<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_15_167248</id>
	<title>A Look Under Western Digital's Hood</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1266253860000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Tom's Hardware got a rare opportunity to <a href="http://www.tomshardware.com/picturestory/525-western-digital-tour.html">explore the Western Digital campus</a> and show us what goes on under the hood of one of the favorites in storage tech.  <i>"When you buy a car, you look under the hood. Given the critical importance of hard disk storage in all of our lives, we thought you might want a peek under that hood, too. Now that Western Digital is in the business of breaking new capacity records (the latest Caviar Green was the first drive to hit 2TB, for example), we jumped at the chance to take a first-ever, unrestricted tour of its California R&amp;D facilities. This is the place where magnetic technology of the 1950s meets the nano- and quantum-level technologies of the current decade."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Tom 's Hardware got a rare opportunity to explore the Western Digital campus and show us what goes on under the hood of one of the favorites in storage tech .
" When you buy a car , you look under the hood .
Given the critical importance of hard disk storage in all of our lives , we thought you might want a peek under that hood , too .
Now that Western Digital is in the business of breaking new capacity records ( the latest Caviar Green was the first drive to hit 2TB , for example ) , we jumped at the chance to take a first-ever , unrestricted tour of its California R&amp;D facilities .
This is the place where magnetic technology of the 1950s meets the nano- and quantum-level technologies of the current decade .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tom's Hardware got a rare opportunity to explore the Western Digital campus and show us what goes on under the hood of one of the favorites in storage tech.
"When you buy a car, you look under the hood.
Given the critical importance of hard disk storage in all of our lives, we thought you might want a peek under that hood, too.
Now that Western Digital is in the business of breaking new capacity records (the latest Caviar Green was the first drive to hit 2TB, for example), we jumped at the chance to take a first-ever, unrestricted tour of its California R&amp;D facilities.
This is the place where magnetic technology of the 1950s meets the nano- and quantum-level technologies of the current decade.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147326</id>
	<title>Re:Looks familiar</title>
	<author>HockeyPuck</author>
	<datestamp>1266265380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I see some isolation pads under equipment, but how do you handle vibration in a seismically active area?</p></div><p>I used to work in IBM's Storage group in SanJose, California. This facility used to manufacture disk drives and storage subsystems.  One of the manufacturing buildings was actually built on rollers so that if an earthquake hit, the building would stay one in place while the ground moved underneath it.  This wouldn't eliminate 100\% of the motion, but would dampen it so that the equipment specific dampeners wouldn't have to handle the entire load.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I see some isolation pads under equipment , but how do you handle vibration in a seismically active area ? I used to work in IBM 's Storage group in SanJose , California .
This facility used to manufacture disk drives and storage subsystems .
One of the manufacturing buildings was actually built on rollers so that if an earthquake hit , the building would stay one in place while the ground moved underneath it .
This would n't eliminate 100 \ % of the motion , but would dampen it so that the equipment specific dampeners would n't have to handle the entire load .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I see some isolation pads under equipment, but how do you handle vibration in a seismically active area?I used to work in IBM's Storage group in SanJose, California.
This facility used to manufacture disk drives and storage subsystems.
One of the manufacturing buildings was actually built on rollers so that if an earthquake hit, the building would stay one in place while the ground moved underneath it.
This wouldn't eliminate 100\% of the motion, but would dampen it so that the equipment specific dampeners wouldn't have to handle the entire load.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146232</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31151490</id>
	<title>Re:I don't seem to have any problem with them</title>
	<author>Hamoohead</author>
	<datestamp>1266247800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>[. .<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.] there's a reason for the M in MTBF.</p></div><p>That IBM is mean? Perhaps you meant <i>there's a reason for the</i> <b>F</b> <i>in MTBF.</i> Or perhaps, referring to the "Deathstar", you should have used IBMTBF?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>[ .
. .
] there 's a reason for the M in MTBF.That IBM is mean ?
Perhaps you meant there 's a reason for the F in MTBF .
Or perhaps , referring to the " Deathstar " , you should have used IBMTBF ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[.
. .
] there's a reason for the M in MTBF.That IBM is mean?
Perhaps you meant there's a reason for the F in MTBF.
Or perhaps, referring to the "Deathstar", you should have used IBMTBF?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145946</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146346</id>
	<title>Ooops</title>
	<author>countertrolling</author>
	<datestamp>1266260580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Their site just sputtered to a halt..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Their site just sputtered to a halt. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Their site just sputtered to a halt..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31148928</id>
	<title>Re:Drive backup of my brain.</title>
	<author>julesh</author>
	<datestamp>1266230220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>How long until we have enough Hard Drive storage space to backup my own brain?</i></p><p>About 5,000 - 10,000 TB ought to be enough.  At current rate of growth, we're talking about 20 years or so. Of course, that rate might slow down in the future...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How long until we have enough Hard Drive storage space to backup my own brain ? About 5,000 - 10,000 TB ought to be enough .
At current rate of growth , we 're talking about 20 years or so .
Of course , that rate might slow down in the future.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How long until we have enough Hard Drive storage space to backup my own brain?About 5,000 - 10,000 TB ought to be enough.
At current rate of growth, we're talking about 20 years or so.
Of course, that rate might slow down in the future...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145912</id>
	<title>Given the critical importance of hard disk storage</title>
	<author>Oxford\_Comma\_Lover</author>
	<datestamp>1266258420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>&gt; Given the critical importance of hard disk storage in all of our lives, we thought you might want a peek under that hood, too.</i></p><p>Careful... what if you open the hard disk and there's a mouse inside who's been remembering it all for you?  Then he sees you and realizes "Oh, crap, we need to do the experiment all over.  Vogons!  Oh, Vogons!  Where are you...."</p><p>And then.  Will come.  The poetry.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Given the critical importance of hard disk storage in all of our lives , we thought you might want a peek under that hood , too.Careful... what if you open the hard disk and there 's a mouse inside who 's been remembering it all for you ?
Then he sees you and realizes " Oh , crap , we need to do the experiment all over .
Vogons ! Oh , Vogons !
Where are you.... " And then .
Will come .
The poetry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Given the critical importance of hard disk storage in all of our lives, we thought you might want a peek under that hood, too.Careful... what if you open the hard disk and there's a mouse inside who's been remembering it all for you?
Then he sees you and realizes "Oh, crap, we need to do the experiment all over.
Vogons!  Oh, Vogons!
Where are you...."And then.
Will come.
The poetry.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31150200</id>
	<title>Re:I don't seem to have any problem with them</title>
	<author>BikeHelmet</author>
	<datestamp>1266236340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've got one old 36GB raptor and 72GB raptor.</p><p>Both are chugging along just fine. I think they're about 5 years old now?</p><p>I use my computers daily. Those raptors are hearty drives. I've had to RMA four seagates once, and two other seagates twice, in the same time period. This is just for my own PCs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've got one old 36GB raptor and 72GB raptor.Both are chugging along just fine .
I think they 're about 5 years old now ? I use my computers daily .
Those raptors are hearty drives .
I 've had to RMA four seagates once , and two other seagates twice , in the same time period .
This is just for my own PCs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've got one old 36GB raptor and 72GB raptor.Both are chugging along just fine.
I think they're about 5 years old now?I use my computers daily.
Those raptors are hearty drives.
I've had to RMA four seagates once, and two other seagates twice, in the same time period.
This is just for my own PCs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145946</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147246</id>
	<title>If I worked at WD I'd be terrified</title>
	<author>timeOday</author>
	<datestamp>1266265020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Solid state drives are sure to displace hard drives before too much longer.  Complex mechanical mechanisms inevitably get pushed aside for solid state.  In all liklihood WD will be relegated to reselling solid state drives, since they will never beat Intel, Micron etc. at fabbing silicon.  I like WD just fine as a company, but they're in the same position as Kodak was in 1996 or so.  The writing is on the wall.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Solid state drives are sure to displace hard drives before too much longer .
Complex mechanical mechanisms inevitably get pushed aside for solid state .
In all liklihood WD will be relegated to reselling solid state drives , since they will never beat Intel , Micron etc .
at fabbing silicon .
I like WD just fine as a company , but they 're in the same position as Kodak was in 1996 or so .
The writing is on the wall .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Solid state drives are sure to displace hard drives before too much longer.
Complex mechanical mechanisms inevitably get pushed aside for solid state.
In all liklihood WD will be relegated to reselling solid state drives, since they will never beat Intel, Micron etc.
at fabbing silicon.
I like WD just fine as a company, but they're in the same position as Kodak was in 1996 or so.
The writing is on the wall.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31154478</id>
	<title>Re:All these complaints about WD drives...</title>
	<author>NJRoadfan</author>
	<datestamp>1266331500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Based on my experience with older computer hardware, Microscribe was by far the king of stiction.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Based on my experience with older computer hardware , Microscribe was by far the king of stiction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Based on my experience with older computer hardware, Microscribe was by far the king of stiction.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146616</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146616</id>
	<title>All these complaints about WD drives...</title>
	<author>rickb928</author>
	<datestamp>1266262080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... has everyone forgotten the dreaded Seagate <a href="http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6002549/description.html" title="patentstorm.us">'stiction'</a> [patentstorm.us] problems? And those fun <a href="http://home.earthlink.net/~z100lifeline/data/HDrive.html" title="earthlink.net">fixes</a> [earthlink.net]?  I was told they were due to <a href="http://www.lintech.org/comp-per/10HDDISK.pdf" title="lintech.org">contamination</a> [lintech.org], but found out later, <a href="href=" title="slashdot.org">not so</a> [slashdot.org].  But I banged my share of them around just to get them running long enough to copy off the data. Ah, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost\_(software)" title="wikipedia.org">Ghost</a> [wikipedia.org].</p><p>Or the <a href="http://www3.uta.edu/faculty/subramaniam/Articles/Miniscribe-Cooking\%20the\%20Books.htm" title="uta.edu">Miniscribe brick scandal</a> [uta.edu], which not a quality control problem, illustrates how your favorite drive manufacturer can become a casualty of even bad accounting?</p><p>Is any drive manufacturer immune to <a href="http://www.driveservice.com/bestwrst.htm" title="driveservice.com">problems</a> [driveservice.com]? <a href="http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/245312-32-seagate-western-digital-reliability" title="tomshardware.com">Nope</a> [tomshardware.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... has everyone forgotten the dreaded Seagate 'stiction ' [ patentstorm.us ] problems ?
And those fun fixes [ earthlink.net ] ?
I was told they were due to contamination [ lintech.org ] , but found out later , not so [ slashdot.org ] .
But I banged my share of them around just to get them running long enough to copy off the data .
Ah , Ghost [ wikipedia.org ] .Or the Miniscribe brick scandal [ uta.edu ] , which not a quality control problem , illustrates how your favorite drive manufacturer can become a casualty of even bad accounting ? Is any drive manufacturer immune to problems [ driveservice.com ] ?
Nope [ tomshardware.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... has everyone forgotten the dreaded Seagate 'stiction' [patentstorm.us] problems?
And those fun fixes [earthlink.net]?
I was told they were due to contamination [lintech.org], but found out later, not so [slashdot.org].
But I banged my share of them around just to get them running long enough to copy off the data.
Ah, Ghost [wikipedia.org].Or the Miniscribe brick scandal [uta.edu], which not a quality control problem, illustrates how your favorite drive manufacturer can become a casualty of even bad accounting?Is any drive manufacturer immune to problems [driveservice.com]?
Nope [tomshardware.com].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31150162</id>
	<title>Re:I don't seem to have any problem with them</title>
	<author>zipherx</author>
	<datestamp>1266236160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I also have been using raptor drives for years now and still have 4 of them running in boxes.. i have had zero failures so far.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I also have been using raptor drives for years now and still have 4 of them running in boxes.. i have had zero failures so far .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I also have been using raptor drives for years now and still have 4 of them running in boxes.. i have had zero failures so far.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145946</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145856</id>
	<title>Hmm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266258120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Given the critical importance of hard disk storage in all of our lives</p></div><p>Much like cars, once you've been burned once... it's hard to place trust in a company. For example, I purchased two IBM <i>deathstar</i> (actually called deskstar, but nicked as such because of their high failure rate) hard drives. Both failed within 5 months. I'd avoid an ibm item like the plague, even out of simple paranoia.</p><p>In the same regard, I had a WD hard drive, 40GB, fail on me. That was about 8 years ago. I haven't looked back. Anyone have any first hand experience with WD's reliability as of late? I know that a couple of years ago, Seagate beat WD'd warranty period by at least 3 years on new hard drives. That was another nail in WD's coffin for me.</p><p>Any updated experiences from WD's product line would be appreciated.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Given the critical importance of hard disk storage in all of our livesMuch like cars , once you 've been burned once... it 's hard to place trust in a company .
For example , I purchased two IBM deathstar ( actually called deskstar , but nicked as such because of their high failure rate ) hard drives .
Both failed within 5 months .
I 'd avoid an ibm item like the plague , even out of simple paranoia.In the same regard , I had a WD hard drive , 40GB , fail on me .
That was about 8 years ago .
I have n't looked back .
Anyone have any first hand experience with WD 's reliability as of late ?
I know that a couple of years ago , Seagate beat WD 'd warranty period by at least 3 years on new hard drives .
That was another nail in WD 's coffin for me.Any updated experiences from WD 's product line would be appreciated .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Given the critical importance of hard disk storage in all of our livesMuch like cars, once you've been burned once... it's hard to place trust in a company.
For example, I purchased two IBM deathstar (actually called deskstar, but nicked as such because of their high failure rate) hard drives.
Both failed within 5 months.
I'd avoid an ibm item like the plague, even out of simple paranoia.In the same regard, I had a WD hard drive, 40GB, fail on me.
That was about 8 years ago.
I haven't looked back.
Anyone have any first hand experience with WD's reliability as of late?
I know that a couple of years ago, Seagate beat WD'd warranty period by at least 3 years on new hard drives.
That was another nail in WD's coffin for me.Any updated experiences from WD's product line would be appreciated.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146282</id>
	<title>Re:well ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266260280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Google "ST31000340AS" and see what kind of quality went into that, and then also see how Seagate tried like hell to keep things quiet about it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google " ST31000340AS " and see what kind of quality went into that , and then also see how Seagate tried like hell to keep things quiet about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google "ST31000340AS" and see what kind of quality went into that, and then also see how Seagate tried like hell to keep things quiet about it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145832</id>
	<title>Amusing picture</title>
	<author>goldaryn</author>
	<datestamp>1266258000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://media.bestofmicro.com/2/6/238542/original/Suiting\%20Up.jpg" title="bestofmicro.com" rel="nofollow">http://media.bestofmicro.com/2/6/238542/original/Suiting\%20Up.jpg</a> [bestofmicro.com] <br>
<br>
"DO NOT TUCK YOUR PENS INTO YOUR BOOTS"<br>
<br>
How has that sign not been graffitoed yet? The temptation</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //media.bestofmicro.com/2/6/238542/original/Suiting \ % 20Up.jpg [ bestofmicro.com ] " DO NOT TUCK YOUR PENS INTO YOUR BOOTS " How has that sign not been graffitoed yet ?
The temptation</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://media.bestofmicro.com/2/6/238542/original/Suiting\%20Up.jpg [bestofmicro.com] 

