<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_09_2020224</id>
	<title>Swiss Firm Claims Boost In Android App Performance</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1265712780000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Precision writes to inform us about the Swiss firm Myriad, which claims a <a href="http://www.telecoms.com/18082/android-gets-faster-apps-better-graphics-longer-battery-life">3x boost in Android app performance and longer battery life</a> with a new virtual machine. Myriad says that its technology is 100\% compatible with existing Android apps. <i>"The tool is a replacement for the Dalvik virtual machine, which ships as part of the Android platform, and retains full compatibility with existing software. Dalvik Turbo also supports a range of processors including those based on ARM, Intel Atom, and MIPS Architectures."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Precision writes to inform us about the Swiss firm Myriad , which claims a 3x boost in Android app performance and longer battery life with a new virtual machine .
Myriad says that its technology is 100 \ % compatible with existing Android apps .
" The tool is a replacement for the Dalvik virtual machine , which ships as part of the Android platform , and retains full compatibility with existing software .
Dalvik Turbo also supports a range of processors including those based on ARM , Intel Atom , and MIPS Architectures .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Precision writes to inform us about the Swiss firm Myriad, which claims a 3x boost in Android app performance and longer battery life with a new virtual machine.
Myriad says that its technology is 100\% compatible with existing Android apps.
"The tool is a replacement for the Dalvik virtual machine, which ships as part of the Android platform, and retains full compatibility with existing software.
Dalvik Turbo also supports a range of processors including those based on ARM, Intel Atom, and MIPS Architectures.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079996</id>
	<title>Re:Behold</title>
	<author>CannonballHead</author>
	<datestamp>1265719200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>they just looked at Android and it became three times faster.</p></div><p>Is that the power of open source?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>Seriously.  "Believe it when I see it" seems to be more the power of open source.  If it works, awesome.  If not, it's just hype.. open source or closed source..</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>they just looked at Android and it became three times faster.Is that the power of open source ?
; ) Seriously. " Believe it when I see it " seems to be more the power of open source .
If it works , awesome .
If not , it 's just hype.. open source or closed source. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they just looked at Android and it became three times faster.Is that the power of open source?
;)Seriously.  "Believe it when I see it" seems to be more the power of open source.
If it works, awesome.
If not, it's just hype.. open source or closed source..
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079534</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080162</id>
	<title>Re:Any technologically savvy want to enlighten me?</title>
	<author>Fnord</author>
	<datestamp>1265720220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There was some untapped optimization-fu.  Its called JIT.  See, google wrote Dalvik, not to be faster than standard java, but to enable a bunch of multi-process memory sharing techniques that aren't possible with standard java.  What they didn't do is ever implement a just in time compiler.  In fact in ever test done, Dalvik performs as well as Sun Java without JIT enabled, which is vastly slower than with JIT.  Their comment at the time was that "maybe we'll implement JIT for Dalvik 2.0".  Assuming Dalvik 2.0 came with android 2.0, that didn't happen.</p><p>These guys probably tacked on a JIT, and good for them.  It needs it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There was some untapped optimization-fu .
Its called JIT .
See , google wrote Dalvik , not to be faster than standard java , but to enable a bunch of multi-process memory sharing techniques that are n't possible with standard java .
What they did n't do is ever implement a just in time compiler .
In fact in ever test done , Dalvik performs as well as Sun Java without JIT enabled , which is vastly slower than with JIT .
Their comment at the time was that " maybe we 'll implement JIT for Dalvik 2.0 " .
Assuming Dalvik 2.0 came with android 2.0 , that did n't happen.These guys probably tacked on a JIT , and good for them .
It needs it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There was some untapped optimization-fu.
Its called JIT.
See, google wrote Dalvik, not to be faster than standard java, but to enable a bunch of multi-process memory sharing techniques that aren't possible with standard java.
What they didn't do is ever implement a just in time compiler.
In fact in ever test done, Dalvik performs as well as Sun Java without JIT enabled, which is vastly slower than with JIT.
Their comment at the time was that "maybe we'll implement JIT for Dalvik 2.0".
Assuming Dalvik 2.0 came with android 2.0, that didn't happen.These guys probably tacked on a JIT, and good for them.
It needs it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080770</id>
	<title>Why is this needed?</title>
	<author>codepunk</author>
	<datestamp>1265724240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why would this be needed? Everyone tells me java is twice as fast as C? This must make it three times faster than C, impressive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would this be needed ?
Everyone tells me java is twice as fast as C ?
This must make it three times faster than C , impressive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would this be needed?
Everyone tells me java is twice as fast as C?
This must make it three times faster than C, impressive.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079558</id>
	<title>Blah.</title>
	<author>James\_Duncan8181</author>
	<datestamp>1265716740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>JIT produces similar improvements in the Google JVM, although it is not currently turned on.<br> <br>

JIT is indeed faster. I am not shocked that a Googleplex full of PhDs is already moving in this direction. Google details are at <a href="http://groups.google.com/group/android-platform/browse\_thread/thread/331d5f5636f5f532?pli=1" title="google.com">http://groups.google.com/group/android-platform/browse\_thread/thread/331d5f5636f5f532?pli=1</a> [google.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>JIT produces similar improvements in the Google JVM , although it is not currently turned on .
JIT is indeed faster .
I am not shocked that a Googleplex full of PhDs is already moving in this direction .
Google details are at http : //groups.google.com/group/android-platform/browse \ _thread/thread/331d5f5636f5f532 ? pli = 1 [ google.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>JIT produces similar improvements in the Google JVM, although it is not currently turned on.
JIT is indeed faster.
I am not shocked that a Googleplex full of PhDs is already moving in this direction.
