<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_30_0111256</id>
	<title>Novell Bringing<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.Net Developers To Apple iPad</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1264863000000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>GMGruman writes <i>"Paul Krill reports that <a href="http://www.infoworld.com/d/developer-world/novell-bringing-net-developers-apple-ipad-391">Apple's new iPad could be easier to write apps for</a>, thanks to Novell's MonoTouch development platform, which helps .Net developers create code for the iPad and fully comply with Apple's licensing requirements &mdash; without having to use Apple's preferred Objective-C. This news falls on the footsteps of news that <a href="http://www.infoworld.com/d/mobilize/citrix-will-have-ipad-app-run-windows-7-sessions-361">Citrix will release an iPad app that lets users run Windows sessions</a> on the iPad. These two developments bolster an argument that <a href="http://www.infoworld.com/d/mobilize/why-ipad-will-kill-netbook-and-chrome-os-911">the iPad could eventually displace the netbook</a>."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>GMGruman writes " Paul Krill reports that Apple 's new iPad could be easier to write apps for , thanks to Novell 's MonoTouch development platform , which helps .Net developers create code for the iPad and fully comply with Apple 's licensing requirements    without having to use Apple 's preferred Objective-C. This news falls on the footsteps of news that Citrix will release an iPad app that lets users run Windows sessions on the iPad .
These two developments bolster an argument that the iPad could eventually displace the netbook .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>GMGruman writes "Paul Krill reports that Apple's new iPad could be easier to write apps for, thanks to Novell's MonoTouch development platform, which helps .Net developers create code for the iPad and fully comply with Apple's licensing requirements — without having to use Apple's preferred Objective-C. This news falls on the footsteps of news that Citrix will release an iPad app that lets users run Windows sessions on the iPad.
These two developments bolster an argument that the iPad could eventually displace the netbook.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30963212</id>
	<title>Re:Apple to Oranges</title>
	<author>anglophobe\_0</author>
	<datestamp>1264874340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My point was that, no matter how popular the iPad gets, it won't be a netbook, and won't fill the same market spot as the netbook.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My point was that , no matter how popular the iPad gets , it wo n't be a netbook , and wo n't fill the same market spot as the netbook .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My point was that, no matter how popular the iPad gets, it won't be a netbook, and won't fill the same market spot as the netbook.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961378</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30963040</id>
	<title>The problem is Apple lied about the iPhone as well</title>
	<author>tomhudson</author>
	<datestamp>1264873320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When they <a href="http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2007/01/09iphone.html" title="apple.com">first announced it</a> [apple.com], Apple said the iPhone was a true multi-tasking device.<blockquote><div><p>iPhone features a rich HTML email client which fetches your email in the background from most POP3 or IMAP mail services and displays photos and graphics right along with the text. <b>iPhone is fully multi-tasking</b>, so you can be reading a web page while downloading your email in the background.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
It's ot "true multi-tasking" - it's more like the old DOS TSRs that gave you limited "multi-tasking".  Aside from the baked-into-the-OS multi-tasking apps, it doesn't multitask - which is one reason it won't support flash - too many threads of execution on a device that is resource-poor (comparatively slow cpu, limited ram).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>When they first announced it [ apple.com ] , Apple said the iPhone was a true multi-tasking device.iPhone features a rich HTML email client which fetches your email in the background from most POP3 or IMAP mail services and displays photos and graphics right along with the text .
iPhone is fully multi-tasking , so you can be reading a web page while downloading your email in the background .
It 's ot " true multi-tasking " - it 's more like the old DOS TSRs that gave you limited " multi-tasking " .
Aside from the baked-into-the-OS multi-tasking apps , it does n't multitask - which is one reason it wo n't support flash - too many threads of execution on a device that is resource-poor ( comparatively slow cpu , limited ram ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When they first announced it [apple.com], Apple said the iPhone was a true multi-tasking device.iPhone features a rich HTML email client which fetches your email in the background from most POP3 or IMAP mail services and displays photos and graphics right along with the text.
iPhone is fully multi-tasking, so you can be reading a web page while downloading your email in the background.
It's ot "true multi-tasking" - it's more like the old DOS TSRs that gave you limited "multi-tasking".
Aside from the baked-into-the-OS multi-tasking apps, it doesn't multitask - which is one reason it won't support flash - too many threads of execution on a device that is resource-poor (comparatively slow cpu, limited ram).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959404</id>
	<title>Re:Raskin's Dream incarnate</title>
	<author>The End Of Days</author>
	<datestamp>1264786500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Moreover you don't really want multi-taksing. You think you do but what you really mean is you want to beable to context swtich easily and for cases where apps need to interact that they do so in the way you want them to</p></div><p>No, I really do.  I want to upload a picture, listen to music, and chat with friends at the same time.  I want to be able to start a long network action and not have to watch it finish because switching away will cause it to abort.</p><p>And just so you don't think I'm talking out my ass, these are things that annoy me about my iPhone today.  Raskin's vision is interesting, but like all ideals, it needs tempering with reality.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Moreover you do n't really want multi-taksing .
You think you do but what you really mean is you want to beable to context swtich easily and for cases where apps need to interact that they do so in the way you want them toNo , I really do .
I want to upload a picture , listen to music , and chat with friends at the same time .
I want to be able to start a long network action and not have to watch it finish because switching away will cause it to abort.And just so you do n't think I 'm talking out my ass , these are things that annoy me about my iPhone today .
Raskin 's vision is interesting , but like all ideals , it needs tempering with reality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Moreover you don't really want multi-taksing.
You think you do but what you really mean is you want to beable to context swtich easily and for cases where apps need to interact that they do so in the way you want them toNo, I really do.
I want to upload a picture, listen to music, and chat with friends at the same time.
I want to be able to start a long network action and not have to watch it finish because switching away will cause it to abort.And just so you don't think I'm talking out my ass, these are things that annoy me about my iPhone today.
Raskin's vision is interesting, but like all ideals, it needs tempering with reality.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30963542</id>
	<title>Re:Raskin's Dream incarnate</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264876140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well put, and do not forget the SECURITY advantage of not having nasty crap running in the background<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well put , and do not forget the SECURITY advantage of not having nasty crap running in the background .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well put, and do not forget the SECURITY advantage of not having nasty crap running in the background ...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961390</id>
	<title>Re:Not seeing any netbook displacement</title>
	<author>SoupIsGoodFood\_42</author>
	<datestamp>1264858560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Multitasking on such a device is overrated. It hasn't stopped the iPhone from becoming popular. The iPad is not meant to be a desktop or laptop replacement, so why are so many people assuming it needs such capabilities?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Multitasking on such a device is overrated .
It has n't stopped the iPhone from becoming popular .
The iPad is not meant to be a desktop or laptop replacement , so why are so many people assuming it needs such capabilities ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Multitasking on such a device is overrated.
It hasn't stopped the iPhone from becoming popular.
The iPad is not meant to be a desktop or laptop replacement, so why are so many people assuming it needs such capabilities?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958974</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30985898</id>
	<title>Re:Working for the enemy</title>
	<author>Wovel</author>
	<datestamp>1265015280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Loving it so much they rushed out that joke of a tablet announcement at CES to try and be ahead.  Apple simply embarrassed them (again).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Loving it so much they rushed out that joke of a tablet announcement at CES to try and be ahead .
Apple simply embarrassed them ( again ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Loving it so much they rushed out that joke of a tablet announcement at CES to try and be ahead.
Apple simply embarrassed them (again).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30962456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959128</id>
	<title>Re:Apple to Oranges</title>
	<author>Draek</author>
	<datestamp>1264783380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And then there's the whole issue with pricing, which was the whole reason the netbook movement caught on in the first place. $500 may be cheap for a tablet PC, but it's certainly not for a netbook replacement.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And then there 's the whole issue with pricing , which was the whole reason the netbook movement caught on in the first place .
$ 500 may be cheap for a tablet PC , but it 's certainly not for a netbook replacement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And then there's the whole issue with pricing, which was the whole reason the netbook movement caught on in the first place.
$500 may be cheap for a tablet PC, but it's certainly not for a netbook replacement.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958762</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961320</id>
	<title>CITRIX Children...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264857240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So w/o RTFA the key thing here is that if CITRIX are making it viable for windows sessions to be run on the iPad then this means that the iPad now appeals to a huge number of corporate clients, especially those on retail! Therefore making the iPad way more likely to appear in stores which will then encourage more POS development and more eyes.</p><p>I still will not buy one!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So w/o RTFA the key thing here is that if CITRIX are making it viable for windows sessions to be run on the iPad then this means that the iPad now appeals to a huge number of corporate clients , especially those on retail !
Therefore making the iPad way more likely to appear in stores which will then encourage more POS development and more eyes.I still will not buy one !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So w/o RTFA the key thing here is that if CITRIX are making it viable for windows sessions to be run on the iPad then this means that the iPad now appeals to a huge number of corporate clients, especially those on retail!
Therefore making the iPad way more likely to appear in stores which will then encourage more POS development and more eyes.I still will not buy one!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104</id>
	<title>Raskin's Dream incarnate</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264783140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm getting a good laugh out of all the folks damning the iPhone for it's lack of explicit multi-tasking.</p><p>Sigh.  If one wants to oversimplify there have been two great visions presented in computing.  One was eberharts classic video showing off mouse and button based editing, along with cellular communications.  If you've never watched it, you have no idea what you have missed.  Prepare to crap your pants.</p><p>The other is Raskin's dream of the info appliance.  A device that has no specific function but morphs itself into the perfect dedicated human interaction device for whatever task is needed.  It does not multi task.  It does not improve a perfectly weighted japanese sushi knife to attach car steering wheel and fire extinguisher to it just in case you need to multi-task.  Each item itself has all the controls and human interface it needs for it's task and only that.</p><p>In raskin's vision, the appliance would never need instructions.  it would be as obvious how to use it as a hammer is.</p><p>The ipad is the closest (practical sized) realization of that to date.  it's 1.5 times the width of your fingers so it balances perfectly in one hand.  when you have a task it dedicated it's surface to becoming the perfect human perceptual  interface you need just for that task.</p><p>The key here is that  Even a 1 year old understands the iphone interface.  It's task specificity is intuitive.</p><p>Moreover you don't really want multi-taksing.  You think you do but what you really mean is you want to beable to context swtich easily and for cases where apps need to interact that they do so in the way you want them to.  Multi-tasking is a dumb way to do this.  it puts the load for managing the interaction on the human not the device.  The iphone os does most of the connections you want.  The addressbook is ubiquitous, apps can send e-mail and get web pages. etc...  In the future this conduit management will be handled more and more by the computer as it should be.  Context switching will be transparent because the computer will anticipate your next move and have pre-warmed it.  etc...</p><p>Multi-tasking is just the current way we approximate implement this metafore for the device that simply changes into what we need at that moment by itself. You don't really want multi-tasking you want that effect.</p><p>For example, people insisted background processing was needed to handle incoming e-mail or other daemon tasks for apps.  But the vast majority of those needs (though definitiely not all) are now served much better by the push notification deamon that apple implemented.  See background processing was just one way to solve that problem that you were used.  You did not need it and you are now better off without it.</p><p>interestingly it's claimed that OSX was originally going to behave that way at Job's request.  there's a hidden mode switch (in the defaults.write ) that will change the interface so only one app is visible at a time.  the others snap to the dock at each context switch.  I activated that for my mother and here ability to use the computer skyrocketed.  I've tried it myself, and because I multi-task a lot I do find the transistions annoying.  But I have to admit it really does de clutter and improve how you interface with an app.  I just find the implementation to clunky to tolerate and I miss my multi-tasking view.  The iphone OS enforces this work mode and anyone who has used one can see how well it works in the small format device.</p><p>It's raskin's dream incarnate.  This is why other devices that don't get what's being created here are going to fail.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm getting a good laugh out of all the folks damning the iPhone for it 's lack of explicit multi-tasking.Sigh .
If one wants to oversimplify there have been two great visions presented in computing .
One was eberharts classic video showing off mouse and button based editing , along with cellular communications .
If you 've never watched it , you have no idea what you have missed .
Prepare to crap your pants.The other is Raskin 's dream of the info appliance .
A device that has no specific function but morphs itself into the perfect dedicated human interaction device for whatever task is needed .
It does not multi task .
It does not improve a perfectly weighted japanese sushi knife to attach car steering wheel and fire extinguisher to it just in case you need to multi-task .
Each item itself has all the controls and human interface it needs for it 's task and only that.In raskin 's vision , the appliance would never need instructions .
it would be as obvious how to use it as a hammer is.The ipad is the closest ( practical sized ) realization of that to date .
it 's 1.5 times the width of your fingers so it balances perfectly in one hand .
when you have a task it dedicated it 's surface to becoming the perfect human perceptual interface you need just for that task.The key here is that Even a 1 year old understands the iphone interface .