"DO NOT TUCK YOUR PENS INTO YOUR BOOTS"

How has that sign not been graffitoed yet?
The temptation</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146528</id>
	<title>Re:Looks familiar</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266261600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can't wear thin cotton gloves under the "clean" gloves, to absorb sweat?? I'd think given all the thought that goes into making the bunny suits, they'd have some sort of sweat-wicking liners by now??</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You ca n't wear thin cotton gloves under the " clean " gloves , to absorb sweat ? ?
I 'd think given all the thought that goes into making the bunny suits , they 'd have some sort of sweat-wicking liners by now ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can't wear thin cotton gloves under the "clean" gloves, to absorb sweat??
I'd think given all the thought that goes into making the bunny suits, they'd have some sort of sweat-wicking liners by now?
?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146232</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145900</id>
	<title>Dear WD, Could You Help Us End an EMF Debate?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266258360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>and (my personal favorite) the warning about how the strong magnet inside the system could fritz your pacemaker.</p></div><p>So you have a large number of workers exposed to this machine that (I presume) creates massive electromagnetic fields?  And they are exposed to it for lengthy amounts of time in proximity to it?  And you have other workers in the same area/facility that are not exposed to it?  <br> <br>

I tire of the ongoing debate that <a href="http://www.mercola.com/article/emf/emf\_dangers.htm" title="mercola.com" rel="nofollow">electromagnetic fields are hazardous to your health</a> [mercola.com].  Since you provide these people ongoing health care, perhaps you could <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic\_field#Health\_and\_safety" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">release anonymized data</a> [wikipedia.org] so we could either confirm or deny this?  If anything it would help clear things up in -- not only the power lines debate -- but also maybe <a href="http://mobile.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/07/24/1811258" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">cellphones</a> [slashdot.org] if the EMFs are in anyway similar.  <br> <br>

Just a thought<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>and ( my personal favorite ) the warning about how the strong magnet inside the system could fritz your pacemaker.So you have a large number of workers exposed to this machine that ( I presume ) creates massive electromagnetic fields ?
And they are exposed to it for lengthy amounts of time in proximity to it ?
And you have other workers in the same area/facility that are not exposed to it ?
I tire of the ongoing debate that electromagnetic fields are hazardous to your health [ mercola.com ] .
Since you provide these people ongoing health care , perhaps you could release anonymized data [ wikipedia.org ] so we could either confirm or deny this ?
If anything it would help clear things up in -- not only the power lines debate -- but also maybe cellphones [ slashdot.org ] if the EMFs are in anyway similar .
Just a thought .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and (my personal favorite) the warning about how the strong magnet inside the system could fritz your pacemaker.So you have a large number of workers exposed to this machine that (I presume) creates massive electromagnetic fields?
And they are exposed to it for lengthy amounts of time in proximity to it?
And you have other workers in the same area/facility that are not exposed to it?
I tire of the ongoing debate that electromagnetic fields are hazardous to your health [mercola.com].
Since you provide these people ongoing health care, perhaps you could release anonymized data [wikipedia.org] so we could either confirm or deny this?
If anything it would help clear things up in -- not only the power lines debate -- but also maybe cellphones [slashdot.org] if the EMFs are in anyway similar.
Just a thought ...
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31148470</id>
	<title>Re:well ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266227940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>"Given the critical importance of hard disk storage in all of our lives"

is the exact reason I have not bought a WD^H^H Maxtor drive in 15 years, back in the 90's you couldn't get one of their products that wasnt crap

after replacing my 120 meg drive 3 times in a single year, and a few later had the same issue with the next wd^H^H Maxtor drive, except 4 times through the rma horse crap, I swore to never buy their garbage again

been quite happy with seagate and maxtor^H^H^H^H^H^H WD, they make a quality product

as far as my old 120mb drive its long dead... as I recall it didnt last more than a year or 2 after the last replacement

but I still have my 240mb maxtor^H^H^H^H^H^H WD, and it still works just fine today</p></div></blockquote><p>

FTFM.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Given the critical importance of hard disk storage in all of our lives " is the exact reason I have not bought a WD ^ H ^ H Maxtor drive in 15 years , back in the 90 's you could n't get one of their products that wasnt crap after replacing my 120 meg drive 3 times in a single year , and a few later had the same issue with the next wd ^ H ^ H Maxtor drive , except 4 times through the rma horse crap , I swore to never buy their garbage again been quite happy with seagate and maxtor ^ H ^ H ^ H ^ H ^ H ^ H WD , they make a quality product as far as my old 120mb drive its long dead... as I recall it didnt last more than a year or 2 after the last replacement but I still have my 240mb maxtor ^ H ^ H ^ H ^ H ^ H ^ H WD , and it still works just fine today FTFM .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Given the critical importance of hard disk storage in all of our lives"

is the exact reason I have not bought a WD^H^H Maxtor drive in 15 years, back in the 90's you couldn't get one of their products that wasnt crap

after replacing my 120 meg drive 3 times in a single year, and a few later had the same issue with the next wd^H^H Maxtor drive, except 4 times through the rma horse crap, I swore to never buy their garbage again

been quite happy with seagate and maxtor^H^H^H^H^H^H WD, they make a quality product

as far as my old 120mb drive its long dead... as I recall it didnt last more than a year or 2 after the last replacement

but I still have my 240mb maxtor^H^H^H^H^H^H WD, and it still works just fine today