Google details are at http://groups.google.com/group/android-platform/browse\_thread/thread/331d5f5636f5f532?pli=1 [google.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079892</id>
	<title>Re:Behold</title>
	<author>ScrewMaster</author>
	<datestamp>1265718480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Myriad's press release just sounds like Chuck Norris decided to dabble in software development</p></div><p>No, he gave Dalvik a roundhouse kick to the garbage collector.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Myriad 's press release just sounds like Chuck Norris decided to dabble in software developmentNo , he gave Dalvik a roundhouse kick to the garbage collector .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Myriad's press release just sounds like Chuck Norris decided to dabble in software developmentNo, he gave Dalvik a roundhouse kick to the garbage collector.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079534</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079832</id>
	<title>Proof?</title>
	<author>Mark19960</author>
	<datestamp>1265718180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Writing up a blurb saying you have something is one thing.... show us some proof, numbers,... something other than<br>a claim that you have something.<br>I am sure Google went over performance and if it could be made to perform better it would have been done. (I Hope... Google?)<br>I can say I have a million dollars, does not mean I do.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Writing up a blurb saying you have something is one thing.... show us some proof , numbers,... something other thana claim that you have something.I am sure Google went over performance and if it could be made to perform better it would have been done .
( I Hope.. .
Google ? ) I can say I have a million dollars , does not mean I do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Writing up a blurb saying you have something is one thing.... show us some proof, numbers,... something other thana claim that you have something.I am sure Google went over performance and if it could be made to perform better it would have been done.
(I Hope...
Google?)I can say I have a million dollars, does not mean I do.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079534</id>
	<title>Behold</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265716680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>

The power of open source.  <br> <br>

How very very fortunate for everyone involved (unless the problem was the original Dalvik developer's sleep statements).  The article is scant on details and <a href="http://www.myriadgroup.com/Media-Centre/News/MYRIAD-BRINGS-3x-FASTER-APPLICATIONS-RICHER-GAME-GRAPHICS-AND-BETTER-BATTERY-LIFE-TO-ANDROID.aspx" title="myriadgroup.com">the official press release is also very thin</a> [myriadgroup.com].  My big question is whether or not we'll see this quickly adopted and rolled out by manufacturers who've already released Android.  For me, assuming this is bug free, I'd like to see how my Motorolla Droid performs on Dalvik Turbo.  Will it be as simple as swap image and reboot to switch between the two?  Is anything lost in this transition?  <br> <br>

At first glance I was certain that they had compiled and optimized the virtual machine to be specific to an architecture<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... allowing them to implement certain optimizations specific to each architecture.  But I don't see any indication of that.  Anyone know where the big speedup came from?  Myriad's press release just sounds like Chuck Norris decided to dabble in software development<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... they just <i>looked</i> at Android and it became three times faster.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The power of open source .
How very very fortunate for everyone involved ( unless the problem was the original Dalvik developer 's sleep statements ) .
The article is scant on details and the official press release is also very thin [ myriadgroup.com ] .
My big question is whether or not we 'll see this quickly adopted and rolled out by manufacturers who 've already released Android .
For me , assuming this is bug free , I 'd like to see how my Motorolla Droid performs on Dalvik Turbo .
Will it be as simple as swap image and reboot to switch between the two ?
Is anything lost in this transition ?
At first glance I was certain that they had compiled and optimized the virtual machine to be specific to an architecture ... allowing them to implement certain optimizations specific to each architecture .
But I do n't see any indication of that .
Anyone know where the big speedup came from ?
Myriad 's press release just sounds like Chuck Norris decided to dabble in software development ... they just looked at Android and it became three times faster .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>

The power of open source.
How very very fortunate for everyone involved (unless the problem was the original Dalvik developer's sleep statements).
The article is scant on details and the official press release is also very thin [myriadgroup.com].
My big question is whether or not we'll see this quickly adopted and rolled out by manufacturers who've already released Android.
For me, assuming this is bug free, I'd like to see how my Motorolla Droid performs on Dalvik Turbo.
Will it be as simple as swap image and reboot to switch between the two?
Is anything lost in this transition?
At first glance I was certain that they had compiled and optimized the virtual machine to be specific to an architecture ... allowing them to implement certain optimizations specific to each architecture.
But I don't see any indication of that.
Anyone know where the big speedup came from?
Myriad's press release just sounds like Chuck Norris decided to dabble in software development ... they just looked at Android and it became three times faster.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31085918</id>
	<title>Re:Benoit Schillings is the Chuck Norris of code.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265040780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&ldquo;the BeOS file system, something that still hasn't been surpassed in flexibility and efficiency - the crown jewel of the BeOS code.&rdquo;</p><p>That's the funniest thing I've read all day.</p><p>The Be File System (BeFS to all the people who already had a perfectly good filesystem called BFS, but named BFS by its oblivious author) is a quick hack. The book about the filesystem openly admits this. It was a race against time to replace the even worse system used in prior versions of BeOS which genuinely tried to treat the filesystem as a database**</p><p>At every step there were nasty compromises in BeFS, dodges that cause problems its (few remaining) users still suffer today.</p><p>Let's pick a nice easy one - deleting files. The simple-but-slow transaction handling code in BeFS can't do a file unlink operation safely, in some cases you'll replay the journal after a crash and there will be an inconsistency, a file exists and yet other metadata about the file is missing. The result is you can't delete it using unlink(). Did Be allocate someone to create a more robust journalling system for the next version? Nope, they added the hilarious "forcerm" command to the OS as a workaround.</p><p>** The performance of this earlier system will surprise no-one who has worked on a failed project to do such a thing - it was so awful as to strangle the rest of the OS.</p><p>Now that you've put the idea of BeFS as a "crown jewel" into my head I have the perfect image - BeOS is a cupcake made by a primary school kid, slightly grey in appearance because they didn't wash all the paint off their hands before mixing the inrgedients, and burnt crispy on one side. There's no sugar in it, because the kid insisted (despite protests from the supervising adult) that it would be better without. And on the top? The jewel on the crown? A slightly sticky chewy sweet the toddler found in their pocket.</p><p>Now, who wants to try a bite?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>   the BeOS file system , something that still has n't been surpassed in flexibility and efficiency - the crown jewel of the BeOS code.    That 's the funniest thing I 've read all day.The Be File System ( BeFS to all the people who already had a perfectly good filesystem called BFS , but named BFS by its oblivious author ) is a quick hack .