It 's task specificity is intuitive.Moreover you do n't really want multi-taksing .
You think you do but what you really mean is you want to beable to context swtich easily and for cases where apps need to interact that they do so in the way you want them to .
Multi-tasking is a dumb way to do this .
it puts the load for managing the interaction on the human not the device .
The iphone os does most of the connections you want .
The addressbook is ubiquitous , apps can send e-mail and get web pages .
etc... In the future this conduit management will be handled more and more by the computer as it should be .
Context switching will be transparent because the computer will anticipate your next move and have pre-warmed it .
etc...Multi-tasking is just the current way we approximate implement this metafore for the device that simply changes into what we need at that moment by itself .
You do n't really want multi-tasking you want that effect.For example , people insisted background processing was needed to handle incoming e-mail or other daemon tasks for apps .
But the vast majority of those needs ( though definitiely not all ) are now served much better by the push notification deamon that apple implemented .
See background processing was just one way to solve that problem that you were used .
You did not need it and you are now better off without it.interestingly it 's claimed that OSX was originally going to behave that way at Job 's request .
there 's a hidden mode switch ( in the defaults.write ) that will change the interface so only one app is visible at a time .
the others snap to the dock at each context switch .
I activated that for my mother and here ability to use the computer skyrocketed .
I 've tried it myself , and because I multi-task a lot I do find the transistions annoying .
But I have to admit it really does de clutter and improve how you interface with an app .
I just find the implementation to clunky to tolerate and I miss my multi-tasking view .
The iphone OS enforces this work mode and anyone who has used one can see how well it works in the small format device.It 's raskin 's dream incarnate .
This is why other devices that do n't get what 's being created here are going to fail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm getting a good laugh out of all the folks damning the iPhone for it's lack of explicit multi-tasking.Sigh.
If one wants to oversimplify there have been two great visions presented in computing.
One was eberharts classic video showing off mouse and button based editing, along with cellular communications.
If you've never watched it, you have no idea what you have missed.
Prepare to crap your pants.The other is Raskin's dream of the info appliance.
A device that has no specific function but morphs itself into the perfect dedicated human interaction device for whatever task is needed.
It does not multi task.
It does not improve a perfectly weighted japanese sushi knife to attach car steering wheel and fire extinguisher to it just in case you need to multi-task.
Each item itself has all the controls and human interface it needs for it's task and only that.In raskin's vision, the appliance would never need instructions.
it would be as obvious how to use it as a hammer is.The ipad is the closest (practical sized) realization of that to date.
it's 1.5 times the width of your fingers so it balances perfectly in one hand.
when you have a task it dedicated it's surface to becoming the perfect human perceptual  interface you need just for that task.The key here is that  Even a 1 year old understands the iphone interface.
It's task specificity is intuitive.Moreover you don't really want multi-taksing.
You think you do but what you really mean is you want to beable to context swtich easily and for cases where apps need to interact that they do so in the way you want them to.
Multi-tasking is a dumb way to do this.
it puts the load for managing the interaction on the human not the device.
The iphone os does most of the connections you want.
The addressbook is ubiquitous, apps can send e-mail and get web pages.
etc...  In the future this conduit management will be handled more and more by the computer as it should be.
Context switching will be transparent because the computer will anticipate your next move and have pre-warmed it.
etc...Multi-tasking is just the current way we approximate implement this metafore for the device that simply changes into what we need at that moment by itself.
You don't really want multi-tasking you want that effect.For example, people insisted background processing was needed to handle incoming e-mail or other daemon tasks for apps.
But the vast majority of those needs (though definitiely not all) are now served much better by the push notification deamon that apple implemented.
See background processing was just one way to solve that problem that you were used.
You did not need it and you are now better off without it.interestingly it's claimed that OSX was originally going to behave that way at Job's request.
there's a hidden mode switch (in the defaults.write ) that will change the interface so only one app is visible at a time.
the others snap to the dock at each context switch.
I activated that for my mother and here ability to use the computer skyrocketed.
I've tried it myself, and because I multi-task a lot I do find the transistions annoying.
But I have to admit it really does de clutter and improve how you interface with an app.
I just find the implementation to clunky to tolerate and I miss my multi-tasking view.
The iphone OS enforces this work mode and anyone who has used one can see how well it works in the small format device.It's raskin's dream incarnate.
This is why other devices that don't get what's being created here are going to fail.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958868</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958974</id>
	<title>Not seeing any netbook displacement</title>
	<author>Darkness404</author>
	<datestamp>1264782120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm not seeing the iPad displacing the netbook even with<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.net. The problem isn't that developers can't develop well, the problem is that Apple doesn't let developers do much with iPhone OS. The nice thing about a netbook or a cheap laptop is I can run multiple things. I can keep my Facebook open, my IM open, play music on YouTube and type on a document all at the same time. These are basic things that people do daily, the lack of a major component of today's web (Flash) and the lack of an ability to multi-task is going to kill any chance the iPad had to survive much faster than anything else other than the steep price.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not seeing the iPad displacing the netbook even with .net .
The problem is n't that developers ca n't develop well , the problem is that Apple does n't let developers do much with iPhone OS .
The nice thing about a netbook or a cheap laptop is I can run multiple things .
I can keep my Facebook open , my IM open , play music on YouTube and type on a document all at the same time .
These are basic things that people do daily , the lack of a major component of today 's web ( Flash ) and the lack of an ability to multi-task is going to kill any chance the iPad had to survive much faster than anything else other than the steep price .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not seeing the iPad displacing the netbook even with .net.
The problem isn't that developers can't develop well, the problem is that Apple doesn't let developers do much with iPhone OS.
The nice thing about a netbook or a cheap laptop is I can run multiple things.
I can keep my Facebook open, my IM open, play music on YouTube and type on a document all at the same time.
These are basic things that people do daily, the lack of a major component of today's web (Flash) and the lack of an ability to multi-task is going to kill any chance the iPad had to survive much faster than anything else other than the steep price.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959932</id>
	<title>Displacing the netbook?</title>
	<author>DragonWriter</author>
	<datestamp>1264793760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How does being able use C# or run windows sessions on the iPad enable it to displace a netbook? About the only place they overlap in functionality that they are both really good for is that they are both good for browsing the web and interacting with web apps that don't require lots of text input.</p><p>Beyond that their functionality diverges. The iPad is a slightly better ebook reader, is better for certain types of applications (particularly, though not exclusively, those involving fairly passive media consumption.) A netbook is better for anything that requires lots of text input -- I wouldn't want to take notes in a meeting or class on an iPad, or write a substantial document on one, both things that netbooks are good for. Netboooks are also substantially cheaper -- the least expensive iPad model is at the high end of netbook prices, the 11.6" Atom Z520 powered netbook I got a couple days ago that I'm typing this on was half the price of an iPad. (And it has a SIM card slot and 3G capablity, which I'd have to pay another half the price of the netbook on top of the minimum price of an iPad to get on iPad.) Its also got much more storage than the high-end iPad. And you don't need another whole computer with iTunes just to be able to use it. Its perfectly possible for someone who doesn't have heavy computing needs to have a netbook as their only computer -- an iPad can't fill that role as long as it is dependent on a "real" computer with iTunes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How does being able use C # or run windows sessions on the iPad enable it to displace a netbook ?
About the only place they overlap in functionality that they are both really good for is that they are both good for browsing the web and interacting with web apps that do n't require lots of text input.Beyond that their functionality diverges .
The iPad is a slightly better ebook reader , is better for certain types of applications ( particularly , though not exclusively , those involving fairly passive media consumption .
) A netbook is better for anything that requires lots of text input -- I would n't want to take notes in a meeting or class on an iPad , or write a substantial document on one , both things that netbooks are good for .
Netboooks are also substantially cheaper -- the least expensive iPad model is at the high end of netbook prices , the 11.6 " Atom Z520 powered netbook I got a couple days ago that I 'm typing this on was half the price of an iPad .
( And it has a SIM card slot and 3G capablity , which I 'd have to pay another half the price of the netbook on top of the minimum price of an iPad to get on iPad .
) Its also got much more storage than the high-end iPad .
And you do n't need another whole computer with iTunes just to be able to use it .
Its perfectly possible for someone who does n't have heavy computing needs to have a netbook as their only computer -- an iPad ca n't fill that role as long as it is dependent on a " real " computer with iTunes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How does being able use C# or run windows sessions on the iPad enable it to displace a netbook?
About the only place they overlap in functionality that they are both really good for is that they are both good for browsing the web and interacting with web apps that don't require lots of text input.Beyond that their functionality diverges.
The iPad is a slightly better ebook reader, is better for certain types of applications (particularly, though not exclusively, those involving fairly passive media consumption.
) A netbook is better for anything that requires lots of text input -- I wouldn't want to take notes in a meeting or class on an iPad, or write a substantial document on one, both things that netbooks are good for.
Netboooks are also substantially cheaper -- the least expensive iPad model is at the high end of netbook prices, the 11.6" Atom Z520 powered netbook I got a couple days ago that I'm typing this on was half the price of an iPad.
(And it has a SIM card slot and 3G capablity, which I'd have to pay another half the price of the netbook on top of the minimum price of an iPad to get on iPad.
) Its also got much more storage than the high-end iPad.
And you don't need another whole computer with iTunes just to be able to use it.
Its perfectly possible for someone who doesn't have heavy computing needs to have a netbook as their only computer -- an iPad can't fill that role as long as it is dependent on a "real" computer with iTunes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30964888</id>
	<title>Except that the iPhone SDK doesn't support SOAP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264884960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess it just rocks too much to provide support for even basic internet technologies.</p><p>So much more fun to re-invent the wheel, and lock your codebase to a single mobile platform.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess it just rocks too much to provide support for even basic internet technologies.So much more fun to re-invent the wheel , and lock your codebase to a single mobile platform .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess it just rocks too much to provide support for even basic internet technologies.So much more fun to re-invent the wheel, and lock your codebase to a single mobile platform.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960190</id>
	<title>Re:Raskin's Dream incarnate</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264883340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>it's 1.5 times the width of your fingers so it balances perfectly in one hand.</p></div></blockquote><p>My iPhone certainly isn't 1.5 times the width of <i>my</i> fingers. Newsflash: humans come in a fairly wide variety of sizes.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>it 's 1.5 times the width of your fingers so it balances perfectly in one hand.My iPhone certainly is n't 1.5 times the width of my fingers .
Newsflash : humans come in a fairly wide variety of sizes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it's 1.5 times the width of your fingers so it balances perfectly in one hand.My iPhone certainly isn't 1.5 times the width of my fingers.
Newsflash: humans come in a fairly wide variety of sizes.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959032</id>
	<title>Re:as someone who programmed for both</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264782540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>iPhone has no garbage collection, for one thing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>iPhone has no garbage collection , for one thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>iPhone has no garbage collection, for one thing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30964406</id>
	<title>There should be some kind of warning</title>
	<author>Ilgaz</author>
	<datestamp>1264881540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the developer can't code in Objective C, using native frameworks, there should be a logo or something to make people understand it is based on Mono/MS<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET. I wouldn't trust to such developer or their coding competence. What next? Use MS Visual C?</p><p>I don't even mention stupidity of using an Apple/OS X/UNIX device and use clone of the clone framework to code for it, it is a bit political. I would really want to know if an application is based on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET, there should be a way to figure it out without hacking anything.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the developer ca n't code in Objective C , using native frameworks , there should be a logo or something to make people understand it is based on Mono/MS .NET .
I would n't trust to such developer or their coding competence .
What next ?
Use MS Visual C ? I do n't even mention stupidity of using an Apple/OS X/UNIX device and use clone of the clone framework to code for it , it is a bit political .
I would really want to know if an application is based on .NET , there should be a way to figure it out without hacking anything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the developer can't code in Objective C, using native frameworks, there should be a logo or something to make people understand it is based on Mono/MS .NET.
I wouldn't trust to such developer or their coding competence.
What next?
Use MS Visual C?I don't even mention stupidity of using an Apple/OS X/UNIX device and use clone of the clone framework to code for it, it is a bit political.
I would really want to know if an application is based on .NET, there should be a way to figure it out without hacking anything.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958868</id>
	<title>Certainly won't displace it in...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264781340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... the next 60 days, amirite?</p><p>The iPad has been officially announced for all of two days, a <em>vanishingly</em> small portion of people have actually spent any time playing with one, and the world is already full of vociferous opinions about its prospects for (pick one) dismal failure/niche success/displacing netbooks/world domination. Like this one:</p><p><i>Because of its price and lack of perennial netbook features, such as a physical keyboard.</i></p><p>Looks to me like it doesn't lack for a physical keyboard, even if it's not permanently attached. Will that be a problem for literal laptop users? Maybe. If I were betting, though, I'd guess that it'll be good enough that Apple's sales will compare with the top 3 netbook manufacturers.</p><p>I'm not betting, however, because like most of the planet, I haven't had a chance to really play with one, and therefore don't have a very solid idea what I'm talking about.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... the next 60 days , amirite ? The iPad has been officially announced for all of two days , a vanishingly small portion of people have actually spent any time playing with one , and the world is already full of vociferous opinions about its prospects for ( pick one ) dismal failure/niche success/displacing netbooks/world domination .