FTFM.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31155594</id>
	<title>Good WD experiences here since 1992 or so</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266338400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><div class="quote"><p><b>"Anyone have any first hand experience with WD's reliability as of late?"</b> - by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 15, @12:22PM (#31145856)</p></div><p>Yes, &amp; since 1992 (&amp; I still have several IDE HDD's from WD that STILL RUN from those days (Caviars, 212mb &amp; 242mb)) - that's just a GOOD TESTIMONY here, to "start the show", so-to-speak (a great one no less).</p><p><b>That's been my experience w/ WD disks since the early 1990's in fact... still running, &amp; imo? An AMAZING one...!</b></p><p>----</p><p>Then, in late 2002/early 2003, I bought into their 10,000 rpm "Raptor" series since the 36gb model (2 of them for MIRRORING or RAID 0)... 1 of them went bad, shortly afterwards (around 6 months tops iirc).</p><p>No biggie though - <b>WD replaced it, AND, w/ the LARGER &amp; FASTER 74gb SATA I model</b> no less &amp; NO EXTRA CHARGE EITHER!</p><p>Then, because of that? I bought into the 150 "Raptor X" SATA I models (again 2 of them, &amp; still part of the former round of Raptors on SATA I @ 10,000rpm)...</p><p>Again, 1 of the 2 went bad around 2 yrs. later (as a mirrored drive, RAID 1 etc. et al)...</p><p>(As an aside + some "pertinent data" here, as to HOW I use HDD's: I don't see any reason to think their disks are "bad", because a LOT of the work I do IS extremely "diskbound" much of the file in File I/O or DB work too)</p><p>SO - What did WD do to "make up for this" per their warranty?</p><p>Well - <b>They sent me a FASTER 150gb SATA II "Viking"</b> (just a smaller velociraptor really) <b>as a replacement - which is an even</b> (theoretically @ least) <b>FASTER disk</b> (SATA II vs. SATA I is why).</p><p>----</p><p>Then, later (last year in fact) I bought into their SATA II 10,000 rpm "Velociraptor" HDD series (1 300mb unit ).</p><p>(This thing FLIES, &amp; is reliable as it gets... &amp; that's for a year++ or so, now, &amp; running F A S T, &amp; strong...)</p><p>----</p><p>So - Of the 5 SATA I drives I bought? 2 went bad, but, nearly immediately on 1 (smaller 36gb unit)... but, WD backs their warranties to no end!</p><p>Again/E.G.-&gt; WD sent me back the 74gb unit I am using TO THIS DAY NOW, almost 7++ yrs. later, as my backup HDD (to replace the smaller generation #1 36gb raptor I lost). I thought that was great - Heh, they DOUBLED THE SIZE OF THE DISK I SENT THEM IN FACT, &amp; sent me one back that still works (way, Way, WAY past its warranty no less). Probably because they no longerp produced the 36gb, but I was happy, because the replacement's been running non-stop since 2004-2005 or so, just fine!</p><p><b>OVERALL - That was my experience on SATA I with them, a GOOD one.</b></p><p>----</p><p>Now, on the "Raptor X's" SATA I??</p><p>I had one of the 2 I bought "go bad"... &amp; what'd WD do?</p><p>Heh - they sent me back the SATA II "Viking" I am using now (also 150gb), which is a faster spec in SATA II than SATA I... &amp; runs like a dream for a year++ now in fact.</p><p>(I.E.-&gt; When a WD disk "goes belly up"? They do you RIGHT - AND, face it guys:  Sooner or later, all HDD's do go on you... period)</p><p>WD does you right though, &amp; just sends you one of equal size from the NEXT GENERATION no less (provided you are still in warranty of course, that goes w/out saying))</p><p><b>They back their products &amp; warranties FULLY &amp; to the letter, in other words, and you make out well imo, by getting a "next gen" &amp; usually SUPERIOR replacement</b> (&amp; though they may be refurbs (not sure IF this is what WD does on replacements or not))... <b> All in all, imo @ least, a good deal.</b></p><p><b>So, lastly: That's been my experience w/ their SATA II HDD "velociraptor" family - again, a good one!</b></p><p>----</p><p><b>IN THE END - PUT IT THIS WAY:</b>  I intend to apply @ WD for work w/in the next year++ (they, or MS)... why? Because I believe in both families of computer products is why. I won't work for a company whose products I don't use &amp; believe in, or one that won't back their merchandise &amp; warranties (or build them as well as is possible either).</p><p>APK</p><p>P.S.=&gt; So, in the end? Well - All I know is, that of the 10 or so WD HDD's I have (some of which still run from 1992 or so no less)? 8 of them are running strong, &amp; they usually are the "speed/performance kings" most every round release they have done over time typically (except for the brief periods that Seagate's PRT made them faster readers, &amp; the IBM "deathstars" that ended up being erroneous anyhow, which iirc, were bought out by some Asian firm for their tech (could be wrong on this last note though, the details escape me over time is why of course))... apk</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Anyone have any first hand experience with WD 's reliability as of late ?
" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 15 , @ 12 : 22PM ( # 31145856 ) Yes , &amp; since 1992 ( &amp; I still have several IDE HDD 's from WD that STILL RUN from those days ( Caviars , 212mb &amp; 242mb ) ) - that 's just a GOOD TESTIMONY here , to " start the show " , so-to-speak ( a great one no less ) .That 's been my experience w/ WD disks since the early 1990 's in fact... still running , &amp; imo ?
An AMAZING one... ! ----Then , in late 2002/early 2003 , I bought into their 10,000 rpm " Raptor " series since the 36gb model ( 2 of them for MIRRORING or RAID 0 ) ... 1 of them went bad , shortly afterwards ( around 6 months tops iirc ) .No biggie though - WD replaced it , AND , w/ the LARGER &amp; FASTER 74gb SATA I model no less &amp; NO EXTRA CHARGE EITHER ! Then , because of that ?
I bought into the 150 " Raptor X " SATA I models ( again 2 of them , &amp; still part of the former round of Raptors on SATA I @ 10,000rpm ) ...Again , 1 of the 2 went bad around 2 yrs .
later ( as a mirrored drive , RAID 1 etc .
et al ) ... ( As an aside + some " pertinent data " here , as to HOW I use HDD 's : I do n't see any reason to think their disks are " bad " , because a LOT of the work I do IS extremely " diskbound " much of the file in File I/O or DB work too ) SO - What did WD do to " make up for this " per their warranty ? Well - They sent me a FASTER 150gb SATA II " Viking " ( just a smaller velociraptor really ) as a replacement - which is an even ( theoretically @ least ) FASTER disk ( SATA II vs. SATA I is why ) .----Then , later ( last year in fact ) I bought into their SATA II 10,000 rpm " Velociraptor " HDD series ( 1 300mb unit ) .
( This thing FLIES , &amp; is reliable as it gets... &amp; that 's for a year + + or so , now , &amp; running F A S T , &amp; strong... ) ----So - Of the 5 SATA I drives I bought ?
2 went bad , but , nearly immediately on 1 ( smaller 36gb unit ) ... but , WD backs their warranties to no end ! Again/E.G.- &gt; WD sent me back the 74gb unit I am using TO THIS DAY NOW , almost 7 + + yrs .
later , as my backup HDD ( to replace the smaller generation # 1 36gb raptor I lost ) .
I thought that was great - Heh , they DOUBLED THE SIZE OF THE DISK I SENT THEM IN FACT , &amp; sent me one back that still works ( way , Way , WAY past its warranty no less ) .
Probably because they no longerp produced the 36gb , but I was happy , because the replacement 's been running non-stop since 2004-2005 or so , just fine ! OVERALL - That was my experience on SATA I with them , a GOOD one.----Now , on the " Raptor X 's " SATA I ?
? I had one of the 2 I bought " go bad " ... &amp; what 'd WD do ? Heh - they sent me back the SATA II " Viking " I am using now ( also 150gb ) , which is a faster spec in SATA II than SATA I... &amp; runs like a dream for a year + + now in fact .
( I.E.- &gt; When a WD disk " goes belly up " ?
They do you RIGHT - AND , face it guys : Sooner or later , all HDD 's do go on you... period ) WD does you right though , &amp; just sends you one of equal size from the NEXT GENERATION no less ( provided you are still in warranty of course , that goes w/out saying ) ) They back their products &amp; warranties FULLY &amp; to the letter , in other words , and you make out well imo , by getting a " next gen " &amp; usually SUPERIOR replacement ( &amp; though they may be refurbs ( not sure IF this is what WD does on replacements or not ) ) ... All in all , imo @ least , a good deal.So , lastly : That 's been my experience w/ their SATA II HDD " velociraptor " family - again , a good one ! ----IN THE END - PUT IT THIS WAY : I intend to apply @ WD for work w/in the next year + + ( they , or MS ) ... why ? Because I believe in both families of computer products is why .
I wo n't work for a company whose products I do n't use &amp; believe in , or one that wo n't back their merchandise &amp; warranties ( or build them as well as is possible either ) .APKP.S. = &gt; So , in the end ?
Well - All I know is , that of the 10 or so WD HDD 's I have ( some of which still run from 1992 or so no less ) ?
8 of them are running strong , &amp; they usually are the " speed/performance kings " most every round release they have done over time typically ( except for the brief periods that Seagate 's PRT made them faster readers , &amp; the IBM " deathstars " that ended up being erroneous anyhow , which iirc , were bought out by some Asian firm for their tech ( could be wrong on this last note though , the details escape me over time is why of course ) ) ... apk</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Anyone have any first hand experience with WD's reliability as of late?
" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 15, @12:22PM (#31145856)Yes, &amp; since 1992 (&amp; I still have several IDE HDD's from WD that STILL RUN from those days (Caviars, 212mb &amp; 242mb)) - that's just a GOOD TESTIMONY here, to "start the show", so-to-speak (a great one no less).That's been my experience w/ WD disks since the early 1990's in fact... still running, &amp; imo?
An AMAZING one...!----Then, in late 2002/early 2003, I bought into their 10,000 rpm "Raptor" series since the 36gb model (2 of them for MIRRORING or RAID 0)... 1 of them went bad, shortly afterwards (around 6 months tops iirc).No biggie though - WD replaced it, AND, w/ the LARGER &amp; FASTER 74gb SATA I model no less &amp; NO EXTRA CHARGE EITHER!Then, because of that?
I bought into the 150 "Raptor X" SATA I models (again 2 of them, &amp; still part of the former round of Raptors on SATA I @ 10,000rpm)...Again, 1 of the 2 went bad around 2 yrs.
later (as a mirrored drive, RAID 1 etc.
et al)...(As an aside + some "pertinent data" here, as to HOW I use HDD's: I don't see any reason to think their disks are "bad", because a LOT of the work I do IS extremely "diskbound" much of the file in File I/O or DB work too)SO - What did WD do to "make up for this" per their warranty?Well - They sent me a FASTER 150gb SATA II "Viking" (just a smaller velociraptor really) as a replacement - which is an even (theoretically @ least) FASTER disk (SATA II vs. SATA I is why).----Then, later (last year in fact) I bought into their SATA II 10,000 rpm "Velociraptor" HDD series (1 300mb unit ).
(This thing FLIES, &amp; is reliable as it gets... &amp; that's for a year++ or so, now, &amp; running F A S T, &amp; strong...)----So - Of the 5 SATA I drives I bought?
2 went bad, but, nearly immediately on 1 (smaller 36gb unit)... but, WD backs their warranties to no end!Again/E.G.-&gt; WD sent me back the 74gb unit I am using TO THIS DAY NOW, almost 7++ yrs.
later, as my backup HDD (to replace the smaller generation #1 36gb raptor I lost).
I thought that was great - Heh, they DOUBLED THE SIZE OF THE DISK I SENT THEM IN FACT, &amp; sent me one back that still works (way, Way, WAY past its warranty no less).
Probably because they no longerp produced the 36gb, but I was happy, because the replacement's been running non-stop since 2004-2005 or so, just fine!OVERALL - That was my experience on SATA I with them, a GOOD one.----Now, on the "Raptor X's" SATA I?
?I had one of the 2 I bought "go bad"... &amp; what'd WD do?Heh - they sent me back the SATA II "Viking" I am using now (also 150gb), which is a faster spec in SATA II than SATA I... &amp; runs like a dream for a year++ now in fact.
(I.E.-&gt; When a WD disk "goes belly up"?