The book about the filesystem openly admits this .
It was a race against time to replace the even worse system used in prior versions of BeOS which genuinely tried to treat the filesystem as a database * * At every step there were nasty compromises in BeFS , dodges that cause problems its ( few remaining ) users still suffer today.Let 's pick a nice easy one - deleting files .
The simple-but-slow transaction handling code in BeFS ca n't do a file unlink operation safely , in some cases you 'll replay the journal after a crash and there will be an inconsistency , a file exists and yet other metadata about the file is missing .
The result is you ca n't delete it using unlink ( ) .
Did Be allocate someone to create a more robust journalling system for the next version ?
Nope , they added the hilarious " forcerm " command to the OS as a workaround .
* * The performance of this earlier system will surprise no-one who has worked on a failed project to do such a thing - it was so awful as to strangle the rest of the OS.Now that you 've put the idea of BeFS as a " crown jewel " into my head I have the perfect image - BeOS is a cupcake made by a primary school kid , slightly grey in appearance because they did n't wash all the paint off their hands before mixing the inrgedients , and burnt crispy on one side .
There 's no sugar in it , because the kid insisted ( despite protests from the supervising adult ) that it would be better without .
And on the top ?
The jewel on the crown ?
A slightly sticky chewy sweet the toddler found in their pocket.Now , who wants to try a bite ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>“the BeOS file system, something that still hasn't been surpassed in flexibility and efficiency - the crown jewel of the BeOS code.”That's the funniest thing I've read all day.The Be File System (BeFS to all the people who already had a perfectly good filesystem called BFS, but named BFS by its oblivious author) is a quick hack.
The book about the filesystem openly admits this.
It was a race against time to replace the even worse system used in prior versions of BeOS which genuinely tried to treat the filesystem as a database**At every step there were nasty compromises in BeFS, dodges that cause problems its (few remaining) users still suffer today.Let's pick a nice easy one - deleting files.
The simple-but-slow transaction handling code in BeFS can't do a file unlink operation safely, in some cases you'll replay the journal after a crash and there will be an inconsistency, a file exists and yet other metadata about the file is missing.
The result is you can't delete it using unlink().
Did Be allocate someone to create a more robust journalling system for the next version?
Nope, they added the hilarious "forcerm" command to the OS as a workaround.
** The performance of this earlier system will surprise no-one who has worked on a failed project to do such a thing - it was so awful as to strangle the rest of the OS.Now that you've put the idea of BeFS as a "crown jewel" into my head I have the perfect image - BeOS is a cupcake made by a primary school kid, slightly grey in appearance because they didn't wash all the paint off their hands before mixing the inrgedients, and burnt crispy on one side.
There's no sugar in it, because the kid insisted (despite protests from the supervising adult) that it would be better without.
And on the top?
The jewel on the crown?
A slightly sticky chewy sweet the toddler found in their pocket.Now, who wants to try a bite?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079872</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080244</id>
	<title>Re:Turbo!</title>
	<author>Tumbleweed</author>
	<datestamp>1265720760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Back in my day, manufacturers used to slap a turbo button on the front of the case.<br>And we liked it that way.</i></p><p>There's an app for that.</p><p><i>Now get off my lawn!</i></p><p>And for that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Back in my day , manufacturers used to slap a turbo button on the front of the case.And we liked it that way.There 's an app for that.Now get off my lawn ! And for that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Back in my day, manufacturers used to slap a turbo button on the front of the case.And we liked it that way.There's an app for that.Now get off my lawn!And for that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079574</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31085220</id>
	<title>Re:Any technologically savvy want to enlighten me?</title>
	<author>91degrees</author>
	<datestamp>1265037720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, you can usually make any code faster.  Google presumably felt their JVM was good enough for the current release, and certainly not worth the man hours it would take to make it faster.  It probably is if there are a lot of calls to natively compiled code.  <br> <br>
Other people clearly have a different idea of what "good enough" is.  However, for Google to reach this sort of speed it sounds like they'd need a total rewrite.  Their resources are better spent elsewhere.<br> <br>
Another point to consider is that although Google has many extremely intelligent people, it doesn't have a monopoly on extremely intelligent people.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , you can usually make any code faster .
Google presumably felt their JVM was good enough for the current release , and certainly not worth the man hours it would take to make it faster .
It probably is if there are a lot of calls to natively compiled code .
Other people clearly have a different idea of what " good enough " is .
However , for Google to reach this sort of speed it sounds like they 'd need a total rewrite .
Their resources are better spent elsewhere .
Another point to consider is that although Google has many extremely intelligent people , it does n't have a monopoly on extremely intelligent people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, you can usually make any code faster.
Google presumably felt their JVM was good enough for the current release, and certainly not worth the man hours it would take to make it faster.
It probably is if there are a lot of calls to natively compiled code.
Other people clearly have a different idea of what "good enough" is.
However, for Google to reach this sort of speed it sounds like they'd need a total rewrite.
Their resources are better spent elsewhere.
Another point to consider is that although Google has many extremely intelligent people, it doesn't have a monopoly on extremely intelligent people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31081914</id>
	<title>Re:Why is this needed?</title>
	<author>paul248</author>
	<datestamp>1265735100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Interpreted Java is pretty much always slower than C.  Java with a JIT has the potential to be faster than C.  That's why they're implementing a JIT.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Interpreted Java is pretty much always slower than C. Java with a JIT has the potential to be faster than C. That 's why they 're implementing a JIT .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interpreted Java is pretty much always slower than C.  Java with a JIT has the potential to be faster than C.  That's why they're implementing a JIT.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31174772</id>
	<title>Videos online</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265057940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The marketing department of the company put some videos online:<br><a href="http://www.youtube.com/user/myriadgroupmarketing" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/user/myriadgroupmarketing</a> [youtube.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The marketing department of the company put some videos online : http : //www.youtube.com/user/myriadgroupmarketing [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The marketing department of the company put some videos online:http://www.youtube.com/user/myriadgroupmarketing [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079916</id>
	<title>Re:Behold</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265718600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The question is... is Google going to accept the new VM?  Or is this going to be a fork of the original code?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The question is... is Google going to accept the new VM ?