Like this one : Because of its price and lack of perennial netbook features , such as a physical keyboard.Looks to me like it does n't lack for a physical keyboard , even if it 's not permanently attached .
Will that be a problem for literal laptop users ?
Maybe. If I were betting , though , I 'd guess that it 'll be good enough that Apple 's sales will compare with the top 3 netbook manufacturers.I 'm not betting , however , because like most of the planet , I have n't had a chance to really play with one , and therefore do n't have a very solid idea what I 'm talking about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... the next 60 days, amirite?The iPad has been officially announced for all of two days, a vanishingly small portion of people have actually spent any time playing with one, and the world is already full of vociferous opinions about its prospects for (pick one) dismal failure/niche success/displacing netbooks/world domination.
Like this one:Because of its price and lack of perennial netbook features, such as a physical keyboard.Looks to me like it doesn't lack for a physical keyboard, even if it's not permanently attached.
Will that be a problem for literal laptop users?
Maybe. If I were betting, though, I'd guess that it'll be good enough that Apple's sales will compare with the top 3 netbook manufacturers.I'm not betting, however, because like most of the planet, I haven't had a chance to really play with one, and therefore don't have a very solid idea what I'm talking about.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958756</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30973028</id>
	<title>Re:Raskin's Dream incarnate</title>
	<author>goombah99</author>
	<datestamp>1264928580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's a better link to the highligts or <a href="http://www.sri.com/news/storykits/1968video.html" title="sri.com">Engelbart's demo </a> [sri.com].</p><p>Be sure to check out the one about real time communication an 1968 and think about how we don't even have that yet!  we have the video ichat and we have some collaborative real time editors.  But they had these working together.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's a better link to the highligts or Engelbart 's demo [ sri.com ] .Be sure to check out the one about real time communication an 1968 and think about how we do n't even have that yet !
we have the video ichat and we have some collaborative real time editors .
But they had these working together .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's a better link to the highligts or Engelbart's demo  [sri.com].Be sure to check out the one about real time communication an 1968 and think about how we don't even have that yet!
we have the video ichat and we have some collaborative real time editors.
But they had these working together.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959528</id>
	<title>It has many keyboards, and more options</title>
	<author>SuperKendall</author>
	<datestamp>1264787940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>1 - its far more expensive</i></p><p>$500 is not "far more" than many netbooks, and will probably last much longer than the cheapest.</p><p><i>2 - it has no keyboard</i></p><p>You went the wrong way.  It actually has an infinite number of keyboards, with a number of physical options since it supports Bluetooth.  What it has the Netbook lacks is the ability to go without a physical keyboard - web pages are easier to read on a sideways screen, but you are not going to be turning a Netbook sideways.</p><p><i>3 - did i mention it was expensive?</i></p><p>Repeatedly, which brings one to question your judgement.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 - its far more expensive $ 500 is not " far more " than many netbooks , and will probably last much longer than the cheapest.2 - it has no keyboardYou went the wrong way .
It actually has an infinite number of keyboards , with a number of physical options since it supports Bluetooth .
What it has the Netbook lacks is the ability to go without a physical keyboard - web pages are easier to read on a sideways screen , but you are not going to be turning a Netbook sideways.3 - did i mention it was expensive ? Repeatedly , which brings one to question your judgement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1 - its far more expensive$500 is not "far more" than many netbooks, and will probably last much longer than the cheapest.2 - it has no keyboardYou went the wrong way.
It actually has an infinite number of keyboards, with a number of physical options since it supports Bluetooth.
What it has the Netbook lacks is the ability to go without a physical keyboard - web pages are easier to read on a sideways screen, but you are not going to be turning a Netbook sideways.3 - did i mention it was expensive?Repeatedly, which brings one to question your judgement.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958942</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961878</id>
	<title>Re:This is pathetic. Don't be afraid to learn.</title>
	<author>darjen</author>
	<datestamp>1264864260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>not really. I don't have a mac as my primary development machine. so I couln't develop iPad apps even if I wanted to learn objective C. But I might have more luck being able to write c# on my thinkpad instead. nothing about laziness at all here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>not really .
I do n't have a mac as my primary development machine .
so I coul n't develop iPad apps even if I wanted to learn objective C. But I might have more luck being able to write c # on my thinkpad instead .
nothing about laziness at all here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>not really.
I don't have a mac as my primary development machine.
so I couln't develop iPad apps even if I wanted to learn objective C. But I might have more luck being able to write c# on my thinkpad instead.
nothing about laziness at all here.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958800</id>
	<title>as someone who programmed for both</title>
	<author>phantomfive</author>
	<datestamp>1264780860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>As someone who's programmed both in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.net and for the iPhone, I can't imagine that being able to program in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.net would be an advantage.  Both are adequate for making windowing systems, but the paradigm is different.<br> <br>
Seriously, Objective-C isn't that hard; if you can't learn it in a day or two (or at most a week) then you are probably not a professional programmer.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As someone who 's programmed both in .net and for the iPhone , I ca n't imagine that being able to program in .net would be an advantage .
Both are adequate for making windowing systems , but the paradigm is different .
Seriously , Objective-C is n't that hard ; if you ca n't learn it in a day or two ( or at most a week ) then you are probably not a professional programmer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As someone who's programmed both in .net and for the iPhone, I can't imagine that being able to program in .net would be an advantage.
Both are adequate for making windowing systems, but the paradigm is different.
Seriously, Objective-C isn't that hard; if you can't learn it in a day or two (or at most a week) then you are probably not a professional programmer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961132</id>
	<title>As I said on my Journal...</title>
	<author>jcr</author>
	<datestamp>1264854600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wrote this about the Mac, but it applies to the iPhone and iPad as well:</p><p>1) Mac users are highly sensitive to the quality of your products' user experience. What this means is, <b>go native or don't bother.</b> Even though Google Earth and Photoshop are rife with UI atrocities, don't imagine that you can get away with ignoring the rules like they can. They're 500-pound Gorillas, and you're not. If you are Google or Adobe, get with the program and write a Cocoa UI, already. It's about time.</p><p>2) The native language for the Mac and the iPhone is Objective-C. Get used to it; it's not hard to learn. Any developer familiar with C should be able to learn Objective-C in a day, and be an Objective-C language lawyer within a week if he cares to. Yes, there are Ruby, Python, and other bridges you can use, and they work just fine, but limit this to integrating existing libraries with your apps. <b>DO NOT</b> try to use the bridges as a way to avoid learning the environment you're working with.</p><p>3) A cross-platform GUI is neither feasible nor desirable. You can't #ifdef the difference between Cocoa, xlib, and Win32. Don't believe me? Look at OpenOffice. (If OpenOffice looks OK to you, then please, forget about offering your products on the Mac. You'll only cause us pain.)</p><p>4) Don't bother with third-party cross-platform GUI libraries like Qt. Yeah, you can make it sort of work, but you'll get a lot of complaints from your Mac customers, and it will be more expensive than properly factoring your code and writing a native GUI for each platform. For every Mac customer who complains about a bad UI, there are many more who took one look at it and decided never to do business with the vendor in question.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wrote this about the Mac , but it applies to the iPhone and iPad as well : 1 ) Mac users are highly sensitive to the quality of your products ' user experience .
What this means is , go native or do n't bother .
Even though Google Earth and Photoshop are rife with UI atrocities , do n't imagine that you can get away with ignoring the rules like they can .
They 're 500-pound Gorillas , and you 're not .
If you are Google or Adobe , get with the program and write a Cocoa UI , already .
It 's about time.2 ) The native language for the Mac and the iPhone is Objective-C. Get used to it ; it 's not hard to learn .
Any developer familiar with C should be able to learn Objective-C in a day , and be an Objective-C language lawyer within a week if he cares to .
Yes , there are Ruby , Python , and other bridges you can use , and they work just fine , but limit this to integrating existing libraries with your apps .
DO NOT try to use the bridges as a way to avoid learning the environment you 're working with.3 ) A cross-platform GUI is neither feasible nor desirable .
You ca n't # ifdef the difference between Cocoa , xlib , and Win32 .
Do n't believe me ?
Look at OpenOffice .
( If OpenOffice looks OK to you , then please , forget about offering your products on the Mac .
You 'll only cause us pain .
) 4 ) Do n't bother with third-party cross-platform GUI libraries like Qt .
Yeah , you can make it sort of work , but you 'll get a lot of complaints from your Mac customers , and it will be more expensive than properly factoring your code and writing a native GUI for each platform .
For every Mac customer who complains about a bad UI , there are many more who took one look at it and decided never to do business with the vendor in question .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wrote this about the Mac, but it applies to the iPhone and iPad as well:1) Mac users are highly sensitive to the quality of your products' user experience.
What this means is, go native or don't bother.
Even though Google Earth and Photoshop are rife with UI atrocities, don't imagine that you can get away with ignoring the rules like they can.
They're 500-pound Gorillas, and you're not.
If you are Google or Adobe, get with the program and write a Cocoa UI, already.
It's about time.2) The native language for the Mac and the iPhone is Objective-C. Get used to it; it's not hard to learn.
Any developer familiar with C should be able to learn Objective-C in a day, and be an Objective-C language lawyer within a week if he cares to.
Yes, there are Ruby, Python, and other bridges you can use, and they work just fine, but limit this to integrating existing libraries with your apps.
DO NOT try to use the bridges as a way to avoid learning the environment you're working with.3) A cross-platform GUI is neither feasible nor desirable.
You can't #ifdef the difference between Cocoa, xlib, and Win32.
Don't believe me?
Look at OpenOffice.
(If OpenOffice looks OK to you, then please, forget about offering your products on the Mac.
You'll only cause us pain.
)4) Don't bother with third-party cross-platform GUI libraries like Qt.
Yeah, you can make it sort of work, but you'll get a lot of complaints from your Mac customers, and it will be more expensive than properly factoring your code and writing a native GUI for each platform.
For every Mac customer who complains about a bad UI, there are many more who took one look at it and decided never to do business with the vendor in question.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959594</id>
	<title>Re:xna</title>
	<author>blai</author>
	<datestamp>1264788780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No it doesn't.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No it does n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No it doesn't.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958742</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961854</id>
	<title>Re:I'm an Apple fan, but...</title>
	<author>noidentity</author>
	<datestamp>1264864020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Shouldn't we be waiting until, oh I don't know, the device actually is released and we can see how this whole thing plays out?</p></div>

</blockquote><p>NO NO NO! TOO LONG! You're suggesting we wait days, maybe weeks to find out. You may have infinite patience, but I have to decide now whether I'm going to buy one, and what model I will buy, and whether I will develop software for it, and whether Apple will have a future 100 years from now, an... wow, just found a new opinion story on the iPad, gotta go.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Should n't we be waiting until , oh I do n't know , the device actually is released and we can see how this whole thing plays out ?
NO NO NO !
TOO LONG !
You 're suggesting we wait days , maybe weeks to find out .
You may have infinite patience , but I have to decide now whether I 'm going to buy one , and what model I will buy , and whether I will develop software for it , and whether Apple will have a future 100 years from now , an... wow , just found a new opinion story on the iPad , got ta go .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shouldn't we be waiting until, oh I don't know, the device actually is released and we can see how this whole thing plays out?
NO NO NO!
TOO LONG!
You're suggesting we wait days, maybe weeks to find out.
You may have infinite patience, but I have to decide now whether I'm going to buy one, and what model I will buy, and whether I will develop software for it, and whether Apple will have a future 100 years from now, an... wow, just found a new opinion story on the iPad, gotta go.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30966214</id>
	<title>Re:iCrap news overload</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264852140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Zomg! Steve Jobs' twitter page? Where, where?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Zomg !
Steve Jobs ' twitter page ?
Where , where ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Zomg!
Steve Jobs' twitter page?
Where, where?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961374</id>
	<title>Re:Raskin's Dream incarnate</title>
	<author>ricotest</author>
	<datestamp>1264858200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I just find the implementation to clunky to tolerate and I miss my multi-tasking view. The iphone OS enforces this work mode</p></div><p>Yeah, I think you said just about all that needs to be said.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I just find the implementation to clunky to tolerate and I miss my multi-tasking view .
The iphone OS enforces this work modeYeah , I think you said just about all that needs to be said .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just find the implementation to clunky to tolerate and I miss my multi-tasking view.