They do you RIGHT - AND, face it guys:  Sooner or later, all HDD's do go on you... period)WD does you right though, &amp; just sends you one of equal size from the NEXT GENERATION no less (provided you are still in warranty of course, that goes w/out saying))They back their products &amp; warranties FULLY &amp; to the letter, in other words, and you make out well imo, by getting a "next gen" &amp; usually SUPERIOR replacement (&amp; though they may be refurbs (not sure IF this is what WD does on replacements or not))...  All in all, imo @ least, a good deal.So, lastly: That's been my experience w/ their SATA II HDD "velociraptor" family - again, a good one!----IN THE END - PUT IT THIS WAY:  I intend to apply @ WD for work w/in the next year++ (they, or MS)... why? Because I believe in both families of computer products is why.
I won't work for a company whose products I don't use &amp; believe in, or one that won't back their merchandise &amp; warranties (or build them as well as is possible either).APKP.S.=&gt; So, in the end?
Well - All I know is, that of the 10 or so WD HDD's I have (some of which still run from 1992 or so no less)?
8 of them are running strong, &amp; they usually are the "speed/performance kings" most every round release they have done over time typically (except for the brief periods that Seagate's PRT made them faster readers, &amp; the IBM "deathstars" that ended up being erroneous anyhow, which iirc, were bought out by some Asian firm for their tech (could be wrong on this last note though, the details escape me over time is why of course))... apk
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145856</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147920</id>
	<title>San Jose?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266225300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I only skimmed the article, but when was the last harddrive you bought that was Made in USA?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I only skimmed the article , but when was the last harddrive you bought that was Made in USA ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I only skimmed the article, but when was the last harddrive you bought that was Made in USA?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147506</id>
	<title>Re:Hmm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266266220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Same experience with WD here.  Actually, I never owned one back in the 90's but I knew enough people with failed drives to keep me away.  It took me a <em>long</em> time to get over that.  However, now WD are one of the best.  But only the Black series (5-year warranty and excellent performance).  That Green shit is just that, shit.</p><p>I don't know what has happened to Seagate but practically everything they make nowadays ain't that great and it seems to get worse with each new revision (the latest 7200.12 is pure shit).  I think Seagate's downfall is when they introduced the perpendicular encoding drives.  There just has not been a reliable model since whatever revision that was introduced in.</p><p>The WD 640GB Black series is currently the best/biggest drive on the market.</p><p><em>Nobody</em> makes a reliable drive over 640 GB (those are the two 320GB platter drives).  Pisses me off because hard-drive technology has completely stalled and I really want a few 2TB drives for my HTPC.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Same experience with WD here .
Actually , I never owned one back in the 90 's but I knew enough people with failed drives to keep me away .
It took me a long time to get over that .
However , now WD are one of the best .
But only the Black series ( 5-year warranty and excellent performance ) .
That Green shit is just that , shit.I do n't know what has happened to Seagate but practically everything they make nowadays ai n't that great and it seems to get worse with each new revision ( the latest 7200.12 is pure shit ) .
I think Seagate 's downfall is when they introduced the perpendicular encoding drives .
There just has not been a reliable model since whatever revision that was introduced in.The WD 640GB Black series is currently the best/biggest drive on the market.Nobody makes a reliable drive over 640 GB ( those are the two 320GB platter drives ) .
Pisses me off because hard-drive technology has completely stalled and I really want a few 2TB drives for my HTPC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Same experience with WD here.
Actually, I never owned one back in the 90's but I knew enough people with failed drives to keep me away.
It took me a long time to get over that.
However, now WD are one of the best.
But only the Black series (5-year warranty and excellent performance).
That Green shit is just that, shit.I don't know what has happened to Seagate but practically everything they make nowadays ain't that great and it seems to get worse with each new revision (the latest 7200.12 is pure shit).
I think Seagate's downfall is when they introduced the perpendicular encoding drives.
There just has not been a reliable model since whatever revision that was introduced in.The WD 640GB Black series is currently the best/biggest drive on the market.Nobody makes a reliable drive over 640 GB (those are the two 320GB platter drives).
Pisses me off because hard-drive technology has completely stalled and I really want a few 2TB drives for my HTPC.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145856</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147286</id>
	<title>Re:Dear WD, Could You Help Us End an EMF Debate?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1266265200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, the simple problem is, that depending on what you accept, it&rsquo;s ether already 100\% clear, or not at all.</p><p>If you only look at the photons, it&rsquo;s 100\% clear, that they are waaaayy to weak to get any electrons to do anything. At maximum you will get 0.1-0.2 degrees of temperature raise. Which is nothing compared to sunlight or a warm shower.</p><p>But the problem is, that people say that there are other effects. No idea what else they could mean, since there is not really anything else (van der Waals?). But as long as it&rsquo;s not proven that there is nothing else, or that those other effects don&rsquo;t do anything, the debate will not be done for non-quantum-physicists.</p><p>Of course the loonies will never stop. By definition. But who cares?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , the simple problem is , that depending on what you accept , it    s ether already 100 \ % clear , or not at all.If you only look at the photons , it    s 100 \ % clear , that they are waaaayy to weak to get any electrons to do anything .
At maximum you will get 0.1-0.2 degrees of temperature raise .
Which is nothing compared to sunlight or a warm shower.But the problem is , that people say that there are other effects .
No idea what else they could mean , since there is not really anything else ( van der Waals ? ) .
But as long as it    s not proven that there is nothing else , or that those other effects don    t do anything , the debate will not be done for non-quantum-physicists.Of course the loonies will never stop .
By definition .
But who cares ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, the simple problem is, that depending on what you accept, it’s ether already 100\% clear, or not at all.If you only look at the photons, it’s 100\% clear, that they are waaaayy to weak to get any electrons to do anything.
At maximum you will get 0.1-0.2 degrees of temperature raise.
Which is nothing compared to sunlight or a warm shower.But the problem is, that people say that there are other effects.
No idea what else they could mean, since there is not really anything else (van der Waals?).
But as long as it’s not proven that there is nothing else, or that those other effects don’t do anything, the debate will not be done for non-quantum-physicists.Of course the loonies will never stop.
By definition.
But who cares?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145900</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31170298</id>
	<title>Re:If I worked at WD I'd be terrified</title>
	<author>CompMD</author>
	<datestamp>1265043720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Complex mechanical mechanisms inevitably get pushed aside for solid state. "</p><p>I know that's all the rage these days, but sometimes it is foolish to replace trusted, well understood mechanical systems with computerized versions.  Just ask Toyota what a bright idea it was to leap into that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Complex mechanical mechanisms inevitably get pushed aside for solid state .
" I know that 's all the rage these days , but sometimes it is foolish to replace trusted , well understood mechanical systems with computerized versions .
Just ask Toyota what a bright idea it was to leap into that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Complex mechanical mechanisms inevitably get pushed aside for solid state.
"I know that's all the rage these days, but sometimes it is foolish to replace trusted, well understood mechanical systems with computerized versions.
Just ask Toyota what a bright idea it was to leap into that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147246</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147676</id>
	<title>Re:If I worked at WD I'd be terrified</title>
	<author>Cicada7</author>
	<datestamp>1266267120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They could surely keep themselves going for a while by buying out a smaller SSD fab shop and selling rebranded as WD devices.  There are multitudes of 'I only use WD/Seagate/Maxtor/Hitachi harddrive' types who have been waiting in the wings for a 'real' HDD manufacturer to sell SSD's before they jump on the bandwagon.
<br> <br>
That said, and this said so many times it's becoming<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. cliche, mechanical HDDs offer storage capacities far exceeding SSD and will continue for a while.  SSD will catch up in capacity soon as fab processes get smaller and smaller (and they start moving to 3.5" form-factors to squeeze in more chips per unit), but HDDs will continue to be an order of magnitude cheaper to produce/purchase for years to come.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They could surely keep themselves going for a while by buying out a smaller SSD fab shop and selling rebranded as WD devices .
There are multitudes of 'I only use WD/Seagate/Maxtor/Hitachi harddrive ' types who have been waiting in the wings for a 'real ' HDD manufacturer to sell SSD 's before they jump on the bandwagon .
That said , and this said so many times it 's becoming / .
cliche , mechanical HDDs offer storage capacities far exceeding SSD and will continue for a while .
SSD will catch up in capacity soon as fab processes get smaller and smaller ( and they start moving to 3.5 " form-factors to squeeze in more chips per unit ) , but HDDs will continue to be an order of magnitude cheaper to produce/purchase for years to come .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They could surely keep themselves going for a while by buying out a smaller SSD fab shop and selling rebranded as WD devices.
There are multitudes of 'I only use WD/Seagate/Maxtor/Hitachi harddrive' types who have been waiting in the wings for a 'real' HDD manufacturer to sell SSD's before they jump on the bandwagon.
That said, and this said so many times it's becoming /.
cliche, mechanical HDDs offer storage capacities far exceeding SSD and will continue for a while.
SSD will catch up in capacity soon as fab processes get smaller and smaller (and they start moving to 3.5" form-factors to squeeze in more chips per unit), but HDDs will continue to be an order of magnitude cheaper to produce/purchase for years to come.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147246</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31148320</id>
	<title>Re:Drive backup of my brain.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266227220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>30MB drives have been around for 20 years.</htmltext>
<tokenext>30MB drives have been around for 20 years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>30MB drives have been around for 20 years.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31148558</id>
	<title>Emo!</title>
	<author>antdude</author>