Or is this going to be a fork of the original code ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The question is... is Google going to accept the new VM?
Or is this going to be a fork of the original code?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079534</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31090686</id>
	<title>Apps</title>
	<author>suzieque</author>
	<datestamp>1265018700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I find apps spluttered around everywhere, it would be good for someone to aggregate mobile apps that are universal for each handset rather than the current mish mash.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I find apps spluttered around everywhere , it would be good for someone to aggregate mobile apps that are universal for each handset rather than the current mish mash .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find apps spluttered around everywhere, it would be good for someone to aggregate mobile apps that are universal for each handset rather than the current mish mash.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080800</id>
	<title>Re:Any technologically savvy want to enlighten me?</title>
	<author>codepunk</author>
	<datestamp>1265724480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The concept is rather simple actually, everyone tells us that java is as fast as C. This will make it three  times faster than C...how cool is that?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The concept is rather simple actually , everyone tells us that java is as fast as C. This will make it three times faster than C...how cool is that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The concept is rather simple actually, everyone tells us that java is as fast as C. This will make it three  times faster than C...how cool is that?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080890</id>
	<title>Just in Time Compiling</title>
	<author>AntiRush</author>
	<datestamp>1265725260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I imagine a big part of the speed increase comes from JIT - something that the current Dalvik implementation on Android doesn't do.  There is, however, an experimental JIT branch.  It would be nice to see how Myriad's stacks up to it. <a href="http://groups.google.com/group/0xlab-devel/browse\_thread/thread/1edef26f4e5b7427?pli=1" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">This test</a> [google.com] claims about a 3x increase in speed by enabling the existing JIT features.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I imagine a big part of the speed increase comes from JIT - something that the current Dalvik implementation on Android does n't do .
There is , however , an experimental JIT branch .
It would be nice to see how Myriad 's stacks up to it .
This test [ google.com ] claims about a 3x increase in speed by enabling the existing JIT features .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I imagine a big part of the speed increase comes from JIT - something that the current Dalvik implementation on Android doesn't do.
There is, however, an experimental JIT branch.
It would be nice to see how Myriad's stacks up to it.
This test [google.com] claims about a 3x increase in speed by enabling the existing JIT features.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31093716</id>
	<title>Re:Benoit Schillings is the Chuck Norris of code.</title>
	<author>xiong.chiamiov</author>
	<datestamp>1265033160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Check his <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benoit\_Schillings" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">wiki</a> [wikipedia.org]</p> </div><p>Hmm, I didn't know that Benoit Schillings owned the English Wikipedia.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Check his wiki [ wikipedia.org ] Hmm , I did n't know that Benoit Schillings owned the English Wikipedia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Check his wiki [wikipedia.org] Hmm, I didn't know that Benoit Schillings owned the English Wikipedia.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079872</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080954</id>
	<title>Re:Java vs Objective C - is iPhone always faster?</title>
	<author>WaywardGeek</author>
	<datestamp>1265725740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Several things come to mind.  First, my Nexus One, like the iPhone, burns about 85\% of it's power on the display.  If it weren't for the display, it could play music and keep the receiver active, and probably do a few more things and have the battery last for days.  So, we're really only talking about the last 15\%.  Second, many applications run in compiled C, like webkit, the network stack, the map application, speech synthesis, 3D rendering, etc.  These apps are going to probably be the similar on both phones in terms of efficiency.  So, in Java, a lot of what we're really talking about is the code that pops up pretty windows.  It's hard for me to imagine that takes much power.</p><p>I expect big advances in the future.  Low power displays will be huge.  After that, maybe we should revisit the JVM.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Several things come to mind .
First , my Nexus One , like the iPhone , burns about 85 \ % of it 's power on the display .
If it were n't for the display , it could play music and keep the receiver active , and probably do a few more things and have the battery last for days .
So , we 're really only talking about the last 15 \ % .
Second , many applications run in compiled C , like webkit , the network stack , the map application , speech synthesis , 3D rendering , etc .
These apps are going to probably be the similar on both phones in terms of efficiency .
So , in Java , a lot of what we 're really talking about is the code that pops up pretty windows .
It 's hard for me to imagine that takes much power.I expect big advances in the future .
Low power displays will be huge .
After that , maybe we should revisit the JVM .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Several things come to mind.
First, my Nexus One, like the iPhone, burns about 85\% of it's power on the display.
If it weren't for the display, it could play music and keep the receiver active, and probably do a few more things and have the battery last for days.
So, we're really only talking about the last 15\%.
Second, many applications run in compiled C, like webkit, the network stack, the map application, speech synthesis, 3D rendering, etc.
These apps are going to probably be the similar on both phones in terms of efficiency.
So, in Java, a lot of what we're really talking about is the code that pops up pretty windows.
It's hard for me to imagine that takes much power.I expect big advances in the future.
Low power displays will be huge.
After that, maybe we should revisit the JVM.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079658</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080216</id>
	<title>Re:Another JVM</title>
	<author>Tumbleweed</author>
	<datestamp>1265720580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Gimme a break. *Every* JVM company out there claims to have the best performance. Probably something to do with on the fly optimization of JITted code.</i></p><p>I don't believe the Dalvik \_does\_ the JIT.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Gim me a break .
* Every * JVM company out there claims to have the best performance .
Probably something to do with on the fly optimization of JITted code.I do n't believe the Dalvik \ _does \ _ the JIT .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gimme a break.
*Every* JVM company out there claims to have the best performance.