The iphone OS enforces this work modeYeah, I think you said just about all that needs to be said.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959400</id>
	<title>Let me get this straight...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264786440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>So a Linux company is bringing Microsoft development to an Apple device?

And it's STILL useless?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So a Linux company is bringing Microsoft development to an Apple device ?
And it 's STILL useless ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So a Linux company is bringing Microsoft development to an Apple device?
And it's STILL useless?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30963772</id>
	<title>meh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264877460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since when the ability to run windows qualifies a machine as notebook.</p><p>C# only strength is good infusion into fresh graduates. Otherwise Apple's XCode is an excellent choice for development platform.</p><p>Language differences, I don't buy that. You learn the language in 3 days. It's the OS and SDK that takes the bulk of learning.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since when the ability to run windows qualifies a machine as notebook.C # only strength is good infusion into fresh graduates .
Otherwise Apple 's XCode is an excellent choice for development platform.Language differences , I do n't buy that .
You learn the language in 3 days .
It 's the OS and SDK that takes the bulk of learning .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since when the ability to run windows qualifies a machine as notebook.C# only strength is good infusion into fresh graduates.
Otherwise Apple's XCode is an excellent choice for development platform.Language differences, I don't buy that.
You learn the language in 3 days.
It's the OS and SDK that takes the bulk of learning.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959260</id>
	<title>I guess I sorta see the point</title>
	<author>seebs</author>
	<datestamp>1264784940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Objective-C rocks, really.  But!  If you don't know it, and you have an existing code base in C#, maybe this would be useful.  I guess.  I think this is not aimed at making iPhone/iPad app development easier <b>in general</b>, but rather, specifically for people who are already using C#.  In which case, it's not totally stupid.  Just mostly stupid.</p><p>FWIW, I'm currently at the "okay, that's the basic functionality, now what do I do next?" phase of developing an iPhone app.  From "never even looked at the docs" to "working multitouch and graphics" took me, oh, a good solid two evenings.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Objective-C rocks , really .
But ! If you do n't know it , and you have an existing code base in C # , maybe this would be useful .
I guess .
I think this is not aimed at making iPhone/iPad app development easier in general , but rather , specifically for people who are already using C # .
In which case , it 's not totally stupid .
Just mostly stupid.FWIW , I 'm currently at the " okay , that 's the basic functionality , now what do I do next ?
" phase of developing an iPhone app .
From " never even looked at the docs " to " working multitouch and graphics " took me , oh , a good solid two evenings .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Objective-C rocks, really.
But!  If you don't know it, and you have an existing code base in C#, maybe this would be useful.
I guess.
I think this is not aimed at making iPhone/iPad app development easier in general, but rather, specifically for people who are already using C#.
In which case, it's not totally stupid.
Just mostly stupid.FWIW, I'm currently at the "okay, that's the basic functionality, now what do I do next?
" phase of developing an iPhone app.
From "never even looked at the docs" to "working multitouch and graphics" took me, oh, a good solid two evenings.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959536</id>
	<title>Re:I'm an Apple fan, but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264788000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's almost like Slashdot is perpetually trying to make up for that whole "No wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame." thing.</p></div><p>That's funny - judging by most of the reactions to the iPad I've been seeing around here it seems more like Slashdot is trying for a repeat. The FUD level seems unusually think. That doesn't change the fact that I agree with you... but waiting a whole month seems so, I don't know rational...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's almost like Slashdot is perpetually trying to make up for that whole " No wireless .
Less space than a Nomad .
Lame. " thing.That 's funny - judging by most of the reactions to the iPad I 've been seeing around here it seems more like Slashdot is trying for a repeat .
The FUD level seems unusually think .
That does n't change the fact that I agree with you... but waiting a whole month seems so , I do n't know rational.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's almost like Slashdot is perpetually trying to make up for that whole "No wireless.
Less space than a Nomad.
Lame." thing.That's funny - judging by most of the reactions to the iPad I've been seeing around here it seems more like Slashdot is trying for a repeat.
The FUD level seems unusually think.
That doesn't change the fact that I agree with you... but waiting a whole month seems so, I don't know rational...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961378</id>
	<title>Re:Apple to Oranges</title>
	<author>SoupIsGoodFood\_42</author>
	<datestamp>1264858320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, that all depends on what the consumers think. If the iPad becomes as popular as the iPhone and iPod, then a large number of developers will be developing for the iPad no matter what your average Slashdotter thinks of it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , that all depends on what the consumers think .
If the iPad becomes as popular as the iPhone and iPod , then a large number of developers will be developing for the iPad no matter what your average Slashdotter thinks of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, that all depends on what the consumers think.
If the iPad becomes as popular as the iPhone and iPod, then a large number of developers will be developing for the iPad no matter what your average Slashdotter thinks of it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958762</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958768</id>
	<title>Nothing new here</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1264780560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Jesus christ stop with the Apple spam.</p><p>There are already RDP clients for the iPhone and Mono Touch isn't freaking new.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Jesus christ stop with the Apple spam.There are already RDP clients for the iPhone and Mono Touch is n't freaking new .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jesus christ stop with the Apple spam.There are already RDP clients for the iPhone and Mono Touch isn't freaking new.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960880</id>
	<title>Re:Raskin's Dream incarnate</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264850220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where can I find "eberharts classic video showing off mouse and button based editing, along with cellular communications"? Thanks!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where can I find " eberharts classic video showing off mouse and button based editing , along with cellular communications " ?
Thanks !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where can I find "eberharts classic video showing off mouse and button based editing, along with cellular communications"?
Thanks!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958990</id>
	<title>umm...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264782240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>huge novell fan about five years ago.  eDirectory, GroupWise, etc.  I know what direction they went in.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... and I can't believe they are still in business.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>huge novell fan about five years ago .
eDirectory , GroupWise , etc .
I know what direction they went in .
... and I ca n't believe they are still in business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>huge novell fan about five years ago.
eDirectory, GroupWise, etc.
I know what direction they went in.
... and I can't believe they are still in business.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959526</id>
	<title>Re:iCrap news overload</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264787940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I won't be interested until these stories link to Australian sites.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wo n't be interested until these stories link to Australian sites .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I won't be interested until these stories link to Australian sites.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30973084</id>
	<title>Engelbart's 1968 demo</title>
	<author>goombah99</author>
	<datestamp>1264929000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's a better link to the highligts or <a href="http://www.sri.com/news/storykits/1968video.html" title="sri.com">Engelbart's demo </a> [sri.com].</p><p>Be sure to check out the one about real time communication an 1968 and think about how we don't even have that yet!  we have the video ichat and we have some collaborative real time editors, but they had both working together with shared real-time mouses on screen in 1968.</p><p>One of the more amusing things to me is that they are demostrating other technologies no one in the audience had scene while barely remarking on it.  For example the minature microphone head sets, the closed circuit microwave com links providing the video and audio connections.  all in 1968.</p><p>the computer system had a whopping 4 banks of 16K and was shared by mulitple users. the screens were created by writing directly to vector graphic phosphors and raster video capture of that. That's how they can have things like characters combined with a moving mouse, overlayed on inset video.</p><p>it's mind bending how much of modern computing was anticipated by this small team in 1968.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's a better link to the highligts or Engelbart 's demo [ sri.com ] .Be sure to check out the one about real time communication an 1968 and think about how we do n't even have that yet !
we have the video ichat and we have some collaborative real time editors , but they had both working together with shared real-time mouses on screen in 1968.One of the more amusing things to me is that they are demostrating other technologies no one in the audience had scene while barely remarking on it .
For example the minature microphone head sets , the closed circuit microwave com links providing the video and audio connections .
all in 1968.the computer system had a whopping 4 banks of 16K and was shared by mulitple users .
the screens were created by writing directly to vector graphic phosphors and raster video capture of that .
That 's how they can have things like characters combined with a moving mouse , overlayed on inset video.it 's mind bending how much of modern computing was anticipated by this small team in 1968 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's a better link to the highligts or Engelbart's demo  [sri.com].Be sure to check out the one about real time communication an 1968 and think about how we don't even have that yet!
we have the video ichat and we have some collaborative real time editors, but they had both working together with shared real-time mouses on screen in 1968.One of the more amusing things to me is that they are demostrating other technologies no one in the audience had scene while barely remarking on it.
For example the minature microphone head sets, the closed circuit microwave com links providing the video and audio connections.
all in 1968.the computer system had a whopping 4 banks of 16K and was shared by mulitple users.
the screens were created by writing directly to vector graphic phosphors and raster video capture of that.
That's how they can have things like characters combined with a moving mouse, overlayed on inset video.it's mind bending how much of modern computing was anticipated by this small team in 1968.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30965390</id>
	<title>What's the switch?</title>
	<author>weston</author>
	<datestamp>1264845360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>interestingly it's claimed that OSX was originally going to behave that way at Job's request. there's a hidden mode switch (in the defaults.write ) that will change the interface so only one app is visible at a time. the others snap to the dock at each context switch. I activated that for my mother and here ability to use the computer skyrocketed. I've tried it myself</i></p><p>What's the switch? I just tried looking through <tt>defaults read</tt>, but that's an awful lot of text to sift through without knowing what I'm looking for...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>interestingly it 's claimed that OSX was originally going to behave that way at Job 's request .
there 's a hidden mode switch ( in the defaults.write ) that will change the interface so only one app is visible at a time .
the others snap to the dock at each context switch .
I activated that for my mother and here ability to use the computer skyrocketed .
I 've tried it myselfWhat 's the switch ?
I just tried looking through defaults read , but that 's an awful lot of text to sift through without knowing what I 'm looking for.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>interestingly it's claimed that OSX was originally going to behave that way at Job's request.
there's a hidden mode switch (in the defaults.write ) that will change the interface so only one app is visible at a time.
the others snap to the dock at each context switch.
I activated that for my mother and here ability to use the computer skyrocketed.
I've tried it myselfWhat's the switch?
I just tried looking through defaults read, but that's an awful lot of text to sift through without knowing what I'm looking for...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959830</id>
	<title>Re:Raskin's Dream incarnate</title>
	<author>seandiggity</author>
	<datestamp>1264792200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Let's not forget, Raskin is responsible for the one-button mouse<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's not forget , Raskin is responsible for the one-button mouse : P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's not forget, Raskin is responsible for the one-button mouse :P</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958770</id>
	<title>iCrap news overload</title>
	<author>sakdoctor</author>
	<datestamp>1264780620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's getting like Steve jobs twitter page around here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's getting like Steve jobs twitter page around here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's getting like Steve jobs twitter page around here.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960634</id>
	<title>Re:Raskin's Dream incarnate</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264846020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are such an Apple whore</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are such an Apple whore</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are such an Apple whore</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960832</id>
	<title>Can we end this now, please?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264849680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Apple iPad - it's a Touch for people with huge hands and/or something new to dump your muck over for fanbois who have too much money.</p><p>Now GET OVER IT &amp; MOVE ON!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Apple iPad - it 's a Touch for people with huge hands and/or something new to dump your muck over for fanbois who have too much money.Now GET OVER IT &amp; MOVE ON !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Apple iPad - it's a Touch for people with huge hands and/or something new to dump your muck over for fanbois who have too much money.Now GET OVER IT &amp; MOVE ON!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959164</id>
	<title>Re:Displace the netbook?</title>
	<author>icebraining</author>
	<datestamp>1264783680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>4 - No Flash<br>5 - No builtin USB port</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>4 - No Flash5 - No builtin USB port</tokentext>
<sentencetext>4 - No Flash5 - No builtin USB port</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958942</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30963496</id>
	<title>There are already hundreds of Mono iPhone apps...</title>
	<author>AmazingRuss</author>
	<datestamp>1264875900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... built with Unity (www.unity3d.com).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... built with Unity ( www.unity3d.com ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... built with Unity (www.unity3d.com).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30962706</id>
	<title>Re:Garbage collection is over rated</title>
	<author>Rockoon</author>
	<datestamp>1264871040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If the "ownership" of an object is not clear, or could not be efficiently tracked, or if you cant be sure if all the entities holding the pointer or the reference have to release it then you should use garbage collection.</p></div><p>
If the ownership and lifetime is easily tracked, then a decent compiler can track it just as well as the human and will not generate code that requires a hunt for garbage at all (contrary to your efficiency argument), but instead will explicitly alloc and then explicitly free just like the programmer would have had to do manually.<br>
<br>
Once the expert understands the garbage collection system, he can avoid the inefficiencies that you are afraid of while still getting all the bang-for-his-buck in those cases where the hunt for garbage makes sense... and while we are on the subject, if efficiency is important then you arent New'ing inside that loop anyways. If you want efficiency, stop being lazy.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the " ownership " of an object is not clear , or could not be efficiently tracked , or if you cant be sure if all the entities holding the pointer or the reference have to release it then you should use garbage collection .