	<datestamp>1266228360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.tomshardware.com/picturestory/525-10-western-digital-tour.html" title="tomshardware.com">http://www.tomshardware.com/picturestory/525-10-western-digital-tour.html</a> [tomshardware.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.tomshardware.com/picturestory/525-10-western-digital-tour.html [ tomshardware.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.tomshardware.com/picturestory/525-10-western-digital-tour.html [tomshardware.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146234</id>
	<title>Re:Dear WD, Could You Help Us End an EMF Debate?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266260100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course it's not good for your health. Human beings evolved alongside mother nature, not power stations. The question is how much exposure does it take to do damage. Is it truly negligible, or not?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course it 's not good for your health .
Human beings evolved alongside mother nature , not power stations .
The question is how much exposure does it take to do damage .
Is it truly negligible , or not ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course it's not good for your health.
Human beings evolved alongside mother nature, not power stations.
The question is how much exposure does it take to do damage.
Is it truly negligible, or not?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145900</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146024</id>
	<title>Re:Dear WD, Could You Help Us End an EMF Debate?</title>
	<author>Kuroji</author>
	<datestamp>1266259020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Look, if it were that big of an issue, you'd see headlines about people leaving the company and suing them and settling out of court for huge sums due to health issues.</p><p>You're not going to get brain cancer from talking on your damned cellphone. If you're afraid you are, then quit using one. If you're afraid of cell towers giving you cancer, check yourself into an asylum, because if that were the case you'd see cancer rates across the country rising by tens of thousands of percent, centered on those towers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Look , if it were that big of an issue , you 'd see headlines about people leaving the company and suing them and settling out of court for huge sums due to health issues.You 're not going to get brain cancer from talking on your damned cellphone .
If you 're afraid you are , then quit using one .
If you 're afraid of cell towers giving you cancer , check yourself into an asylum , because if that were the case you 'd see cancer rates across the country rising by tens of thousands of percent , centered on those towers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Look, if it were that big of an issue, you'd see headlines about people leaving the company and suing them and settling out of court for huge sums due to health issues.You're not going to get brain cancer from talking on your damned cellphone.
If you're afraid you are, then quit using one.
If you're afraid of cell towers giving you cancer, check yourself into an asylum, because if that were the case you'd see cancer rates across the country rising by tens of thousands of percent, centered on those towers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145900</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31152006</id>
	<title>Re:Drive backup of my brain.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266253440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How long until we have enough Hard Drive storage space to backup my own brain?</p></div><p>Your brain?  Not long...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How long until we have enough Hard Drive storage space to backup my own brain ? Your brain ?
Not long.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How long until we have enough Hard Drive storage space to backup my own brain?Your brain?
Not long...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146800</id>
	<title>Tom's Hardware, Campus</title>
	<author>sexconker</author>
	<datestamp>1266263100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Tom's Hardware got a tour of WD?  I expect good reviews for WD gear on TH in the near future.  TH is the most horrendously money-hatted review site in existence.</p><p>Everyone knows WD's gear is shit.<br>Hell, a few years ago they dropped their standard warranty from 5 years to 3 years,  Now there is absolutely zero reason to pick WD over Seagate.</p><p>Add in the fact that they're one of the shitty sites that breaks a single article into 20 fucking pages and you've got a guaranteed recipe for me not clicking that shit.</p><p>But I guaranfuckingtee you that TH will be handing out stellar reviews for some WD products in the near future.</p><p>Why does every fucking tech company insist on having their headquarters / office be called a "campus"?  It's not a fucking campus - it's not there as some ivory-tower education factory, it's a fucking corporation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Tom 's Hardware got a tour of WD ?
I expect good reviews for WD gear on TH in the near future .
TH is the most horrendously money-hatted review site in existence.Everyone knows WD 's gear is shit.Hell , a few years ago they dropped their standard warranty from 5 years to 3 years , Now there is absolutely zero reason to pick WD over Seagate.Add in the fact that they 're one of the shitty sites that breaks a single article into 20 fucking pages and you 've got a guaranteed recipe for me not clicking that shit.But I guaranfuckingtee you that TH will be handing out stellar reviews for some WD products in the near future.Why does every fucking tech company insist on having their headquarters / office be called a " campus " ?
It 's not a fucking campus - it 's not there as some ivory-tower education factory , it 's a fucking corporation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tom's Hardware got a tour of WD?
I expect good reviews for WD gear on TH in the near future.
TH is the most horrendously money-hatted review site in existence.Everyone knows WD's gear is shit.Hell, a few years ago they dropped their standard warranty from 5 years to 3 years,  Now there is absolutely zero reason to pick WD over Seagate.Add in the fact that they're one of the shitty sites that breaks a single article into 20 fucking pages and you've got a guaranteed recipe for me not clicking that shit.But I guaranfuckingtee you that TH will be handing out stellar reviews for some WD products in the near future.Why does every fucking tech company insist on having their headquarters / office be called a "campus"?
It's not a fucking campus - it's not there as some ivory-tower education factory, it's a fucking corporation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31148762</id>
	<title>Re:Hmm</title>
	<author>Urza9814</author>
	<datestamp>1266229320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I purchased two 80GB WD Caviar drives - one about 5 years ago, the other 3 years ago. Neither one lasted more than a year.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I purchased two 80GB WD Caviar drives - one about 5 years ago , the other 3 years ago .
Neither one lasted more than a year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I purchased two 80GB WD Caviar drives - one about 5 years ago, the other 3 years ago.
Neither one lasted more than a year.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145856</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146882</id>
	<title>Re:well ...</title>
	<author>blahplusplus</author>
	<datestamp>1266263460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you buy enough drives you'll eventually come across failures.</p><p>I did the same thing, the early years of western digital were quite awful.  The heat typical WD drives put out were a big contributor to their failure.</p><p>So far my record of drive failure is 2 seagate within 5 years, vs 7+ western digital in 5 years.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you buy enough drives you 'll eventually come across failures.I did the same thing , the early years of western digital were quite awful .
The heat typical WD drives put out were a big contributor to their failure.So far my record of drive failure is 2 seagate within 5 years , vs 7 + western digital in 5 years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you buy enough drives you'll eventually come across failures.I did the same thing, the early years of western digital were quite awful.
The heat typical WD drives put out were a big contributor to their failure.So far my record of drive failure is 2 seagate within 5 years, vs 7+ western digital in 5 years.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31148436</id>
	<title>Re:Drive backup of my brain.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266227700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How long until we have enough Hard Drive storage space to backup my own brain?</p></div><p> <i>Your</i> brain? Oh we had that since the eighties...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How long until we have enough Hard Drive storage space to backup my own brain ?
Your brain ?
Oh we had that since the eighties.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How long until we have enough Hard Drive storage space to backup my own brain?
Your brain?
Oh we had that since the eighties...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146650</id>
	<title>Re:Hmm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266262200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anecdotally, every single manufacturer is having reliability problems; there's no one brand you can Just Count On.   WD is included in that; I recently had a WD drive fail after just a few months.  I wanted to know who to switch to, asked around, and there's just no answer.</p><p>The good news is that drives are big and cheap.  Use software RAID1 and the worst drives combine to become very reliable storage.  So that's my answer: buy the cheapest drives you can get, and use them in pairs or triplets.  Even multiplying the price like that, they're great value.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anecdotally , every single manufacturer is having reliability problems ; there 's no one brand you can Just Count On .
WD is included in that ; I recently had a WD drive fail after just a few months .
I wanted to know who to switch to , asked around , and there 's just no answer.The good news is that drives are big and cheap .
Use software RAID1 and the worst drives combine to become very reliable storage .
So that 's my answer : buy the cheapest drives you can get , and use them in pairs or triplets .
Even multiplying the price like that , they 're great value .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anecdotally, every single manufacturer is having reliability problems; there's no one brand you can Just Count On.
WD is included in that; I recently had a WD drive fail after just a few months.
I wanted to know who to switch to, asked around, and there's just no answer.The good news is that drives are big and cheap.
Use software RAID1 and the worst drives combine to become very reliable storage.
So that's my answer: buy the cheapest drives you can get, and use them in pairs or triplets.
Even multiplying the price like that, they're great value.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145856</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31149080</id>
	<title>Re:Hmm</title>
	<author>hairyfeet</author>
	<datestamp>1266231060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I build, repair, and sell PCs for a living, been using a LOT of WDs and Maxtors, and no problems. With the Maxtors if they are gonna fail they nearly always fail right out of the box, and with the WDs so far no bad ones yet. Of all the drives I have been using (Maxtor, ExcelStor, WD, Seagate, Hitachi) I have had the most bad ones from the Seagate consumer line. They seem to be having some trouble lately with their over 500Gb drives, at least from my exp.</p><p>You just have to remember though that these companies are cranking out drives like flapjacks on those lines, so bad batches will inevitably slip through. To me it isn't whether you get a bad part or not, it is how they handle it WHEN you do, because you work with PCs long enough it will happen. In that regard Nvidia thanks to their handling of Bumpgate can go DIAF as far as I'm concerned. I got burnt with a couple of low end cards thanks to Nvidia trying to pass the buck. It wasn't the money that was the issue, it was the shady passing the buck. if you don't stand by your products and support your customers I have no use for you.</p><p>

