do you want to know?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910068</id>
	<title>Kind of scary that it works....</title>
	<author>argent</author>
	<datestamp>1264501200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I sure wouldn't have thought letting a website access the microphone was a good idea. Next up... web bugs that really bug you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I sure would n't have thought letting a website access the microphone was a good idea .
Next up... web bugs that really bug you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I sure wouldn't have thought letting a website access the microphone was a good idea.
Next up... web bugs that really bug you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910158</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Apple, let the Apps through already!</title>
	<author>Pojut</author>
	<datestamp>1264501560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Agreed.  The closed nature of the app store has <i>some</i> semblance of keeping things in order...but really all it does is limit innovation.  It isn't too hard to tell when an app is going to be a crapp (see what I did there?), but that's Apple for ya...iron fist wrapped in a velvet glove.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed .
The closed nature of the app store has some semblance of keeping things in order...but really all it does is limit innovation .
It is n't too hard to tell when an app is going to be a crapp ( see what I did there ?
) , but that 's Apple for ya...iron fist wrapped in a velvet glove .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed.
The closed nature of the app store has some semblance of keeping things in order...but really all it does is limit innovation.
It isn't too hard to tell when an app is going to be a crapp (see what I did there?
), but that's Apple for ya...iron fist wrapped in a velvet glove.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909964</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909988</id>
	<title>Dear Apple</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264500840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I switched to Mac so I wouldn't have to use a Microsoft product ever again.</p><p>I'll keep using Google as my search engine, even if it means I have to use a bookmark instead of the search field!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I switched to Mac so I would n't have to use a Microsoft product ever again.I 'll keep using Google as my search engine , even if it means I have to use a bookmark instead of the search field !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I switched to Mac so I wouldn't have to use a Microsoft product ever again.I'll keep using Google as my search engine, even if it means I have to use a bookmark instead of the search field!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910918</id>
	<title>Re:Don't listen to this guy, Apple.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264504800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ladies and gentlemen, this post is exactly why Apple fanboys are considered rabid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ladies and gentlemen , this post is exactly why Apple fanboys are considered rabid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ladies and gentlemen, this post is exactly why Apple fanboys are considered rabid.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30914340</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Apple, let the Apps through already!</title>
	<author>mspohr</author>
	<datestamp>1264622760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You may recall (or not) that when the iPhone was originally released, there was no dev kit, no app store, and no provision to add apps.  Only after a great uproar was the current (wildly successful) dev kit and app store released.  However, you have to understand that this is still the mindset... it's all about control of the customer and the platform.  You will never have a 'libre' iPhone.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You may recall ( or not ) that when the iPhone was originally released , there was no dev kit , no app store , and no provision to add apps .
Only after a great uproar was the current ( wildly successful ) dev kit and app store released .
However , you have to understand that this is still the mindset... it 's all about control of the customer and the platform .
You will never have a 'libre ' iPhone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You may recall (or not) that when the iPhone was originally released, there was no dev kit, no app store, and no provision to add apps.
Only after a great uproar was the current (wildly successful) dev kit and app store released.
However, you have to understand that this is still the mindset... it's all about control of the customer and the platform.
You will never have a 'libre' iPhone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909964</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910548</id>
	<title>Now we need a Gizmo app</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264503060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use Google Voice in conjunction with Gizmo on my PC, and it works brilliantly for free, cell-phone free calling.  So I guess now we need a Gizmo app to complete the circuit, no?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use Google Voice in conjunction with Gizmo on my PC , and it works brilliantly for free , cell-phone free calling .
So I guess now we need a Gizmo app to complete the circuit , no ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use Google Voice in conjunction with Gizmo on my PC, and it works brilliantly for free, cell-phone free calling.
So I guess now we need a Gizmo app to complete the circuit, no?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909964</id>
	<title>Oh Apple, let the Apps through already!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264500720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're just shooting yourself in the foot otherwise.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're just shooting yourself in the foot otherwise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're just shooting yourself in the foot otherwise.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30912942</id>
	<title>not yet</title>
	<author>binarybum</author>
	<datestamp>1264519800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>don't get too excited, it's not functional yet.  Trying this out, you just get a "coming soon" message on the iphone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>do n't get too excited , it 's not functional yet .
Trying this out , you just get a " coming soon " message on the iphone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>don't get too excited, it's not functional yet.