If the ownership and lifetime is easily tracked , then a decent compiler can track it just as well as the human and will not generate code that requires a hunt for garbage at all ( contrary to your efficiency argument ) , but instead will explicitly alloc and then explicitly free just like the programmer would have had to do manually .
Once the expert understands the garbage collection system , he can avoid the inefficiencies that you are afraid of while still getting all the bang-for-his-buck in those cases where the hunt for garbage makes sense... and while we are on the subject , if efficiency is important then you arent New'ing inside that loop anyways .
If you want efficiency , stop being lazy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the "ownership" of an object is not clear, or could not be efficiently tracked, or if you cant be sure if all the entities holding the pointer or the reference have to release it then you should use garbage collection.
If the ownership and lifetime is easily tracked, then a decent compiler can track it just as well as the human and will not generate code that requires a hunt for garbage at all (contrary to your efficiency argument), but instead will explicitly alloc and then explicitly free just like the programmer would have had to do manually.
Once the expert understands the garbage collection system, he can avoid the inefficiencies that you are afraid of while still getting all the bang-for-his-buck in those cases where the hunt for garbage makes sense... and while we are on the subject, if efficiency is important then you arent New'ing inside that loop anyways.
If you want efficiency, stop being lazy.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959196</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960594</id>
	<title>Its a shame</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264845240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That the iPad is going to get a disproportionate amount of support compared to devices that are FAR superior, such as the Adam tablet from Notion Ink. (More expandability, hdmi, 1080p,  color lcd can change to a mode that is similar to e-paper)<br>Here is a demo of it: http://gizmodo.com/5444232/notion-ink-adam-pixel-qi-tabletereader-hands-on-your-screen-is-obsolete</p><p>And here is a mockup of the final unit, which is supposed to come out in june:<br>http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/28/notion-inks-adam-gets-a-name-june-2010-release/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That the iPad is going to get a disproportionate amount of support compared to devices that are FAR superior , such as the Adam tablet from Notion Ink .
( More expandability , hdmi , 1080p , color lcd can change to a mode that is similar to e-paper ) Here is a demo of it : http : //gizmodo.com/5444232/notion-ink-adam-pixel-qi-tabletereader-hands-on-your-screen-is-obsoleteAnd here is a mockup of the final unit , which is supposed to come out in june : http : //www.engadget.com/2009/12/28/notion-inks-adam-gets-a-name-june-2010-release/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That the iPad is going to get a disproportionate amount of support compared to devices that are FAR superior, such as the Adam tablet from Notion Ink.
(More expandability, hdmi, 1080p,  color lcd can change to a mode that is similar to e-paper)Here is a demo of it: http://gizmodo.com/5444232/notion-ink-adam-pixel-qi-tabletereader-hands-on-your-screen-is-obsoleteAnd here is a mockup of the final unit, which is supposed to come out in june:http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/28/notion-inks-adam-gets-a-name-june-2010-release/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958742</id>
	<title>xna</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264780380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>this would mean we could get xna games for the iPad</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>this would mean we could get xna games for the iPad</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this would mean we could get xna games for the iPad</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958942</id>
	<title>Displace the netbook?</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1264781880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Umm no.</p><p>1 - its far more expensive<br>2 - it has no keyboard<br>3 - did i mention it was expensive?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Umm no.1 - its far more expensive2 - it has no keyboard3 - did i mention it was expensive ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Umm no.1 - its far more expensive2 - it has no keyboard3 - did i mention it was expensive?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30968320</id>
	<title>Re:Raskin's Dream incarnate</title>
	<author>sootman</author>
	<datestamp>1264876560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Some good points, but one little snag...</p><p>"Multi-tasking is a dumb way to do this. it puts the load for managing the interaction on the human not the device."</p><p>Er, the device isn't SENTIENT, you know. You can ONLY interact in ways that programmers have PREDICTED and PROGRAMMED FOR. For example*, it is a HUGE PAIN IN THE ASS to send multiple pics in an email. Select a pic, copy, press the "home" button, tap "Mail", paste, press "home", tap on "Pictures",  find the pic again (starting again at the bottom--the damn thing doesn't even stay where you left it!), etc etc etc. This is very much a case of "[putting] the load for managing the interaction on the human not the device"!!!</p><p>Think I should post them to Flickr or Facebook? Well, I can use the app, if one has been written. But what if I want to post to a smaller service? What if I already have my own online gallery? Hell, I can't even send my pics to Walgreens, since they have a web-based uploader (no user-browsable filesystem!) and they haven't written an app.</p><p>I agree that there's a place for simplicity and I think the iPad is pretty spiffy but come on, you can't even easily switch between an IM session and another app. Yes, there are some IM apps with notifications, but what if you want to IM while playing a game, and the game is one that doesn't save state perfectly when you press "home"?</p><p>Furthermore, push notifications are NOT equal to local daemons in all cases. They're great if you want to get data from the outside world, but what if you want to a) ACT on data from the outside world (example: I want my iPhone to download the local temperature hourly and sound an alarm if it goes above or below a certain point), or b) what if you want to SEND data from the iPhone--for example, I want my phone to post its location to a server every hour. There are some truly great things that could be done with background processes and it'd be great to have an inch of leeway here.</p><p>* not so much an example of multitasking being needed per se, but an example of how hard it is to do things that weren't accounted for, or if they were, that weren't accounted for well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some good points , but one little snag... " Multi-tasking is a dumb way to do this .
it puts the load for managing the interaction on the human not the device .
" Er , the device is n't SENTIENT , you know .
You can ONLY interact in ways that programmers have PREDICTED and PROGRAMMED FOR .
For example * , it is a HUGE PAIN IN THE ASS to send multiple pics in an email .
Select a pic , copy , press the " home " button , tap " Mail " , paste , press " home " , tap on " Pictures " , find the pic again ( starting again at the bottom--the damn thing does n't even stay where you left it !
) , etc etc etc .
This is very much a case of " [ putting ] the load for managing the interaction on the human not the device " ! !
! Think I should post them to Flickr or Facebook ?
Well , I can use the app , if one has been written .
But what if I want to post to a smaller service ?
What if I already have my own online gallery ?
Hell , I ca n't even send my pics to Walgreens , since they have a web-based uploader ( no user-browsable filesystem !
) and they have n't written an app.I agree that there 's a place for simplicity and I think the iPad is pretty spiffy but come on , you ca n't even easily switch between an IM session and another app .
Yes , there are some IM apps with notifications , but what if you want to IM while playing a game , and the game is one that does n't save state perfectly when you press " home " ? Furthermore , push notifications are NOT equal to local daemons in all cases .
They 're great if you want to get data from the outside world , but what if you want to a ) ACT on data from the outside world ( example : I want my iPhone to download the local temperature hourly and sound an alarm if it goes above or below a certain point ) , or b ) what if you want to SEND data from the iPhone--for example , I want my phone to post its location to a server every hour .
There are some truly great things that could be done with background processes and it 'd be great to have an inch of leeway here .
* not so much an example of multitasking being needed per se , but an example of how hard it is to do things that were n't accounted for , or if they were , that were n't accounted for well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some good points, but one little snag..."Multi-tasking is a dumb way to do this.
it puts the load for managing the interaction on the human not the device.
"Er, the device isn't SENTIENT, you know.
You can ONLY interact in ways that programmers have PREDICTED and PROGRAMMED FOR.
For example*, it is a HUGE PAIN IN THE ASS to send multiple pics in an email.
Select a pic, copy, press the "home" button, tap "Mail", paste, press "home", tap on "Pictures",  find the pic again (starting again at the bottom--the damn thing doesn't even stay where you left it!
), etc etc etc.
This is very much a case of "[putting] the load for managing the interaction on the human not the device"!!
!Think I should post them to Flickr or Facebook?
Well, I can use the app, if one has been written.
But what if I want to post to a smaller service?
What if I already have my own online gallery?
Hell, I can't even send my pics to Walgreens, since they have a web-based uploader (no user-browsable filesystem!
) and they haven't written an app.I agree that there's a place for simplicity and I think the iPad is pretty spiffy but come on, you can't even easily switch between an IM session and another app.
Yes, there are some IM apps with notifications, but what if you want to IM while playing a game, and the game is one that doesn't save state perfectly when you press "home"?Furthermore, push notifications are NOT equal to local daemons in all cases.
They're great if you want to get data from the outside world, but what if you want to a) ACT on data from the outside world (example: I want my iPhone to download the local temperature hourly and sound an alarm if it goes above or below a certain point), or b) what if you want to SEND data from the iPhone--for example, I want my phone to post its location to a server every hour.
There are some truly great things that could be done with background processes and it'd be great to have an inch of leeway here.
* not so much an example of multitasking being needed per se, but an example of how hard it is to do things that weren't accounted for, or if they were, that weren't accounted for well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959048</id>
	<title>Re:Certainly won't displace it in...</title>
	<author>Unoriginal\_Nickname</author>
	<datestamp>1264782660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If anybody on this planet has had time to play with an iPad, it's Steve Jobs. Seeing him fumble the device and make repeated typing errors during a public presentation does not inspire my confidence about its utility.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If anybody on this planet has had time to play with an iPad , it 's Steve Jobs .
Seeing him fumble the device and make repeated typing errors during a public presentation does not inspire my confidence about its utility .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If anybody on this planet has had time to play with an iPad, it's Steve Jobs.
Seeing him fumble the device and make repeated typing errors during a public presentation does not inspire my confidence about its utility.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958868</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958756</id>
	<title>Pffff</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264780440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The iPad won't displace the netbook. Because of its price and lack of perennial netbook features, such as a physical keyboard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The iPad wo n't displace the netbook .
Because of its price and lack of perennial netbook features , such as a physical keyboard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The iPad won't displace the netbook.
Because of its price and lack of perennial netbook features, such as a physical keyboard.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959216</id>
	<title>I'm an Apple fan, but...</title>
	<author>93 Escort Wagon</author>
	<datestamp>1264784340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Shouldn't we be waiting until, oh I don't know, the device actually is released and we can see how this whole thing plays out?</p><p>It's almost like Slashdot is perpetually trying to make up for that whole "No wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame." thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Should n't we be waiting until , oh I do n't know , the device actually is released and we can see how this whole thing plays out ? It 's almost like Slashdot is perpetually trying to make up for that whole " No wireless .
Less space than a Nomad .
Lame. " thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shouldn't we be waiting until, oh I don't know, the device actually is released and we can see how this whole thing plays out?It's almost like Slashdot is perpetually trying to make up for that whole "No wireless.
Less space than a Nomad.
Lame." thing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959196</id>
	<title>Garbage collection is over rated</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264784100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't see why people are so obsessed with garbage collection. Automatic garbage collection should be used sparingly. If the "ownership" of an object is not clear, or could not be efficiently tracked, or if you cant be sure if all the entities holding the pointer or the reference have to release it then you should use garbage collection. But blindly using it for classes that will be instantiated in the millions of instances where the ownership and referers are clearly known and can be notified  automatic garbage collection comes with severe performance penalty.<p>

I grew up in really old Fortran codes where we obsessed with the number of square roots it takes to do this or how to reduce the number of trig function calls by two (not a factor of two, just two sin() calls are avoided in a tight loop). Eventually came to C++ and saw everyone using new and delete left right and center and I naturally assumed it would have trivial cost. Imagine my surprise when I actually ran the comparison benchmarks. With modern math coprocessors, a sqrt() is just three times mults, sin() is about 14, hyperbolic sine, logarithms are all about the same, inverse trig functions were around 25-30 times the cost of a mult. You know what? A simple push\_back() or push\_front() to an std::list is around 180 to 200 times as expensive as a mult. Throw in automatic garbage collection on top of this, you are looking at some serious performance degradation. </p><p>

If you cant program without memory leaks in plain C, C++, I just won't hire you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't see why people are so obsessed with garbage collection .
Automatic garbage collection should be used sparingly .
If the " ownership " of an object is not clear , or could not be efficiently tracked , or if you cant be sure if all the entities holding the pointer or the reference have to release it then you should use garbage collection .
But blindly using it for classes that will be instantiated in the millions of instances where the ownership and referers are clearly known and can be notified automatic garbage collection comes with severe performance penalty .
I grew up in really old Fortran codes where we obsessed with the number of square roots it takes to do this or how to reduce the number of trig function calls by two ( not a factor of two , just two sin ( ) calls are avoided in a tight loop ) .
Eventually came to C + + and saw everyone using new and delete left right and center and I naturally assumed it would have trivial cost .
Imagine my surprise when I actually ran the comparison benchmarks .
With modern math coprocessors , a sqrt ( ) is just three times mults , sin ( ) is about 14 , hyperbolic sine , logarithms are all about the same , inverse trig functions were around 25-30 times the cost of a mult .
You know what ?