 All of the above HDD manufacturers I had NO trouble with RMAs or making things right. With ExcelStor they even gave me a free upgrade to the next biggest size because they were out of the size I had bought. To me THAT is how a company should do business. Bad things happen, mistakes are always gonna be made. It is how they treat you after they have your money that makes the difference to this old greybeard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I build , repair , and sell PCs for a living , been using a LOT of WDs and Maxtors , and no problems .
With the Maxtors if they are gon na fail they nearly always fail right out of the box , and with the WDs so far no bad ones yet .
Of all the drives I have been using ( Maxtor , ExcelStor , WD , Seagate , Hitachi ) I have had the most bad ones from the Seagate consumer line .
They seem to be having some trouble lately with their over 500Gb drives , at least from my exp.You just have to remember though that these companies are cranking out drives like flapjacks on those lines , so bad batches will inevitably slip through .
To me it is n't whether you get a bad part or not , it is how they handle it WHEN you do , because you work with PCs long enough it will happen .
In that regard Nvidia thanks to their handling of Bumpgate can go DIAF as far as I 'm concerned .
I got burnt with a couple of low end cards thanks to Nvidia trying to pass the buck .
It was n't the money that was the issue , it was the shady passing the buck .
if you do n't stand by your products and support your customers I have no use for you .
All of the above HDD manufacturers I had NO trouble with RMAs or making things right .
With ExcelStor they even gave me a free upgrade to the next biggest size because they were out of the size I had bought .
To me THAT is how a company should do business .
Bad things happen , mistakes are always gon na be made .
It is how they treat you after they have your money that makes the difference to this old greybeard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I build, repair, and sell PCs for a living, been using a LOT of WDs and Maxtors, and no problems.
With the Maxtors if they are gonna fail they nearly always fail right out of the box, and with the WDs so far no bad ones yet.
Of all the drives I have been using (Maxtor, ExcelStor, WD, Seagate, Hitachi) I have had the most bad ones from the Seagate consumer line.
They seem to be having some trouble lately with their over 500Gb drives, at least from my exp.You just have to remember though that these companies are cranking out drives like flapjacks on those lines, so bad batches will inevitably slip through.
To me it isn't whether you get a bad part or not, it is how they handle it WHEN you do, because you work with PCs long enough it will happen.
In that regard Nvidia thanks to their handling of Bumpgate can go DIAF as far as I'm concerned.
I got burnt with a couple of low end cards thanks to Nvidia trying to pass the buck.
It wasn't the money that was the issue, it was the shady passing the buck.
if you don't stand by your products and support your customers I have no use for you.
All of the above HDD manufacturers I had NO trouble with RMAs or making things right.
With ExcelStor they even gave me a free upgrade to the next biggest size because they were out of the size I had bought.
To me THAT is how a company should do business.
Bad things happen, mistakes are always gonna be made.
It is how they treat you after they have your money that makes the difference to this old greybeard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145856</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31148062</id>
	<title>Re:Dear WD, Could You Help Us End an EMF Debate?</title>
	<author>arielCo</author>
	<datestamp>1266225960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry for replying twice, but I forgot to point out this: there are two possible applications for strong magnetic fields in a HDD factory: one is to "bake" those nasty rare-earth magnets (I haven't the faintest idea how they're made), and that would surely be a DC field (harmless), and the other would be an AC field to demagnetize any other components before assembly, including the blank platters. The latter is the one that can jam a pacemaker, since the induced current in a decent conductor can get really high even at low frequencies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry for replying twice , but I forgot to point out this : there are two possible applications for strong magnetic fields in a HDD factory : one is to " bake " those nasty rare-earth magnets ( I have n't the faintest idea how they 're made ) , and that would surely be a DC field ( harmless ) , and the other would be an AC field to demagnetize any other components before assembly , including the blank platters .
The latter is the one that can jam a pacemaker , since the induced current in a decent conductor can get really high even at low frequencies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry for replying twice, but I forgot to point out this: there are two possible applications for strong magnetic fields in a HDD factory: one is to "bake" those nasty rare-earth magnets (I haven't the faintest idea how they're made), and that would surely be a DC field (harmless), and the other would be an AC field to demagnetize any other components before assembly, including the blank platters.
The latter is the one that can jam a pacemaker, since the induced current in a decent conductor can get really high even at low frequencies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145900</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31154428</id>
	<title>Re:I don't seem to have any problem with them</title>
	<author>Ed Avis</author>
	<datestamp>1266331080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Since we're on anecdotes, I have had a Raptor 150GByte fail twice (that is, be replaced, and the replacement failed).  It's still within the five year warranty period so I'm about to send it back again.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Since we 're on anecdotes , I have had a Raptor 150GByte fail twice ( that is , be replaced , and the replacement failed ) .
It 's still within the five year warranty period so I 'm about to send it back again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since we're on anecdotes, I have had a Raptor 150GByte fail twice (that is, be replaced, and the replacement failed).
It's still within the five year warranty period so I'm about to send it back again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145946</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147808</id>
	<title>Re:Hmm</title>
	<author>Domint</author>
	<datestamp>1266224700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm sure this is purely anecdotal, but it's been my experience with WD drives that they either fail spectacularly within the first few months of operation or I can run them into the dirt over the course of 8+ years without a hiccup. Also, I've had nothing but fantastic experiences with their warranty processing department - their RMA program is quick and painless should I find myself with a dead drive still under warranty.<br> <br>As an aside, as a SAN administrator I feel it important to point out that <b>regardless</b> who manufactures the drive: It's a matter of when, not if, the drive will fail. If the data retained on the drive is critical (business or personal), one must always be prepared for the eventual death of the drive and plan accordingly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure this is purely anecdotal , but it 's been my experience with WD drives that they either fail spectacularly within the first few months of operation or I can run them into the dirt over the course of 8 + years without a hiccup .
Also , I 've had nothing but fantastic experiences with their warranty processing department - their RMA program is quick and painless should I find myself with a dead drive still under warranty .
As an aside , as a SAN administrator I feel it important to point out that regardless who manufactures the drive : It 's a matter of when , not if , the drive will fail .
If the data retained on the drive is critical ( business or personal ) , one must always be prepared for the eventual death of the drive and plan accordingly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure this is purely anecdotal, but it's been my experience with WD drives that they either fail spectacularly within the first few months of operation or I can run them into the dirt over the course of 8+ years without a hiccup.
Also, I've had nothing but fantastic experiences with their warranty processing department - their RMA program is quick and painless should I find myself with a dead drive still under warranty.
As an aside, as a SAN administrator I feel it important to point out that regardless who manufactures the drive: It's a matter of when, not if, the drive will fail.
If the data retained on the drive is critical (business or personal), one must always be prepared for the eventual death of the drive and plan accordingly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145856</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145918</id>
	<title>well ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266258420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Given the critical importance of hard disk storage in all of our lives"</p><p>is the exact reason I have not bought a WD drive in 15 years, back in the 90's you couldn't get one of their products that wasnt crap</p><p>after replacing my 120 meg drive 3 times in a single year, and a few later had the same issue with the next wd drive, except 4 times through the rma horse crap, I swore to never buy their garbage again</p><p>been quite happy with seagate and maxtor, they make a quality product</p><p>as far as my old 120mb drive its long dead... as I recall it didnt last more than a year or 2 after the last replacement</p><p>but I still have my 240mb maxtor, and it still works just fine today</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Given the critical importance of hard disk storage in all of our lives " is the exact reason I have not bought a WD drive in 15 years , back in the 90 's you could n't get one of their products that wasnt crapafter replacing my 120 meg drive 3 times in a single year , and a few later had the same issue with the next wd drive , except 4 times through the rma horse crap , I swore to never buy their garbage againbeen quite happy with seagate and maxtor , they make a quality productas far as my old 120mb drive its long dead... as I recall it didnt last more than a year or 2 after the last replacementbut I still have my 240mb maxtor , and it still works just fine today</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Given the critical importance of hard disk storage in all of our lives"is the exact reason I have not bought a WD drive in 15 years, back in the 90's you couldn't get one of their products that wasnt crapafter replacing my 120 meg drive 3 times in a single year, and a few later had the same issue with the next wd drive, except 4 times through the rma horse crap, I swore to never buy their garbage againbeen quite happy with seagate and maxtor, they make a quality productas far as my old 120mb drive its long dead... as I recall it didnt last more than a year or 2 after the last replacementbut I still have my 240mb maxtor, and it still works just fine today</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146420</id>
	<title>Re:Dear WD, Could You Help Us End an EMF Debate?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266260940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>A very strong, static magnetic field is not the same as electromagnetic radiation. EM fields are actual particles (photons) which can penetrate (or try to penetrate) biological tissue. Magnetic fields are not.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A very strong , static magnetic field is not the same as electromagnetic radiation .
EM fields are actual particles ( photons ) which can penetrate ( or try to penetrate ) biological tissue .
Magnetic fields are not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A very strong, static magnetic field is not the same as electromagnetic radiation.
EM fields are actual particles (photons) which can penetrate (or try to penetrate) biological tissue.
Magnetic fields are not.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145900</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146232</id>
	<title>Looks familiar</title>
	<author>Sooner Boomer</author>
	<datestamp>1266260040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I worked in the Texas Instruments semiconductor fab shop in Sherman, TX for several years.  Same sort of setup, different substrate (plus they don't have any etching processes).  The bunny suits can get hot, but the sweat under the gloves make some work almost impossible.  Try changing the battery in your watch wearing those plastic gloves and you'll see what I mean.  Sometimes the gloves just have to come off; then you have to clean the work area thoroughly to decontaminate it (sodium in sweat was the biggest worry).  One thing I'm curious about: vibration.  We were in north Texas, and needed quite a bit of vibration control, mostly isolation pads.  The article doesn't say where the WD facility is, I assume California.  I see some isolation pads under equipment, but how do you handle vibration in a seismically active area?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I worked in the Texas Instruments semiconductor fab shop in Sherman , TX for several years .