Trying this out, you just get a "coming soon" message on the iphone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911000</id>
	<title>Re:Google getting a bit too cocky.</title>
	<author>Locutus</author>
	<datestamp>1264505280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>if the first Google Voice iPhone app was a VOIP app, then this is probably something much different. I doubt this is a VOIP implementation of Google Voice and is probably just a small interface to their call forwarding service built into Google Voice. In this setup, you tell Google Voice what number you want to call but also them them what local phone you want to use( one on your desk or iPhone ) and Google voice will first call that local phone and then call the other person. In this case, they would be just calling the iPhone over the AT&amp;T network but the calls would all be going through Google Voices exchange and the remote phone would see your Google Voice phone number, not your iPhone number.<br><br>The only problem Apple might have with this is probably via AT&amp;T who may not like how Google is starting to move into the phone network business. Apple shouldn't care much because it's basically a simple web app to a server which then results in the wireless phone service being used. BFD IMO<br><br>LoB</htmltext>
<tokenext>if the first Google Voice iPhone app was a VOIP app , then this is probably something much different .
I doubt this is a VOIP implementation of Google Voice and is probably just a small interface to their call forwarding service built into Google Voice .
In this setup , you tell Google Voice what number you want to call but also them them what local phone you want to use ( one on your desk or iPhone ) and Google voice will first call that local phone and then call the other person .
In this case , they would be just calling the iPhone over the AT&amp;T network but the calls would all be going through Google Voices exchange and the remote phone would see your Google Voice phone number , not your iPhone number.The only problem Apple might have with this is probably via AT&amp;T who may not like how Google is starting to move into the phone network business .
Apple should n't care much because it 's basically a simple web app to a server which then results in the wireless phone service being used .
BFD IMOLoB</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if the first Google Voice iPhone app was a VOIP app, then this is probably something much different.
I doubt this is a VOIP implementation of Google Voice and is probably just a small interface to their call forwarding service built into Google Voice.
In this setup, you tell Google Voice what number you want to call but also them them what local phone you want to use( one on your desk or iPhone ) and Google voice will first call that local phone and then call the other person.
In this case, they would be just calling the iPhone over the AT&amp;T network but the calls would all be going through Google Voices exchange and the remote phone would see your Google Voice phone number, not your iPhone number.The only problem Apple might have with this is probably via AT&amp;T who may not like how Google is starting to move into the phone network business.
Apple shouldn't care much because it's basically a simple web app to a server which then results in the wireless phone service being used.
BFD IMOLoB</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910010</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30912460
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910240
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910300
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910010
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910672
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30912624
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910192
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910010
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910460
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910392
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910152
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910534
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909964
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911052
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910102
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910152
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30912444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910312
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910010
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30913776
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909964
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910414
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30912230
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910410
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910084
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910010
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910894
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910240
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910696
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910010
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910192
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910802
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30914172
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909988
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30913330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909964
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909964
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30912724
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910036
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911898
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909988
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909964
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910704
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909988
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910158
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909964
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30913170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910284
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910036
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30914340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909964
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910984
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909964
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911932
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909988
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910280
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910010
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30912318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909964
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911502
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910614
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909964
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910898
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909964
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910036
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30913388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910410
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910084
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910010
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911124
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910268
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910102
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910534
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909964
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909964
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910494
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30912136
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910268
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910102
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911566
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909964
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911044
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910010
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30912392
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910084
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910010
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909988
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911000
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910010
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30914968
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911014
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909964
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910192
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1944230_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1944230.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910244
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1944230.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910068
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910152
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910392
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911484
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910460
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910554
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910240
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910894
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30912460
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1944230.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910316
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1944230.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910330
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910416
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1944230.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910102
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911052
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910268
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30912136
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911124
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1944230.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30913452
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1944230.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910242
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1944230.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910010
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910482
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910280
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911000
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910084
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30912392
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910410
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30912230
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30913388
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911044
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910696
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910312
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30912444
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910300
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1944230.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910614
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911502
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1944230.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910200
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910374
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910846
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910380
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910454
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910802
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910494
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30914968
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910508
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910542
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910480
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910390
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910672
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910414
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910898
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910346
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1944230.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910036
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910546
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30912724
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910284
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30913170
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1944230.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30912942
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1944230.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910548
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1944230.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909964
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910984
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911148
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910362
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30913330
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30913776
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30914340
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910826
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911566
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911486
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910256
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911014
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910918
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910426
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910534
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911214
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910862
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30912318
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910158
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1944230.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30909988
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911932
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911336
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30914172
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910704
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910472
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30911898
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1944230.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910192
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30912624
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910612
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1944230.30910370
</commentlist>
</conversation>