A simple push \ _back ( ) or push \ _front ( ) to an std : : list is around 180 to 200 times as expensive as a mult .
Throw in automatic garbage collection on top of this , you are looking at some serious performance degradation .
If you cant program without memory leaks in plain C , C + + , I just wo n't hire you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't see why people are so obsessed with garbage collection.
Automatic garbage collection should be used sparingly.
If the "ownership" of an object is not clear, or could not be efficiently tracked, or if you cant be sure if all the entities holding the pointer or the reference have to release it then you should use garbage collection.
But blindly using it for classes that will be instantiated in the millions of instances where the ownership and referers are clearly known and can be notified  automatic garbage collection comes with severe performance penalty.
I grew up in really old Fortran codes where we obsessed with the number of square roots it takes to do this or how to reduce the number of trig function calls by two (not a factor of two, just two sin() calls are avoided in a tight loop).
Eventually came to C++ and saw everyone using new and delete left right and center and I naturally assumed it would have trivial cost.
Imagine my surprise when I actually ran the comparison benchmarks.
With modern math coprocessors, a sqrt() is just three times mults, sin() is about 14, hyperbolic sine, logarithms are all about the same, inverse trig functions were around 25-30 times the cost of a mult.
You know what?
A simple push\_back() or push\_front() to an std::list is around 180 to 200 times as expensive as a mult.
Throw in automatic garbage collection on top of this, you are looking at some serious performance degradation.
If you cant program without memory leaks in plain C, C++, I just won't hire you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959032</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30985344</id>
	<title>Re:Raskin's Dream incarnate</title>
	<author>Wovel</author>
	<datestamp>1265056800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can actually do that on the iphone right now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can actually do that on the iphone right now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can actually do that on the iphone right now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30966328</id>
	<title>Re:Not seeing any netbook displacement</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264853460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know it's an Apple product, but you actually have to look at the price before calling it steep.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know it 's an Apple product , but you actually have to look at the price before calling it steep .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know it's an Apple product, but you actually have to look at the price before calling it steep.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958974</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961158</id>
	<title>Re:Raskin's Dream incarnate</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264855080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>For example, people insisted background processing was needed to handle incoming e-mail or other daemon tasks for apps.  But the vast majority of those needs (though definitiely not all) are now served much better by the push notification deamon that apple implemented.  See background processing was just one way to solve that problem that you were used.</p></div><p>This makes no sense.  How is a daemon not background processing?</p><p>Anyway, the issue is not that the iPad lacks multitasking capability, rather that it imposes constraints on it.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>You did not need it and you are now better off without it.</p></div><p>Gee, and here I was thinking that it was devices that needed to cater to my requirements, when really it's the other way round.  However did we ever get on without people like you?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>This is why other devices that don't get what's being created here are going to fail.</p></div><p>And what exactly IS being created here?  A device whose main selling point (direct from the CEO, no less) is the "phenomonal" ability to view a single web page, and is overall unspecialised, less functional and costs more than competing devices?  Yep, sounds like a sure-fire market success to me...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For example , people insisted background processing was needed to handle incoming e-mail or other daemon tasks for apps .
But the vast majority of those needs ( though definitiely not all ) are now served much better by the push notification deamon that apple implemented .
See background processing was just one way to solve that problem that you were used.This makes no sense .
How is a daemon not background processing ? Anyway , the issue is not that the iPad lacks multitasking capability , rather that it imposes constraints on it.You did not need it and you are now better off without it.Gee , and here I was thinking that it was devices that needed to cater to my requirements , when really it 's the other way round .
However did we ever get on without people like you ? This is why other devices that do n't get what 's being created here are going to fail.And what exactly IS being created here ?
A device whose main selling point ( direct from the CEO , no less ) is the " phenomonal " ability to view a single web page , and is overall unspecialised , less functional and costs more than competing devices ?
Yep , sounds like a sure-fire market success to me.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For example, people insisted background processing was needed to handle incoming e-mail or other daemon tasks for apps.
But the vast majority of those needs (though definitiely not all) are now served much better by the push notification deamon that apple implemented.
See background processing was just one way to solve that problem that you were used.This makes no sense.
How is a daemon not background processing?Anyway, the issue is not that the iPad lacks multitasking capability, rather that it imposes constraints on it.You did not need it and you are now better off without it.Gee, and here I was thinking that it was devices that needed to cater to my requirements, when really it's the other way round.
However did we ever get on without people like you?This is why other devices that don't get what's being created here are going to fail.And what exactly IS being created here?
A device whose main selling point (direct from the CEO, no less) is the "phenomonal" ability to view a single web page, and is overall unspecialised, less functional and costs more than competing devices?
Yep, sounds like a sure-fire market success to me...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960386</id>
	<title>Re:Certainly won't displace it in...</title>
	<author>kramerd</author>
	<datestamp>1264842240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree, you have no idea what you are talking about.</p><p>For half of the cost of the cheapest ipad, you can get a netbook, which has more features, and 10x the hard drive (if not 30x).</p><p>After giving apple a shot. I have noticed that on literally every product produced, a cheaper, better alternative already exists.</p><p>You are claiming that I should give apple a shot, and compare the ipad to anything else. I'm not gonna buy one unless its better, regardless of price. Don't hold your breath.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree , you have no idea what you are talking about.For half of the cost of the cheapest ipad , you can get a netbook , which has more features , and 10x the hard drive ( if not 30x ) .After giving apple a shot .
I have noticed that on literally every product produced , a cheaper , better alternative already exists.You are claiming that I should give apple a shot , and compare the ipad to anything else .
I 'm not gon na buy one unless its better , regardless of price .
Do n't hold your breath .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree, you have no idea what you are talking about.For half of the cost of the cheapest ipad, you can get a netbook, which has more features, and 10x the hard drive (if not 30x).After giving apple a shot.
I have noticed that on literally every product produced, a cheaper, better alternative already exists.You are claiming that I should give apple a shot, and compare the ipad to anything else.
I'm not gonna buy one unless its better, regardless of price.
Don't hold your breath.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958868</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959556</id>
	<title>Re:Garbage collection is over rated</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264788300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I understood every single word you wrote, and I think I divined your intent, but your mode of expression is so sloppy I wonder how you could demand precision from anybody else.</p><p>If you run whatever you hire for as incoherently as you rant, I wouldn't work for you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I understood every single word you wrote , and I think I divined your intent , but your mode of expression is so sloppy I wonder how you could demand precision from anybody else.If you run whatever you hire for as incoherently as you rant , I would n't work for you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I understood every single word you wrote, and I think I divined your intent, but your mode of expression is so sloppy I wonder how you could demand precision from anybody else.If you run whatever you hire for as incoherently as you rant, I wouldn't work for you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959196</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960006</id>
	<title>multi-task</title>
	<author>codepunk</author>
	<datestamp>1264794600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think you are very much wrong about multi-tasking and I think you can ask any iphone user and verify this. First of all the typical<br>joe user could give a shit less. I am a developer and I am perfectly happy that the iphone and even the ipad has no multi-tasking. Sure<br>it would be nice to have. However I realize that not having it keeps my device from turning to shit because I loaded someone's craplication that thinks<br>it is cool to burn my battery life by running a worthless notifier, spam downloader etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you are very much wrong about multi-tasking and I think you can ask any iphone user and verify this .
First of all the typicaljoe user could give a shit less .
I am a developer and I am perfectly happy that the iphone and even the ipad has no multi-tasking .
Sureit would be nice to have .
However I realize that not having it keeps my device from turning to shit because I loaded someone 's craplication that thinksit is cool to burn my battery life by running a worthless notifier , spam downloader etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you are very much wrong about multi-tasking and I think you can ask any iphone user and verify this.
First of all the typicaljoe user could give a shit less.
I am a developer and I am perfectly happy that the iphone and even the ipad has no multi-tasking.
Sureit would be nice to have.
However I realize that not having it keeps my device from turning to shit because I loaded someone's craplication that thinksit is cool to burn my battery life by running a worthless notifier, spam downloader etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958974</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961842</id>
	<title>Re:Raskin's Dream incarnate</title>
	<author>siride</author>
	<datestamp>1264863900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A hammer is obvious to use because it has one extremely specific and very simple purpose.  We already have plenty of tech devices like that, like digital thermometers, watches, etc.  But for anything informational that is more complicated than those things, the ability for the device to be "as obvious as a hammer" is going to become impossible.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A hammer is obvious to use because it has one extremely specific and very simple purpose .
We already have plenty of tech devices like that , like digital thermometers , watches , etc .
But for anything informational that is more complicated than those things , the ability for the device to be " as obvious as a hammer " is going to become impossible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A hammer is obvious to use because it has one extremely specific and very simple purpose.
We already have plenty of tech devices like that, like digital thermometers, watches, etc.
But for anything informational that is more complicated than those things, the ability for the device to be "as obvious as a hammer" is going to become impossible.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30971580</id>
	<title>me too</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264963440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree. It's like there's a campaign to smear apple - one of the best run companies out there, led by a visionary who literally did build the company out of his garage with the help of Wozniak and others. It's a true American company - an example to the world. They have a vision to not just dump technology into peoples hands but instead take responsibility for delivering technology that humans control, rather than technology to control humans.</p><p>Federalist government spooks are probably behind the smear.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree .
It 's like there 's a campaign to smear apple - one of the best run companies out there , led by a visionary who literally did build the company out of his garage with the help of Wozniak and others .
It 's a true American company - an example to the world .
They have a vision to not just dump technology into peoples hands but instead take responsibility for delivering technology that humans control , rather than technology to control humans.Federalist government spooks are probably behind the smear .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree.
It's like there's a campaign to smear apple - one of the best run companies out there, led by a visionary who literally did build the company out of his garage with the help of Wozniak and others.
It's a true American company - an example to the world.
They have a vision to not just dump technology into peoples hands but instead take responsibility for delivering technology that humans control, rather than technology to control humans.Federalist government spooks are probably behind the smear.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959604</id>
	<title>This is pathetic. Don't be afraid to learn.</title>
	<author>aristotle-dude</author>
	<datestamp>1264788900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>When I joined my current employer, I did not know how to write in perl but I learned quickly and took over development of our first e-commerce service and we launched on time. During my time there I've learned perl, VFP, C#, Python and Java.
<p>
If you want to learn how to develop for the iPhone OS then you need to learn Objective-C.
</p><p>
I don't care if you have an existing codebase in C#. You are going to have to expose your code as generic webservices anyway since Mono for the iPhone does not support<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET remoting anyway. Once your "cloud" services are available as standard web services, they can be accessed by any language and it makes sense to learn the main native language of the iPhone OS platform.
</p><p>
Trying to use Mono Touch as a crutch smacks of laziness and fear of learning.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I joined my current employer , I did not know how to write in perl but I learned quickly and took over development of our first e-commerce service and we launched on time .
During my time there I 've learned perl , VFP , C # , Python and Java .
If you want to learn how to develop for the iPhone OS then you need to learn Objective-C . I do n't care if you have an existing codebase in C # .
You are going to have to expose your code as generic webservices anyway since Mono for the iPhone does not support .NET remoting anyway .
Once your " cloud " services are available as standard web services , they can be accessed by any language and it makes sense to learn the main native language of the iPhone OS platform .
Trying to use Mono Touch as a crutch smacks of laziness and fear of learning .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I joined my current employer, I did not know how to write in perl but I learned quickly and took over development of our first e-commerce service and we launched on time.
During my time there I've learned perl, VFP, C#, Python and Java.
If you want to learn how to develop for the iPhone OS then you need to learn Objective-C.

I don't care if you have an existing codebase in C#.
You are going to have to expose your code as generic webservices anyway since Mono for the iPhone does not support .NET remoting anyway.
Once your "cloud" services are available as standard web services, they can be accessed by any language and it makes sense to learn the main native language of the iPhone OS platform.
Trying to use Mono Touch as a crutch smacks of laziness and fear of learning.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960446</id>
	<title>Re:Garbage collection is over rated</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1264843080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Eventually came to C++ and saw everyone using new and delete left right and center and I naturally assumed it would have trivial cost. Imagine my surprise when I actually ran the comparison benchmarks. With modern math coprocessors, a sqrt() is just three times mults, sin() is about 14, hyperbolic sine, logarithms are all about the same, inverse trig functions were around 25-30 times the cost of a mult. You know what? A simple push\_back() or push\_front() to an std::list is around 180 to 200 times as expensive as a mult. Throw in automatic garbage collection on top of this, you are looking at some serious performance degradation.</p></div><p>By the way, this is actually a very wrong way to go around this. Memory allocation in C and C++ (and other languages with memory allocation) is expensive precisely because they don't have compacting GCs - it means that allocation algorithm is that much more complex (and time-consuming), as it has to search for a fitting free block, and update the corresponding memory structures. And, as you keep the program running, and the heap gets fragmented more and more, allocation performance gets worse.</p><p>In comparison, a compacting generational GC, as used in Java or<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET, periodically defragments the heap so that unallocated memory is always on top. The result is that a single allocation from a GC heap is quite often literally a single pointer (to lower boundary of unallocated space) increment instruction.</p><p>Furthermore, depending on allocation patterns, deallocation with GC can be faster as well - e.g. if you call "new" in a loop in Java, all objects it'll allocate will be in a single contiguous block - and GC knows about that, and will be able to deallocate all objects in that block together (in a perfect case, with a single pointer decrement), if their lifetimes all end at the same time.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Eventually came to C + + and saw everyone using new and delete left right and center and I naturally assumed it would have trivial cost .