Same sort of setup , different substrate ( plus they do n't have any etching processes ) .
The bunny suits can get hot , but the sweat under the gloves make some work almost impossible .
Try changing the battery in your watch wearing those plastic gloves and you 'll see what I mean .
Sometimes the gloves just have to come off ; then you have to clean the work area thoroughly to decontaminate it ( sodium in sweat was the biggest worry ) .
One thing I 'm curious about : vibration .
We were in north Texas , and needed quite a bit of vibration control , mostly isolation pads .
The article does n't say where the WD facility is , I assume California .
I see some isolation pads under equipment , but how do you handle vibration in a seismically active area ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I worked in the Texas Instruments semiconductor fab shop in Sherman, TX for several years.
Same sort of setup, different substrate (plus they don't have any etching processes).
The bunny suits can get hot, but the sweat under the gloves make some work almost impossible.
Try changing the battery in your watch wearing those plastic gloves and you'll see what I mean.
Sometimes the gloves just have to come off; then you have to clean the work area thoroughly to decontaminate it (sodium in sweat was the biggest worry).
One thing I'm curious about: vibration.
We were in north Texas, and needed quite a bit of vibration control, mostly isolation pads.
The article doesn't say where the WD facility is, I assume California.
I see some isolation pads under equipment, but how do you handle vibration in a seismically active area?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146868</id>
	<title>Re:Drive backup of my brain.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266263400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A couple of 1TB disks will do I guess, the encoder/decoder on the other hand<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A couple of 1TB disks will do I guess , the encoder/decoder on the other hand .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A couple of 1TB disks will do I guess, the encoder/decoder on the other hand ...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145946</id>
	<title>I don't seem to have any problem with them</title>
	<author>Moraelin</author>
	<datestamp>1266258540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, all hard drives can fail sooner or later, and there's a reason for the M in MTBF. The problem with IBM Deathstars wasn't just that they failed (all do), but that their failure rate was disproportionately higher than any other brand at the time. And yeah, I had one of those fail on me too.</p><p>That said, I don't seem to have much of a problem with failing WD drives. I have a Raptor of each of the 75 GB, 150 GB and 300 GB varieties, all of them since that particular series was launched and all three still seem to chug along just fine. But that's a non-representative sample too, so don't take it as more than a personal anecdote.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , all hard drives can fail sooner or later , and there 's a reason for the M in MTBF .
The problem with IBM Deathstars was n't just that they failed ( all do ) , but that their failure rate was disproportionately higher than any other brand at the time .
And yeah , I had one of those fail on me too.That said , I do n't seem to have much of a problem with failing WD drives .
I have a Raptor of each of the 75 GB , 150 GB and 300 GB varieties , all of them since that particular series was launched and all three still seem to chug along just fine .
But that 's a non-representative sample too , so do n't take it as more than a personal anecdote .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, all hard drives can fail sooner or later, and there's a reason for the M in MTBF.
The problem with IBM Deathstars wasn't just that they failed (all do), but that their failure rate was disproportionately higher than any other brand at the time.
And yeah, I had one of those fail on me too.That said, I don't seem to have much of a problem with failing WD drives.
I have a Raptor of each of the 75 GB, 150 GB and 300 GB varieties, all of them since that particular series was launched and all three still seem to chug along just fine.
But that's a non-representative sample too, so don't take it as more than a personal anecdote.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145856</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31163242</id>
	<title>Re:Looks familiar</title>
	<author>Agripa</author>
	<datestamp>1266330420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The article doesn't say where the WD facility is, I assume California. I see some isolation pads under equipment, but how do you handle vibration in a seismically active area?</p></div></blockquote><p>Where I worked in Covina they were running full scale dead load tests (a couple hundred thousand pounds I think) when the Whittier Narrows earthquake hit.  There was no way to unload the machine without a warning so they just had to let it break.  The USGS had at least one seismograph you could listen to in the area (tone modulated FM in the VHF band) which usually provided 5 to 20 seconds of warning depending on the geometry but earthquakes were rare enough that a fail safe was not considered worthwhile.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The article does n't say where the WD facility is , I assume California .
I see some isolation pads under equipment , but how do you handle vibration in a seismically active area ? Where I worked in Covina they were running full scale dead load tests ( a couple hundred thousand pounds I think ) when the Whittier Narrows earthquake hit .
There was no way to unload the machine without a warning so they just had to let it break .
The USGS had at least one seismograph you could listen to in the area ( tone modulated FM in the VHF band ) which usually provided 5 to 20 seconds of warning depending on the geometry but earthquakes were rare enough that a fail safe was not considered worthwhile .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The article doesn't say where the WD facility is, I assume California.
I see some isolation pads under equipment, but how do you handle vibration in a seismically active area?Where I worked in Covina they were running full scale dead load tests (a couple hundred thousand pounds I think) when the Whittier Narrows earthquake hit.
There was no way to unload the machine without a warning so they just had to let it break.
The USGS had at least one seismograph you could listen to in the area (tone modulated FM in the VHF band) which usually provided 5 to 20 seconds of warning depending on the geometry but earthquakes were rare enough that a fail safe was not considered worthwhile.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146232</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146514</id>
	<title>Drive backup of my brain.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266261480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How long until we have enough Hard Drive storage space to backup my own brain?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How long until we have enough Hard Drive storage space to backup my own brain ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How long until we have enough Hard Drive storage space to backup my own brain?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145936</id>
	<title>Cool... But...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266258540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wheres the giant pile of dead drives?</p><p>I've got one in both buildings here.  And 80\% of them are WD drives.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wheres the giant pile of dead drives ? I 've got one in both buildings here .
And 80 \ % of them are WD drives .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wheres the giant pile of dead drives?I've got one in both buildings here.
And 80\% of them are WD drives.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31148598</id>
	<title>Re:Hmm</title>
	<author>yoden</author>
	<datestamp>1266228540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Anecdotes are not scientific</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anecdotes are not scientific</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anecdotes are not scientific</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145856</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146624</id>
	<title>It was a filesystem bug, not a hardware failure.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266262080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The rash of 40GB HD failures (and it wasn't just W.D.) wasn't the hardware. In most cases it was because the entire 40GB was partitioned as One Big Drive... in FAT32, which was still the dominant filesystem for Windows.</p><p>The problem is that FAT32 has a bug that can  cause data-wrapping if the partition is larger than 32GB. And the bug exactly mimics a failing HD -- random data loss, corrupted files.</p><p>The explanation used to be on Microsoft's tech site, but it vanished last time they nuked a bunch of older material (which they do periodically).</p><p>At any rate, you can see why there was a rash of "HD failures" when HDs exceeded 32GB. And W.D. took the brunt of this, since at the time they were the first (and for some time, the only) manufacturer offering a consumer HD larger than 32GB. By the time everyone else caught up, most of the Windows world had moved to NTFS, which does not have the bug, and the problem went away.</p><p>BTW not long after that, Seagate did a study on RMA'd drives, and found that about 60\% of the time the hardware was fine, and the "failure" was in fact caused by a filesystem or software error. This is pretty much in line with my own experience.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The rash of 40GB HD failures ( and it was n't just W.D .
) was n't the hardware .
In most cases it was because the entire 40GB was partitioned as One Big Drive... in FAT32 , which was still the dominant filesystem for Windows.The problem is that FAT32 has a bug that can cause data-wrapping if the partition is larger than 32GB .
And the bug exactly mimics a failing HD -- random data loss , corrupted files.The explanation used to be on Microsoft 's tech site , but it vanished last time they nuked a bunch of older material ( which they do periodically ) .At any rate , you can see why there was a rash of " HD failures " when HDs exceeded 32GB .
And W.D .
took the brunt of this , since at the time they were the first ( and for some time , the only ) manufacturer offering a consumer HD larger than 32GB .
By the time everyone else caught up , most of the Windows world had moved to NTFS , which does not have the bug , and the problem went away.BTW not long after that , Seagate did a study on RMA 'd drives , and found that about 60 \ % of the time the hardware was fine , and the " failure " was in fact caused by a filesystem or software error .
This is pretty much in line with my own experience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The rash of 40GB HD failures (and it wasn't just W.D.
) wasn't the hardware.
In most cases it was because the entire 40GB was partitioned as One Big Drive... in FAT32, which was still the dominant filesystem for Windows.The problem is that FAT32 has a bug that can  cause data-wrapping if the partition is larger than 32GB.
And the bug exactly mimics a failing HD -- random data loss, corrupted files.The explanation used to be on Microsoft's tech site, but it vanished last time they nuked a bunch of older material (which they do periodically).At any rate, you can see why there was a rash of "HD failures" when HDs exceeded 32GB.
And W.D.
took the brunt of this, since at the time they were the first (and for some time, the only) manufacturer offering a consumer HD larger than 32GB.
By the time everyone else caught up, most of the Windows world had moved to NTFS, which does not have the bug, and the problem went away.BTW not long after that, Seagate did a study on RMA'd drives, and found that about 60\% of the time the hardware was fine, and the "failure" was in fact caused by a filesystem or software error.
This is pretty much in line with my own experience.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145856</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147304</id>
	<title>Re:well ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266265320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe in the 90s, but for the past 10 years at least I've had no problems.  Just about every drive I bought from 20 gig to 1000 gig has been a WD with no problems whatsoever. I think I did have a 40gb maxtor at one point but it died.   And Seagate?  Their recent problems with the 7200.11 drives has kept me from buying any of those.</p><p>I have been buying Samsung recently, as I've found them cheaper than WD and quite reliable.  I've heard very of very few problems with Samsung, but I'm sure someone will chime in here now.  No matter what drives you buy, you will eventually suffer a failure.  That's what backups are for.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe in the 90s , but for the past 10 years at least I 've had no problems .