Probably something to do with on the fly optimization of JITted code.I don't believe the Dalvik \_does\_ the JIT.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31082664</id>
	<title>Re:Benoit Schillings is the Chuck Norris of code.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265745360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually OpenBFS is now better...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually OpenBFS is now better.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually OpenBFS is now better...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079872</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31081850</id>
	<title>Java hardware acceleration was discarded</title>
	<author>kriston</author>
	<datestamp>1265734140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Java hardware acceleration was discarded by the Android platform.<br>Imagine if someone were to translate Dalvik into a bytecode that is compatible with the inbuilt Java acceleration of most mobile-market processors.<br>The fact that Android uses Dalvik instead of Java throws away an important hardware-based performance boost of native Java acceleration.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Java hardware acceleration was discarded by the Android platform.Imagine if someone were to translate Dalvik into a bytecode that is compatible with the inbuilt Java acceleration of most mobile-market processors.The fact that Android uses Dalvik instead of Java throws away an important hardware-based performance boost of native Java acceleration .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Java hardware acceleration was discarded by the Android platform.Imagine if someone were to translate Dalvik into a bytecode that is compatible with the inbuilt Java acceleration of most mobile-market processors.The fact that Android uses Dalvik instead of Java throws away an important hardware-based performance boost of native Java acceleration.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31081022</id>
	<title>Re:Behold</title>
	<author>WaywardGeek</author>
	<datestamp>1265726100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are plenty of reasons a 3X speed improvement could be had.  For example, optimizing memory layout for cache performace could do it.  If one system had a heap that randomly scatters objects through memory, and the other packs like-fields of objects together in dense arrays, inner loop cache performace can be improved greatly.  I saw a factor of 17X in one case.  It's amazing to me how few programmers today bother getting down to this all-important performance bottleneck.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are plenty of reasons a 3X speed improvement could be had .
For example , optimizing memory layout for cache performace could do it .
If one system had a heap that randomly scatters objects through memory , and the other packs like-fields of objects together in dense arrays , inner loop cache performace can be improved greatly .
I saw a factor of 17X in one case .
It 's amazing to me how few programmers today bother getting down to this all-important performance bottleneck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are plenty of reasons a 3X speed improvement could be had.
For example, optimizing memory layout for cache performace could do it.
If one system had a heap that randomly scatters objects through memory, and the other packs like-fields of objects together in dense arrays, inner loop cache performace can be improved greatly.
I saw a factor of 17X in one case.
It's amazing to me how few programmers today bother getting down to this all-important performance bottleneck.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079534</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31084280</id>
	<title>Re:Kuchichaestli</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265030760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>B&#252;nzli<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-P</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>B   nzli : -P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bünzli :-P</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079728</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31084922</id>
	<title>Make It Run Real Java</title>
	<author>Doc Ruby</author>
	<datestamp>1265036340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This project looks like it opens the door for a real JVM that runs real Java apps, real Java bytecode, not the Dalvik bytecode that has to be developed for specifically the Android platform. With a real JVM, some Java bytecode already available for download could just work, and porting a lot of the rest should be a lot easier. Which would open up a much larger existing community of developers to target these devices with apps.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This project looks like it opens the door for a real JVM that runs real Java apps , real Java bytecode , not the Dalvik bytecode that has to be developed for specifically the Android platform .
With a real JVM , some Java bytecode already available for download could just work , and porting a lot of the rest should be a lot easier .
Which would open up a much larger existing community of developers to target these devices with apps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This project looks like it opens the door for a real JVM that runs real Java apps, real Java bytecode, not the Dalvik bytecode that has to be developed for specifically the Android platform.
With a real JVM, some Java bytecode already available for download could just work, and porting a lot of the rest should be a lot easier.
Which would open up a much larger existing community of developers to target these devices with apps.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31084936</id>
	<title>Re:Any technologically savvy want to enlighten me?</title>
	<author>Issarlk</author>
	<datestamp>1265036460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>According to a rant I read in an android app, Android doesn't have a JIT. It's what makes the 3x as fast possible. Some lesser smartphone with a Java with JIT run apps faster than Androids.</htmltext>
<tokenext>According to a rant I read in an android app , Android does n't have a JIT .
It 's what makes the 3x as fast possible .
Some lesser smartphone with a Java with JIT run apps faster than Androids .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to a rant I read in an android app, Android doesn't have a JIT.
It's what makes the 3x as fast possible.
Some lesser smartphone with a Java with JIT run apps faster than Androids.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079658</id>
	<title>Java vs Objective C - is iPhone always faster?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265717340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does this imply that on more or less identical hardware (latest ARM + similar battery), the iPhone will always run apps faster and will always have better battery life than an Android phone?</p><p>If JIT produces such a noticeable performance boost, does that suggest that the difference between next-gen Android and iPhone will be negligible, or will there always be a significant gap?  And if the gap will remain significant, should we care?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does this imply that on more or less identical hardware ( latest ARM + similar battery ) , the iPhone will always run apps faster and will always have better battery life than an Android phone ? If JIT produces such a noticeable performance boost , does that suggest that the difference between next-gen Android and iPhone will be negligible , or will there always be a significant gap ?
And if the gap will remain significant , should we care ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does this imply that on more or less identical hardware (latest ARM + similar battery), the iPhone will always run apps faster and will always have better battery life than an Android phone?If JIT produces such a noticeable performance boost, does that suggest that the difference between next-gen Android and iPhone will be negligible, or will there always be a significant gap?
And if the gap will remain significant, should we care?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079530</id>
	<title>Slashvertisements ahoy!</title>
	<author>Monkeedude1212</author>
	<datestamp>1265716620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Towards thee I roll, thou all-destroying but unconquering Virtual Machine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Towards thee I roll , thou all-destroying but unconquering Virtual Machine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Towards thee I roll, thou all-destroying but unconquering Virtual Machine.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31083148</id>
	<title>Re:Kuchichaestli</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265016540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ha!<br>Helvetische Schluchtenscheisser<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-p</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ha ! Helvetische Schluchtenscheisser : -p</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ha!Helvetische Schluchtenscheisser :-p</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079728</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080138</id>
	<title>Re:Any technologically savvy want to enlighten me?</title>
	<author>Tacvek</author>
	<datestamp>1265720100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google did not miss anything. They were well aware that Dalvik was largly unoptimized. They have been working on creating a JIT compiler for Dalvik, while this other company has been working on other improvements.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google did not miss anything .
They were well aware that Dalvik was largly unoptimized .
They have been working on creating a JIT compiler for Dalvik , while this other company has been working on other improvements .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google did not miss anything.