Imagine my surprise when I actually ran the comparison benchmarks .
With modern math coprocessors , a sqrt ( ) is just three times mults , sin ( ) is about 14 , hyperbolic sine , logarithms are all about the same , inverse trig functions were around 25-30 times the cost of a mult .
You know what ?
A simple push \ _back ( ) or push \ _front ( ) to an std : : list is around 180 to 200 times as expensive as a mult .
Throw in automatic garbage collection on top of this , you are looking at some serious performance degradation.By the way , this is actually a very wrong way to go around this .
Memory allocation in C and C + + ( and other languages with memory allocation ) is expensive precisely because they do n't have compacting GCs - it means that allocation algorithm is that much more complex ( and time-consuming ) , as it has to search for a fitting free block , and update the corresponding memory structures .
And , as you keep the program running , and the heap gets fragmented more and more , allocation performance gets worse.In comparison , a compacting generational GC , as used in Java or .NET , periodically defragments the heap so that unallocated memory is always on top .
The result is that a single allocation from a GC heap is quite often literally a single pointer ( to lower boundary of unallocated space ) increment instruction.Furthermore , depending on allocation patterns , deallocation with GC can be faster as well - e.g .
if you call " new " in a loop in Java , all objects it 'll allocate will be in a single contiguous block - and GC knows about that , and will be able to deallocate all objects in that block together ( in a perfect case , with a single pointer decrement ) , if their lifetimes all end at the same time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Eventually came to C++ and saw everyone using new and delete left right and center and I naturally assumed it would have trivial cost.
Imagine my surprise when I actually ran the comparison benchmarks.
With modern math coprocessors, a sqrt() is just three times mults, sin() is about 14, hyperbolic sine, logarithms are all about the same, inverse trig functions were around 25-30 times the cost of a mult.
You know what?
A simple push\_back() or push\_front() to an std::list is around 180 to 200 times as expensive as a mult.
Throw in automatic garbage collection on top of this, you are looking at some serious performance degradation.By the way, this is actually a very wrong way to go around this.
Memory allocation in C and C++ (and other languages with memory allocation) is expensive precisely because they don't have compacting GCs - it means that allocation algorithm is that much more complex (and time-consuming), as it has to search for a fitting free block, and update the corresponding memory structures.
And, as you keep the program running, and the heap gets fragmented more and more, allocation performance gets worse.In comparison, a compacting generational GC, as used in Java or .NET, periodically defragments the heap so that unallocated memory is always on top.
The result is that a single allocation from a GC heap is quite often literally a single pointer (to lower boundary of unallocated space) increment instruction.Furthermore, depending on allocation patterns, deallocation with GC can be faster as well - e.g.
if you call "new" in a loop in Java, all objects it'll allocate will be in a single contiguous block - and GC knows about that, and will be able to deallocate all objects in that block together (in a perfect case, with a single pointer decrement), if their lifetimes all end at the same time.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959196</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30966054</id>
	<title>Re:Its a shame</title>
	<author>aristotle-dude</author>
	<datestamp>1264850820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Software, software, software attracts developer, developers, developer. Hardware specs give hardware fanboys a hardon but without a good API and distribution system, developers and consumers will not go with it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Software , software , software attracts developer , developers , developer .
Hardware specs give hardware fanboys a hardon but without a good API and distribution system , developers and consumers will not go with it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Software, software, software attracts developer, developers, developer.
Hardware specs give hardware fanboys a hardon but without a good API and distribution system, developers and consumers will not go with it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960390</id>
	<title>Re:Garbage collection is over rated</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1264842360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I don't see why people are so obsessed with garbage collection. Automatic garbage collection should be used sparingly.</p></div><p>You pretty much can't have proper closures without some form of automatic garbage collection. And, while you can have them with reference counting (which is still a form of automatic garbage collection), it's <em>really</em> easy to inadvertently create a cyclic reference with closures, so you really want a tracing GC there. Hence why, historically, pretty much all proper functional languages - Scheme, the whole ML family, Haskell etc - used GC, even back when it was still considered to be strictly a toy of the academia.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't see why people are so obsessed with garbage collection .
Automatic garbage collection should be used sparingly.You pretty much ca n't have proper closures without some form of automatic garbage collection .
And , while you can have them with reference counting ( which is still a form of automatic garbage collection ) , it 's really easy to inadvertently create a cyclic reference with closures , so you really want a tracing GC there .
Hence why , historically , pretty much all proper functional languages - Scheme , the whole ML family , Haskell etc - used GC , even back when it was still considered to be strictly a toy of the academia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't see why people are so obsessed with garbage collection.
Automatic garbage collection should be used sparingly.You pretty much can't have proper closures without some form of automatic garbage collection.
And, while you can have them with reference counting (which is still a form of automatic garbage collection), it's really easy to inadvertently create a cyclic reference with closures, so you really want a tracing GC there.
Hence why, historically, pretty much all proper functional languages - Scheme, the whole ML family, Haskell etc - used GC, even back when it was still considered to be strictly a toy of the academia.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959196</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959158</id>
	<title>Interop</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264783620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>say goodbye to pinvokes</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>say goodbye to pinvokes</tokentext>
<sentencetext>say goodbye to pinvokes</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959036</id>
	<title>Missing Remoting</title>
	<author>chrpai</author>
	<datestamp>1264782540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd be very interested in this but the last time I check it doesn't support<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET's remoting API's such as webservices.

I'd want to be able to make rich thin clients that talk to application layer servers but Apple always make sure the garden is well walled.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd be very interested in this but the last time I check it does n't support .NET 's remoting API 's such as webservices .
I 'd want to be able to make rich thin clients that talk to application layer servers but Apple always make sure the garden is well walled .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd be very interested in this but the last time I check it doesn't support .NET's remoting API's such as webservices.
I'd want to be able to make rich thin clients that talk to application layer servers but Apple always make sure the garden is well walled.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30962456</id>
	<title>Working for the enemy</title>
	<author>paxcoder</author>
	<datestamp>1264869000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Microsoft must be loving this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft must be loving this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft must be loving this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961290</id>
	<title>Re:Raskin's Dream incarnate</title>
	<author>evanspw</author>
	<datestamp>1264856940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>bang on goombah99. a corollary of what you've said is that the maintenance for this thing is gonna be much much simpler than for a general purpose PC. i reckon that will be a monster word-of-mouth selling point. folks will be telling each other other how bloody simple it all is compared to the PC that's gathering dust in the back room.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>bang on goombah99 .
a corollary of what you 've said is that the maintenance for this thing is gon na be much much simpler than for a general purpose PC .
i reckon that will be a monster word-of-mouth selling point .
folks will be telling each other other how bloody simple it all is compared to the PC that 's gathering dust in the back room .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>bang on goombah99.
a corollary of what you've said is that the maintenance for this thing is gonna be much much simpler than for a general purpose PC.
i reckon that will be a monster word-of-mouth selling point.
folks will be telling each other other how bloody simple it all is compared to the PC that's gathering dust in the back room.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959382</id>
	<title>Re:Nothing new here</title>
	<author>IronChef</author>
	<datestamp>1264786140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But without these kind of posts, we'd be deprived of some true comedy gold. Check out the last link in the summary. The first paragraph reads:</p><p><i>Apple has just fired a death shot at the netbook. The new iPad could easily displace the netbook category, and I believe it will. Cheap laptops are at risk of extinction as well.</i></p><p>I am typing this on an expensive, arguably even overpriced Macbook Pro so I am not drinking the Apple Haterade. But this kind of hyperbole is... pretty astounding.</p><p>The only revolutionary thing about the iPad is a business thing, not a tech thing... the new AT&amp;T data plans.</p><p>Hopefully, someday, I will be able to get a $30/mo, no contract, unlimited data plan that I can stick onto any computer I happen to have. (Hell, I might settle for adding a $30 data plan to my hacktivated iPhone. It isn't possible to do without a contract extension... for all lines on the family plan the phone is on. But I should complain on HowardForums, not here...)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But without these kind of posts , we 'd be deprived of some true comedy gold .
Check out the last link in the summary .
The first paragraph reads : Apple has just fired a death shot at the netbook .
The new iPad could easily displace the netbook category , and I believe it will .
Cheap laptops are at risk of extinction as well.I am typing this on an expensive , arguably even overpriced Macbook Pro so I am not drinking the Apple Haterade .
But this kind of hyperbole is... pretty astounding.The only revolutionary thing about the iPad is a business thing , not a tech thing... the new AT&amp;T data plans.Hopefully , someday , I will be able to get a $ 30/mo , no contract , unlimited data plan that I can stick onto any computer I happen to have .
( Hell , I might settle for adding a $ 30 data plan to my hacktivated iPhone .
It is n't possible to do without a contract extension... for all lines on the family plan the phone is on .
But I should complain on HowardForums , not here... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But without these kind of posts, we'd be deprived of some true comedy gold.
Check out the last link in the summary.
The first paragraph reads:Apple has just fired a death shot at the netbook.
The new iPad could easily displace the netbook category, and I believe it will.
Cheap laptops are at risk of extinction as well.I am typing this on an expensive, arguably even overpriced Macbook Pro so I am not drinking the Apple Haterade.
But this kind of hyperbole is... pretty astounding.The only revolutionary thing about the iPad is a business thing, not a tech thing... the new AT&amp;T data plans.Hopefully, someday, I will be able to get a $30/mo, no contract, unlimited data plan that I can stick onto any computer I happen to have.
(Hell, I might settle for adding a $30 data plan to my hacktivated iPhone.
It isn't possible to do without a contract extension... for all lines on the family plan the phone is on.
But I should complain on HowardForums, not here...)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958768</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960118</id>
	<title>Re:Not seeing any netbook displacement</title>
	<author>DragonWriter</author>
	<datestamp>1264882500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> I'm not seeing the iPad displacing the netbook even with<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.net. The problem isn't that developers can't develop well, the problem is that Apple doesn't let developers do much with iPhone OS.</p></div> </blockquote><p>The real problem, as I see it, has nothing to do with developers. A netbook can be the <i>one and only</i> computer for a user that doesn't need a lot of horsepower, but needs mobility, and a model with 3G support costs less than half as much as an iPad with 3G support (and, if you need 3G support, your going to get a data plan anyway, and a netbook is even cheaper up-front when carrier subsidized with a contract for a data plan.) An iPad, on the other hand, is substantially more expensive <i>and</i> requires the user to have and keep another computer just to run iTunes.</p><p>The iPad might succeed, but until it can be a first computer and becomes more price competitive, its not going to displace netbooks. Plus, the lack of an integral keyboard makes it not particularly useful for certain roles for which netbooks are ideal.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not seeing the iPad displacing the netbook even with .net .
The problem is n't that developers ca n't develop well , the problem is that Apple does n't let developers do much with iPhone OS .
The real problem , as I see it , has nothing to do with developers .
A netbook can be the one and only computer for a user that does n't need a lot of horsepower , but needs mobility , and a model with 3G support costs less than half as much as an iPad with 3G support ( and , if you need 3G support , your going to get a data plan anyway , and a netbook is even cheaper up-front when carrier subsidized with a contract for a data plan .
) An iPad , on the other hand , is substantially more expensive and requires the user to have and keep another computer just to run iTunes.The iPad might succeed , but until it can be a first computer and becomes more price competitive , its not going to displace netbooks .
Plus , the lack of an integral keyboard makes it not particularly useful for certain roles for which netbooks are ideal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> I'm not seeing the iPad displacing the netbook even with .net.
The problem isn't that developers can't develop well, the problem is that Apple doesn't let developers do much with iPhone OS.
The real problem, as I see it, has nothing to do with developers.
A netbook can be the one and only computer for a user that doesn't need a lot of horsepower, but needs mobility, and a model with 3G support costs less than half as much as an iPad with 3G support (and, if you need 3G support, your going to get a data plan anyway, and a netbook is even cheaper up-front when carrier subsidized with a contract for a data plan.
) An iPad, on the other hand, is substantially more expensive and requires the user to have and keep another computer just to run iTunes.The iPad might succeed, but until it can be a first computer and becomes more price competitive, its not going to displace netbooks.
Plus, the lack of an integral keyboard makes it not particularly useful for certain roles for which netbooks are ideal.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958974</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30964064</id>
	<title>Re:Certainly won't displace it in...</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1264879020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But the burden is upon those who claim it will be successful. I can criticise those claims, without having ever seen one.</p><p>No, I haven't seen an Ipad. But I haven't seen most other tech products, just as most Apple fans haven't tried every other single tech product out there. But that doesn't stop them making claims about how Apple products are best, and for some reason we still have endless coverage over the unreleased iStale... You're right, I wish the speculation and media coverage would stop until (if) the thing is actually released. Then, it can have a single article, at most, just as happens with any other tech product.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But the burden is upon those who claim it will be successful .
I can criticise those claims , without having ever seen one.No , I have n't seen an Ipad .
But I have n't seen most other tech products , just as most Apple fans have n't tried every other single tech product out there .
But that does n't stop them making claims about how Apple products are best , and for some reason we still have endless coverage over the unreleased iStale... You 're right , I wish the speculation and media coverage would stop until ( if ) the thing is actually released .
Then , it can have a single article , at most , just as happens with any other tech product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But the burden is upon those who claim it will be successful.
I can criticise those claims, without having ever seen one.No, I haven't seen an Ipad.
But I haven't seen most other tech products, just as most Apple fans haven't tried every other single tech product out there.
But that doesn't stop them making claims about how Apple products are best, and for some reason we still have endless coverage over the unreleased iStale... You're right, I wish the speculation and media coverage would stop until (if) the thing is actually released.
Then, it can have a single article, at most, just as happens with any other tech product.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958868</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961480</id>
	<title>Not definsible..</title>
	<author>Junta</author>
	<datestamp>1264860120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> It does not improve a perfectly weighted japanese sushi knife to attach car steering wheel and fire extinguisher to it just in case you need to multi-task. Each item itself has all the controls and human interface it needs for it's task and only that.</p></div><p>That is a broken analogy.  Each one of those devices has hard-set physical characteristics that inherently conflict with each other.  The iPad can do multiple things, but not concurrently.  Their UI is in no way hard set to preclude any of the functions people are asking about.  A knife can never be a reasonable steering wheel ever, it isn't just that it can't cut and be a wheel at the same time.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>In raskin's vision, the appliance would never need instructions. it would be as obvious how to use it as a hammer is.</p></div><p>And yet I see in hands on demos people trying various random gestures, and requiring the Apple rep to demonstrate what gesture was needed to perform a task.  Notably, pinch to 'go back', how the hell is that intuitive?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Moreover you don't really want multi-taksing. You think you do but what you really mean is you want to beable to context swtich easily and for cases where apps need to interact that they do so in the way you want them to.</p> </div><p>People don't complain about WebOS's realization of small form-factor multitasking, where each app is a full-screened app at pretty much all times.  You seem to be attacking the multi-window model, which is a fair thing to question particularly in small form factors, but forbidding a program from executing in the background (doing non-interactive things like receiving instant messages or manipulating audio, etc) is asinine.  I wonder what your post will be when Apple does finally cave to allowing third-party apps to background execute, it will happen I can guarantee.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>For example, people insisted background processing was needed to handle incoming e-mail or other daemon tasks for apps. But the vast majority of those needs (though definitiely not all) are now served much better by the push notification deamon that apple implemented. See background processing was just one way to solve that problem that you were used. You did not need it and you are now better off without it.</p></div><p>Umm, you do realize that the daemon they implemented is explicitly a form of background processing?  Apple *needs* it to deliver the things they need, and they allow themselves the privilege of background execution, they just deny it to third parties.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It does not improve a perfectly weighted japanese sushi knife to attach car steering wheel and fire extinguisher to it just in case you need to multi-task .
Each item itself has all the controls and human interface it needs for it 's task and only that.That is a broken analogy .
Each one of those devices has hard-set physical characteristics that inherently conflict with each other .
The iPad can do multiple things , but not concurrently .
Their UI is in no way hard set to preclude any of the functions people are asking about .
A knife can never be a reasonable steering wheel ever , it is n't just that it ca n't cut and be a wheel at the same time.In raskin 's vision , the appliance would never need instructions .
it would be as obvious how to use it as a hammer is.And yet I see in hands on demos people trying various random gestures , and requiring the Apple rep to demonstrate what gesture was needed to perform a task .
Notably , pinch to 'go back ' , how the hell is that intuitive ? Moreover you do n't really want multi-taksing .
You think you do but what you really mean is you want to beable to context swtich easily and for cases where apps need to interact that they do so in the way you want them to .
People do n't complain about WebOS 's realization of small form-factor multitasking , where each app is a full-screened app at pretty much all times .
You seem to be attacking the multi-window model , which is a fair thing to question particularly in small form factors , but forbidding a program from executing in the background ( doing non-interactive things like receiving instant messages or manipulating audio , etc ) is asinine .
I wonder what your post will be when Apple does finally cave to allowing third-party apps to background execute , it will happen I can guarantee.For example , people insisted background processing was needed to handle incoming e-mail or other daemon tasks for apps .
But the vast majority of those needs ( though definitiely not all ) are now served much better by the push notification deamon that apple implemented .
See background processing was just one way to solve that problem that you were used .
You did not need it and you are now better off without it.Umm , you do realize that the daemon they implemented is explicitly a form of background processing ?
Apple * needs * it to deliver the things they need , and they allow themselves the privilege of background execution , they just deny it to third parties .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> It does not improve a perfectly weighted japanese sushi knife to attach car steering wheel and fire extinguisher to it just in case you need to multi-task.
Each item itself has all the controls and human interface it needs for it's task and only that.That is a broken analogy.
Each one of those devices has hard-set physical characteristics that inherently conflict with each other.
The iPad can do multiple things, but not concurrently.
Their UI is in no way hard set to preclude any of the functions people are asking about.
A knife can never be a reasonable steering wheel ever, it isn't just that it can't cut and be a wheel at the same time.In raskin's vision, the appliance would never need instructions.
it would be as obvious how to use it as a hammer is.And yet I see in hands on demos people trying various random gestures, and requiring the Apple rep to demonstrate what gesture was needed to perform a task.
Notably, pinch to 'go back', how the hell is that intuitive?Moreover you don't really want multi-taksing.
You think you do but what you really mean is you want to beable to context swtich easily and for cases where apps need to interact that they do so in the way you want them to.
People don't complain about WebOS's realization of small form-factor multitasking, where each app is a full-screened app at pretty much all times.
You seem to be attacking the multi-window model, which is a fair thing to question particularly in small form factors, but forbidding a program from executing in the background (doing non-interactive things like receiving instant messages or manipulating audio, etc) is asinine.
I wonder what your post will be when Apple does finally cave to allowing third-party apps to background execute, it will happen I can guarantee.For example, people insisted background processing was needed to handle incoming e-mail or other daemon tasks for apps.
But the vast majority of those needs (though definitiely not all) are now served much better by the push notification deamon that apple implemented.
See background processing was just one way to solve that problem that you were used.
You did not need it and you are now better off without it.Umm, you do realize that the daemon they implemented is explicitly a form of background processing?
Apple *needs* it to deliver the things they need, and they allow themselves the privilege of background execution, they just deny it to third parties.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960422</id>
	<title>Re:iCrap news overload</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264842720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think Steve Jobs was chosen the upper-class twitter of the year, or something.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think Steve Jobs was chosen the upper-class twitter of the year , or something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think Steve Jobs was chosen the upper-class twitter of the year, or something.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30966072</id>
	<title>Re:I'm an Apple fan, but...</title>
	<author>flydpnkrtn</author>
	<datestamp>1264850880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yea the Taco really put his foot in his mouth on that one<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>( <a href="http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23/1816257" title="slashdot.org">http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23/1816257</a> [slashdot.org] is the article in question for those wondering what the frack we're talking about)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yea the Taco really put his foot in his mouth on that one : ) ( http : //apple.slashdot.org/article.pl ? sid = 01/10/23/1816257 [ slashdot.org ] is the article in question for those wondering what the frack we 're talking about )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yea the Taco really put his foot in his mouth on that one :)( http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23/1816257 [slashdot.org] is the article in question for those wondering what the frack we're talking about)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958762</id>
	<title>Apple to Oranges</title>
	<author>anglophobe\_0</author>
	<datestamp>1264780560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The iPad is one product...Netbooks are a genre of device. Add to that the aversion of folks like me to using anything put out by Apple, and I don't see much chance of the iPad replacing a whole genre of DIY-friendly hardware.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The iPad is one product...Netbooks are a genre of device .
Add to that the aversion of folks like me to using anything put out by Apple , and I do n't see much chance of the iPad replacing a whole genre of DIY-friendly hardware .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The iPad is one product...Netbooks are a genre of device.
Add to that the aversion of folks like me to using anything put out by Apple, and I don't see much chance of the iPad replacing a whole genre of DIY-friendly hardware.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960994</id>
	<title>Re:Displace the netbook?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264852140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No keyboard's the big one. Even photoshop use is sped up dramatically with keyboard shortcuts. Vim users would die trying to do their work with a touchscreen keyboard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No keyboard 's the big one .
Even photoshop use is sped up dramatically with keyboard shortcuts .
Vim users would die trying to do their work with a touchscreen keyboard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No keyboard's the big one.
Even photoshop use is sped up dramatically with keyboard shortcuts.
Vim users would die trying to do their work with a touchscreen keyboard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958942</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959326</id>
	<title>Re:Certainly won't displace it in...</title>
	<author>DarkJC</author>
	<datestamp>1264785600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, just like he was a speed demon on the iPhone when he announced that in 2007 right? How is this modded insightful?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , just like he was a speed demon on the iPhone when he announced that in 2007 right ?
How is this modded insightful ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, just like he was a speed demon on the iPhone when he announced that in 2007 right?
How is this modded insightful?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959048</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960468</id>
	<title>Re:This is pathetic. Don't be afraid to learn.</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1264843380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you want to learn how to develop for the iPhone OS then you need to learn Objective-C.</p></div><p>You didn't gave any particular reasons as to why someone who already knows C# (or knows both languages, but prefers C#) should need to learn Objective-C. Just because Apple says it's the "main native language" on the platform doesn't automatically make it the best choice. And end user couldn't care less what his applications are written in, so long as they run well.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want to learn how to develop for the iPhone OS then you need to learn Objective-C.You did n't gave any particular reasons as to why someone who already knows C # ( or knows both languages , but prefers C # ) should need to learn Objective-C. Just because Apple says it 's the " main native language " on the platform does n't automatically make it the best choice .
And end user could n't care less what his applications are written in , so long as they run well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want to learn how to develop for the iPhone OS then you need to learn Objective-C.You didn't gave any particular reasons as to why someone who already knows C# (or knows both languages, but prefers C#) should need to learn Objective-C. Just because Apple says it's the "main native language" on the platform doesn't automatically make it the best choice.
And end user couldn't care less what his applications are written in, so long as they run well.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958776</id>
	<title>Not interesting</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264780680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'll wait six hours until the next ipad story.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll wait six hours until the next ipad story .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll wait six hours until the next ipad story.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30966214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959526
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30963212
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961378
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961290
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958974
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30971580
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30965390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959536
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30973084
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959528
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958942
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960386
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960634
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30963542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30966328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958974
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30985898
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30962456
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960190
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958942
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30966054
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960594
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30966072
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30985344
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960468
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958800
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30963040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30973028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960006
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958974
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30964888
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30968320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30962706
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958800
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30964406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958800
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961158
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959048
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30964064
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958800
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958742
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960118
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958974
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960994
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958942
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958800
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959382
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958768
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_30_0111256_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_30_0111256.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959932
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_30_0111256.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958742
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959594
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_30_0111256.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958770
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960422
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30966214
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959526
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_30_0111256.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959216
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30971580
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959536
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30966072
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961854
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_30_0111256.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958756
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958868
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30964064
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960386
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959104
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30973084
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960190
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30963542
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960634
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961374
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959830
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30963040
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961290
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30968320
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961158
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961842
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960880
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30973028
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959404
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30985344
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961480
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30965390
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959048
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959326
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_30_0111256.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30962456
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30985898
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_30_0111256.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959604
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30964888
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961878
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960468
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_30_0111256.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960594
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30966054
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_30_0111256.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958800
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959032
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959196
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960390
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960446
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959556
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30962706
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30964406
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_30_0111256.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959400
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_30_0111256.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958768
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959382
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_30_0111256.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958762
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959128
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961378
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30963212
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_30_0111256.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958942
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959528
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960994
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30959164
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_30_0111256.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30958974
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30966328
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960006
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30961390
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_30_0111256.30960118
</commentlist>
</conversation>