They were well aware that Dalvik was largly unoptimized.
They have been working on creating a JIT compiler for Dalvik, while this other company has been working on other improvements.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080156</id>
	<title>Re:Behold</title>
	<author>HotBBQ</author>
	<datestamp>1265720160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>At work when we switched to Java 6 when it came out our application (electronic surveillance data fusion) saw an 11\% speed boost.  Apparently the Java 6 JVM had tweaks to double and long primitive handling, which we utilized heavily.  My point being it doesn't necessarily have to do with how it is compiled.</htmltext>
<tokenext>At work when we switched to Java 6 when it came out our application ( electronic surveillance data fusion ) saw an 11 \ % speed boost .
Apparently the Java 6 JVM had tweaks to double and long primitive handling , which we utilized heavily .
My point being it does n't necessarily have to do with how it is compiled .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At work when we switched to Java 6 when it came out our application (electronic surveillance data fusion) saw an 11\% speed boost.
Apparently the Java 6 JVM had tweaks to double and long primitive handling, which we utilized heavily.
My point being it doesn't necessarily have to do with how it is compiled.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079534</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31083048</id>
	<title>Re:Benoit Schillings is the Chuck Norris of code.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265015160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Having RTFA it is curious that he is involved with Nokia. Why does the CTO of a large handset maker helps out an emerging large handset provider and its handset making subcontractor, i.e. its competitors?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Having RTFA it is curious that he is involved with Nokia .
Why does the CTO of a large handset maker helps out an emerging large handset provider and its handset making subcontractor , i.e .
its competitors ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having RTFA it is curious that he is involved with Nokia.
Why does the CTO of a large handset maker helps out an emerging large handset provider and its handset making subcontractor, i.e.
its competitors?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079872</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079494</id>
	<title>Another JVM</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265716500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Gimme a break. *Every* JVM company out there claims to have the best performance.</p><p>Probably something to do with on the fly optimization of JITted code. Or maybe GC optimization and memory management.</p><p>It must be Press Release day here at<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Gim me a break .
* Every * JVM company out there claims to have the best performance.Probably something to do with on the fly optimization of JITted code .
Or maybe GC optimization and memory management.It must be Press Release day here at / .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gimme a break.
*Every* JVM company out there claims to have the best performance.Probably something to do with on the fly optimization of JITted code.
Or maybe GC optimization and memory management.It must be Press Release day here at /.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31084706</id>
	<title>Re:Java vs Objective C - is iPhone always faster?</title>
	<author>GooberToo</author>
	<datestamp>1265034840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Does this imply that on more or less identical hardware (latest ARM + similar battery), the iPhone will always run apps faster and will always have better battery life than an Android phone?</p></div><p>From a performance perspective, no. Android can run native code should a developer decide he wishes to do so.</p><p>As for battery life, maybe. As newer devices come out their efficiency is likely to continue to improve but Android devices always have more work to do because they are more capable devices. This extra capability comes from their native ability to multitask. Included in their ability to multitask is the ability to run applications in the background. This has the effect of a perceived reduction in battery life, when compared to something like an iPhone.</p><p>The good news for Android devices is that all that I'm aware of allow for interchangeable batteries which means you can always swap out batteries to stay on the run. Furthermore, many phones have alternate battery models with increased capacity. For example, the G1 has batteries with double their stock capacity.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does this imply that on more or less identical hardware ( latest ARM + similar battery ) , the iPhone will always run apps faster and will always have better battery life than an Android phone ? From a performance perspective , no .
Android can run native code should a developer decide he wishes to do so.As for battery life , maybe .
As newer devices come out their efficiency is likely to continue to improve but Android devices always have more work to do because they are more capable devices .
This extra capability comes from their native ability to multitask .
Included in their ability to multitask is the ability to run applications in the background .
This has the effect of a perceived reduction in battery life , when compared to something like an iPhone.The good news for Android devices is that all that I 'm aware of allow for interchangeable batteries which means you can always swap out batteries to stay on the run .
Furthermore , many phones have alternate battery models with increased capacity .
For example , the G1 has batteries with double their stock capacity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does this imply that on more or less identical hardware (latest ARM + similar battery), the iPhone will always run apps faster and will always have better battery life than an Android phone?From a performance perspective, no.
Android can run native code should a developer decide he wishes to do so.As for battery life, maybe.
As newer devices come out their efficiency is likely to continue to improve but Android devices always have more work to do because they are more capable devices.
This extra capability comes from their native ability to multitask.
Included in their ability to multitask is the ability to run applications in the background.
This has the effect of a perceived reduction in battery life, when compared to something like an iPhone.The good news for Android devices is that all that I'm aware of allow for interchangeable batteries which means you can always swap out batteries to stay on the run.
Furthermore, many phones have alternate battery models with increased capacity.
For example, the G1 has batteries with double their stock capacity.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079658</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31083092</id>
	<title>Re:Any technologically savvy want to enlighten me?</title>
	<author>DrXym</author>
	<datestamp>1265015880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dalvik isn't a JVM. It's similar to a JVM but Java byte code is translated during the build phase into a different intermediate byte code. Dalvik byte code is a register oriented code compared to the stack oriented code in the JVM. The runtime sits on top
<p>
It's also fairly nascent and I wouldn't be surprised if there is plenty of room for improvement.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dalvik is n't a JVM .
It 's similar to a JVM but Java byte code is translated during the build phase into a different intermediate byte code .
Dalvik byte code is a register oriented code compared to the stack oriented code in the JVM .
The runtime sits on top It 's also fairly nascent and I would n't be surprised if there is plenty of room for improvement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dalvik isn't a JVM.
It's similar to a JVM but Java byte code is translated during the build phase into a different intermediate byte code.
Dalvik byte code is a register oriented code compared to the stack oriented code in the JVM.
The runtime sits on top

It's also fairly nascent and I wouldn't be surprised if there is plenty of room for improvement.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079560</id>
	<title>faster slow is still slow shit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265716800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>'droid suxors!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>'droid suxors !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'droid suxors!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079756</id>
	<title>Re:Turbo!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265717880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Back in my day, manufacturers used to slap a turbo button on the front of the case.<br>And we liked it that way.<br>Now get off my lawn!</p></div><p>i remember the turbo button!<br>i was convinced it did something..<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Back in my day , manufacturers used to slap a turbo button on the front of the case.And we liked it that way.Now get off my lawn ! i remember the turbo button ! i was convinced it did something.. : (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Back in my day, manufacturers used to slap a turbo button on the front of the case.And we liked it that way.Now get off my lawn!i remember the turbo button!i was convinced it did something.. :(
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079574</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079872</id>
	<title>Benoit Schillings is the Chuck Norris of code.</title>
	<author>Dr. Spork</author>
	<datestamp>1265718420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Check his <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benoit\_Schillings" title="wikipedia.org">wiki</a> [wikipedia.org], this guy is the real deal. He is the architect of the BeOS file system, something that still hasn't been surpassed in flexibility and efficiency - the crown jewel of the BeOS code. Trolltech's QT also improved a lot under his reign. I would say that this guy knows a lot about writing optimized code, and Google should be very happy that he's turned his attention to Android. If I were Google, I'd be thinking hard about buying out this plucky little startup from Switzerland.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Check his wiki [ wikipedia.org ] , this guy is the real deal .
He is the architect of the BeOS file system , something that still has n't been surpassed in flexibility and efficiency - the crown jewel of the BeOS code .
Trolltech 's QT also improved a lot under his reign .
I would say that this guy knows a lot about writing optimized code , and Google should be very happy that he 's turned his attention to Android .
If I were Google , I 'd be thinking hard about buying out this plucky little startup from Switzerland .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Check his wiki [wikipedia.org], this guy is the real deal.
He is the architect of the BeOS file system, something that still hasn't been surpassed in flexibility and efficiency - the crown jewel of the BeOS code.
Trolltech's QT also improved a lot under his reign.
I would say that this guy knows a lot about writing optimized code, and Google should be very happy that he's turned his attention to Android.
If I were Google, I'd be thinking hard about buying out this plucky little startup from Switzerland.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079534</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31084568</id>
	<title>Re:Another JVM</title>
	<author>Astrath</author>
	<datestamp>1265033640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>3x performance increase sounds entirely reasonable, I guess they are using this magic thing called JIT.

I still can't wrap my head around the fact that Google to this day has the most basic, worst garbage collector in the whole wide world of virtual machines, and doesn't seem to care about performance.

But as has already been mentioned here, they are at least working on a JIT compiler. Just seems to take them forever.

And while you are at it Google, why not at add an incremental garbage collector or however this thing is called. And how about introducing a stack for temporary objects, so not every time I do:

drawString("Score: " + score);

the garbage collector kicks in and freezes the whole app for 200ms?</htmltext>
<tokenext>3x performance increase sounds entirely reasonable , I guess they are using this magic thing called JIT .
I still ca n't wrap my head around the fact that Google to this day has the most basic , worst garbage collector in the whole wide world of virtual machines , and does n't seem to care about performance .
But as has already been mentioned here , they are at least working on a JIT compiler .
Just seems to take them forever .
And while you are at it Google , why not at add an incremental garbage collector or however this thing is called .
And how about introducing a stack for temporary objects , so not every time I do : drawString ( " Score : " + score ) ; the garbage collector kicks in and freezes the whole app for 200ms ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>3x performance increase sounds entirely reasonable, I guess they are using this magic thing called JIT.
I still can't wrap my head around the fact that Google to this day has the most basic, worst garbage collector in the whole wide world of virtual machines, and doesn't seem to care about performance.
But as has already been mentioned here, they are at least working on a JIT compiler.
Just seems to take them forever.
And while you are at it Google, why not at add an incremental garbage collector or however this thing is called.
And how about introducing a stack for temporary objects, so not every time I do:

drawString("Score: " + score);

the garbage collector kicks in and freezes the whole app for 200ms?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079574</id>
	<title>Turbo!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265716800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Back in my day, manufacturers used to slap a turbo button on the front of the case.<br>And we liked it that way.<br>Now get off my lawn!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Back in my day , manufacturers used to slap a turbo button on the front of the case.And we liked it that way.Now get off my lawn !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Back in my day, manufacturers used to slap a turbo button on the front of the case.And we liked it that way.Now get off my lawn!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079862</id>
	<title>Any technologically savvy want to enlighten me?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265718360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As I understand it, Dalvik is basically Java, mostly. Sun has, for a long while now; been chipping away at the problem of making Java perform well. For whatever reason, Java applets never seemed to receive any benefit, and have always felt horribly slow; but Java has seen enormous use in both Big Serious Corporate Iron applications and in tiny, embedded dumphone applications. Much of that development has been in the open, either directly OSS or at least visible in comp-sci papers and talks and such.<br> <br>

Then Dalvik comes along, and now somebody is claiming 3X speedup. What could Google have missed, or not had time/resources to implement that some random outfit did? Was Dalvik unexpectedly perversely bad for some reason? Was there some untapped java-optimization-fu floating around out there? Did somebody just put out a press release about their own horribly unstable version of what is currently in Google's "unstable" branch?</htmltext>
<tokenext>As I understand it , Dalvik is basically Java , mostly .
Sun has , for a long while now ; been chipping away at the problem of making Java perform well .
For whatever reason , Java applets never seemed to receive any benefit , and have always felt horribly slow ; but Java has seen enormous use in both Big Serious Corporate Iron applications and in tiny , embedded dumphone applications .
Much of that development has been in the open , either directly OSS or at least visible in comp-sci papers and talks and such .
Then Dalvik comes along , and now somebody is claiming 3X speedup .
What could Google have missed , or not had time/resources to implement that some random outfit did ?
Was Dalvik unexpectedly perversely bad for some reason ?
Was there some untapped java-optimization-fu floating around out there ?
Did somebody just put out a press release about their own horribly unstable version of what is currently in Google 's " unstable " branch ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As I understand it, Dalvik is basically Java, mostly.
Sun has, for a long while now; been chipping away at the problem of making Java perform well.
For whatever reason, Java applets never seemed to receive any benefit, and have always felt horribly slow; but Java has seen enormous use in both Big Serious Corporate Iron applications and in tiny, embedded dumphone applications.
Much of that development has been in the open, either directly OSS or at least visible in comp-sci papers and talks and such.
Then Dalvik comes along, and now somebody is claiming 3X speedup.
What could Google have missed, or not had time/resources to implement that some random outfit did?
Was Dalvik unexpectedly perversely bad for some reason?
Was there some untapped java-optimization-fu floating around out there?
Did somebody just put out a press release about their own horribly unstable version of what is currently in Google's "unstable" branch?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080772</id>
	<title>Re:Turbo!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265724240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I thought this joke was a repeat.. checked, yes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought this joke was a repeat.. checked , yes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought this joke was a repeat.. checked, yes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079574</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31082698</id>
	<title>Re:Any technologically savvy want to enlighten me?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265054580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Java is only slow because they use one single thread for all gui-handling. So it's only swing/awt gui-apps that are slow. Somehow they still havn't realized that it's the one thing that sucks, and instead they checked in the SwingWorker util class to add even more mess to the problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Java is only slow because they use one single thread for all gui-handling .
So it 's only swing/awt gui-apps that are slow .
Somehow they still hav n't realized that it 's the one thing that sucks , and instead they checked in the SwingWorker util class to add even more mess to the problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Java is only slow because they use one single thread for all gui-handling.
So it's only swing/awt gui-apps that are slow.
Somehow they still havn't realized that it's the one thing that sucks, and instead they checked in the SwingWorker util class to add even more mess to the problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079728</id>
	<title>Kuchichaestli</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265717700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nur i de Schwiiz!</p><p>Hopp Schwiiz!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nur i de Schwiiz ! Hopp Schwiiz !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nur i de Schwiiz!Hopp Schwiiz!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079582</id>
	<title>Re:Another JVM</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265716860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To be honest the GC on the standard Android handsets is so poor any improvement is a good thing. If the GC is better then it will increase the performance of libraries such as JBox2D and other physics libraries since most generate alot of garbage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To be honest the GC on the standard Android handsets is so poor any improvement is a good thing .
If the GC is better then it will increase the performance of libraries such as JBox2D and other physics libraries since most generate alot of garbage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To be honest the GC on the standard Android handsets is so poor any improvement is a good thing.
If the GC is better then it will increase the performance of libraries such as JBox2D and other physics libraries since most generate alot of garbage.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079730</id>
	<title>Re:Turbo!</title>
	<author>pclminion</author>
	<datestamp>1265717760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>One of my favorite things to do (yes, I'm weird) was hammer on that button as the system was trying to POST. Most BIOSes did not handle this very well at all. They would fail in all manner of hilarious ways.</htmltext>
<tokenext>One of my favorite things to do ( yes , I 'm weird ) was hammer on that button as the system was trying to POST .
Most BIOSes did not handle this very well at all .
They would fail in all manner of hilarious ways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of my favorite things to do (yes, I'm weird) was hammer on that button as the system was trying to POST.
Most BIOSes did not handle this very well at all.
They would fail in all manner of hilarious ways.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079574</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31089168</id>
	<title>Re:Another JVM</title>
	<author>SaltedBliss</author>
	<datestamp>1265054280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The author should be more specific as to the developer name, Myriad Group. The JVM is not likely to be available for general download real soon, but I'm certainly willing to experiment with it on Moto Droid when it is.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The author should be more specific as to the developer name , Myriad Group .
The JVM is not likely to be available for general download real soon , but I 'm certainly willing to experiment with it on Moto Droid when it is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The author should be more specific as to the developer name, Myriad Group.
The JVM is not likely to be available for general download real soon, but I'm certainly willing to experiment with it on Moto Droid when it is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080046</id>
	<title>Re:Java vs Objective C - is iPhone always faster?</title>
	<author>larry bagina</author>
	<datestamp>1265719500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>objective c is compiled BUT sending a message / calling a method goes through a runtime system which allows all kinds of awesome shit but is slower than a direct function call or an indirection table ala C++ virtual functions. Best case, compiled java could beat objective c by flattening out method calls.</htmltext>
<tokenext>objective c is compiled BUT sending a message / calling a method goes through a runtime system which allows all kinds of awesome shit but is slower than a direct function call or an indirection table ala C + + virtual functions .
Best case , compiled java could beat objective c by flattening out method calls .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>objective c is compiled BUT sending a message / calling a method goes through a runtime system which allows all kinds of awesome shit but is slower than a direct function call or an indirection table ala C++ virtual functions.
Best case, compiled java could beat objective c by flattening out method calls.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079658</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31084936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079862
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31081914
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31085220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079862
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31089168
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080954
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080162
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079862
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079534
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079534
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079892
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079534
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31082698
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079862
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080156
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079534
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31083048
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079872
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079534
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080046
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31085918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079872
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079534
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079862
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31093716
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079872
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079534
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31081022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079534
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080772
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079574
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31084568
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080244
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079574
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079582
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31082664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079872
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079534
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31083148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079728
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31084280
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079728
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079730
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079574
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079862
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079756
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079574
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31083092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079862
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_09_2020224_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31084706
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2020224.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079530
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2020224.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079574
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079730
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080772
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080244
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079756
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2020224.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079560
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2020224.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079832
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2020224.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079494
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079658
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080046
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31084706
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080954
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080216
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31084568
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31089168
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079582
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2020224.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079728
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31084280
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31083148
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2020224.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31084922
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2020224.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079558
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2020224.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080770
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31081914
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2020224.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079862
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080138
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080162
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31083092
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31085220
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31082698
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080800
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31084936
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2020224.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31081850
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_09_2020224.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079534
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31080156
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079892
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079916
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31081022
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079872
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31093716
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31085918
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31083048
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31082664
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_09_2020224.31079996
</commentlist>
</conversation>