Just about every drive I bought from 20 gig to 1000 gig has been a WD with no problems whatsoever .
I think I did have a 40gb maxtor at one point but it died .
And Seagate ?
Their recent problems with the 7200.11 drives has kept me from buying any of those.I have been buying Samsung recently , as I 've found them cheaper than WD and quite reliable .
I 've heard very of very few problems with Samsung , but I 'm sure someone will chime in here now .
No matter what drives you buy , you will eventually suffer a failure .
That 's what backups are for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe in the 90s, but for the past 10 years at least I've had no problems.
Just about every drive I bought from 20 gig to 1000 gig has been a WD with no problems whatsoever.
I think I did have a 40gb maxtor at one point but it died.
And Seagate?
Their recent problems with the 7200.11 drives has kept me from buying any of those.I have been buying Samsung recently, as I've found them cheaper than WD and quite reliable.
I've heard very of very few problems with Samsung, but I'm sure someone will chime in here now.
No matter what drives you buy, you will eventually suffer a failure.
That's what backups are for.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147462</id>
	<title>Re:Looks familiar</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266266100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>"...but how do you handle vibration in a seismically active area?."</i></p><p>We put them on Tempupedic mattresses.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" ...but how do you handle vibration in a seismically active area ? .
" We put them on Tempupedic mattresses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"...but how do you handle vibration in a seismically active area?.
"We put them on Tempupedic mattresses.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146232</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31150366</id>
	<title>Re:If I worked at WD I'd be terrified</title>
	<author>BikeHelmet</author>
	<datestamp>1266237600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The writing is on the wall.</p></div><p>No it isn't. At least not this decade.</p><p>Combine these, and you have a recipe for success:<br>1) New HDD controllers.<br>2) Gigabytes of cache.<br>3) Massive capacities.<br>4) Low price.</p><p>I eagerly await my 6TB WD Black with 280MB/sec read/write speeds. Bring it!</p><p>SSDs will dominate the low end computer and laptop markets - but not for a few years. It'll take a little while to get enough space for Windows, your apps, and your docs, but at a competitive price point. Right now the cheapest SSD is around $100, but you can get a 160GB HDD for about $40. OEMs like that, so that means a lot of money is still going to HDD manufacturers. Actually, it's even cheaper for an OEM, which buys by the hundreds of thousands.</p><p>Once SSDs are cheap like camera cards, every company will be using them, and marketing them as "Silent", "Shock immune", "blazing fast", "power efficient", etc... As soon as that happens, HDD manufacturers better have their R&amp;D complete on huge cache HDDs or SSDs, or they won't be able to compete, and a large chunk of their OEM market and revenue will be gone.</p><p>After that, it'll still be at least a decade before the technology is obsolete. Assuming something revolutionary comes around, you still have to expect ~4 years to engineer a prototype, then ~3 more to commercialize it, and 2-3 more before it's affordable.</p><p>WD and Seagate would have to play a <i>lot</i> of cards wrong to go out of business any time soon. Their time to correct mistakes is measured in years rather than quarters. They'll probably manage.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The writing is on the wall.No it is n't .
At least not this decade.Combine these , and you have a recipe for success : 1 ) New HDD controllers.2 ) Gigabytes of cache.3 ) Massive capacities.4 ) Low price.I eagerly await my 6TB WD Black with 280MB/sec read/write speeds .
Bring it ! SSDs will dominate the low end computer and laptop markets - but not for a few years .
It 'll take a little while to get enough space for Windows , your apps , and your docs , but at a competitive price point .
Right now the cheapest SSD is around $ 100 , but you can get a 160GB HDD for about $ 40 .
OEMs like that , so that means a lot of money is still going to HDD manufacturers .
Actually , it 's even cheaper for an OEM , which buys by the hundreds of thousands.Once SSDs are cheap like camera cards , every company will be using them , and marketing them as " Silent " , " Shock immune " , " blazing fast " , " power efficient " , etc... As soon as that happens , HDD manufacturers better have their R&amp;D complete on huge cache HDDs or SSDs , or they wo n't be able to compete , and a large chunk of their OEM market and revenue will be gone.After that , it 'll still be at least a decade before the technology is obsolete .
Assuming something revolutionary comes around , you still have to expect ~ 4 years to engineer a prototype , then ~ 3 more to commercialize it , and 2-3 more before it 's affordable.WD and Seagate would have to play a lot of cards wrong to go out of business any time soon .
Their time to correct mistakes is measured in years rather than quarters .
They 'll probably manage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The writing is on the wall.No it isn't.
At least not this decade.Combine these, and you have a recipe for success:1) New HDD controllers.2) Gigabytes of cache.3) Massive capacities.4) Low price.I eagerly await my 6TB WD Black with 280MB/sec read/write speeds.
Bring it!SSDs will dominate the low end computer and laptop markets - but not for a few years.
It'll take a little while to get enough space for Windows, your apps, and your docs, but at a competitive price point.
Right now the cheapest SSD is around $100, but you can get a 160GB HDD for about $40.
OEMs like that, so that means a lot of money is still going to HDD manufacturers.
Actually, it's even cheaper for an OEM, which buys by the hundreds of thousands.Once SSDs are cheap like camera cards, every company will be using them, and marketing them as "Silent", "Shock immune", "blazing fast", "power efficient", etc... As soon as that happens, HDD manufacturers better have their R&amp;D complete on huge cache HDDs or SSDs, or they won't be able to compete, and a large chunk of their OEM market and revenue will be gone.After that, it'll still be at least a decade before the technology is obsolete.
Assuming something revolutionary comes around, you still have to expect ~4 years to engineer a prototype, then ~3 more to commercialize it, and 2-3 more before it's affordable.WD and Seagate would have to play a lot of cards wrong to go out of business any time soon.
Their time to correct mistakes is measured in years rather than quarters.
They'll probably manage.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147246</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146508</id>
	<title>Re:Dear WD, Could You Help Us End an EMF Debate?</title>
	<author>Capt. Skinny</author>
	<datestamp>1266261480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If a link between EMF and health is confirmed, their insurance company would raise rates and employees would have an excuse to sue. I don't see that happening.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If a link between EMF and health is confirmed , their insurance company would raise rates and employees would have an excuse to sue .
I do n't see that happening .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If a link between EMF and health is confirmed, their insurance company would raise rates and employees would have an excuse to sue.
I don't see that happening.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145900</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146670</id>
	<title>WOW</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266262320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How I love the way they devoted one page for each paragraph! It feels so great to be forced to browse through all 41 pages just to read the entire article.  The site is so user-friendly, that a print version is nowhere to be found.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How I love the way they devoted one page for each paragraph !
It feels so great to be forced to browse through all 41 pages just to read the entire article .
The site is so user-friendly , that a print version is nowhere to be found .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How I love the way they devoted one page for each paragraph!
It feels so great to be forced to browse through all 41 pages just to read the entire article.
The site is so user-friendly, that a print version is nowhere to be found.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146000</id>
	<title>Introduction</title>
	<author>xtracto</author>
	<datestamp>1266258900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This article [&gt;]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This article [ &gt; ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This article [&gt;]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31148684</id>
	<title>Re:well ...</title>
	<author>NotQuiteInsane</author>
	<datestamp>1266228900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The whole Barracuda 7200.11 series was a dead bust. I had a 500GB 7200.11 pack in with the "just plays dead" issue -- basically the SMART log overruns, the drive detects this on boot, then barfs. A bit later on they admitted there was a firmware bug, but their RMA policy didn't change... Basically:<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; - You pay for shipping there, they pay for it back. But you have to send it back in a Seagate-labelled shipping box -- sending it back in a normal "foam and ESD-bag" HDD box is grounds for them refusing the RMA. The special Seagate box (which is identical to most HDD shipping boxes) costs &pound;15, plus P&amp;P and VAT.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; - You get a "Seagate reconditioned" or "refurbished" drive back. Not a repaired version of your drive, not a new drive.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; - Even though they knew the fault was down to a firmware issue (i.e. their fault) they didn't offer any form of data recovery with the RMA... but conveniently they allowed you to send it to "Seagate Data Recovery" for repair and replacement. What's that, you sent the drive to Drivesavers or Ontrack? No RMA for you, sir!</p><p>After all the bullshit and the humps they wanted me to jump through, I jumped ship. A friend suggested WD on the grounds that their RMA system is a lot easier to deal with (go to website, enter serial number, accept terms and conditions, print shipping label, pack, post -- no need to call and argue your case to get an RMA#).</p><p>My main PC now runs two 500GB WD RE2s with TLER disabled (I wanted the 5-year guarantee which at the time was only available on the RE2s), and a Seagate 7200.10 as a backup (the 7200.10s are solid performers, the 7200.11s are turkeys). The PVR has a 1TB WD Caviar-GP GreenPower drive (first-generation too), and I think there's another 500GB Caviar-GP kicking around in an external drive box somewhere around here...<br>The home server runs a 500GB 7200.10 and a 500GB 7200.11 (RAID-1 mirrored), with latest firmware on the '11. The '11 is the one I tried to RMA, but ended up fixing with a home-made terminal cable (an FTDI TTL-232R-3V cable hooked up to an adapter). Those two are old enough that I'm considering swapping them out for a pair of 1.5TB WD RE-series or Caviar Black Edition drives.</p><p>I've owned Maxtors as well -- I have a 7850AV (850MB ATA) which just won't die, and an 80GB D540X (which was one of the designs they got from Quantum) which was an RMA replacement for a 40GB drive that failed. Again, no issues with the RMA -- a quick phone call, send it back in a hard drive shipping box ("but it'd be a good idea to put a few layers of bubble wrap around that and put it in a larger, stronger box just to be safe" -- which I did), receive new drive a week later.</p><p>I also note with some interest that Seagate have canned their 5-year guarantee scheme, which doesn't exactly inspire confidence in their products....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The whole Barracuda 7200.11 series was a dead bust .
I had a 500GB 7200.11 pack in with the " just plays dead " issue -- basically the SMART log overruns , the drive detects this on boot , then barfs .
A bit later on they admitted there was a firmware bug , but their RMA policy did n't change... Basically :     - You pay for shipping there , they pay for it back .
But you have to send it back in a Seagate-labelled shipping box -- sending it back in a normal " foam and ESD-bag " HDD box is grounds for them refusing the RMA .
The special Seagate box ( which is identical to most HDD shipping boxes ) costs   15 , plus P&amp;P and VAT .
    - You get a " Seagate reconditioned " or " refurbished " drive back .
Not a repaired version of your drive , not a new drive .
    - Even though they knew the fault was down to a firmware issue ( i.e .
their fault ) they did n't offer any form of data recovery with the RMA... but conveniently they allowed you to send it to " Seagate Data Recovery " for repair and replacement .
What 's that , you sent the drive to Drivesavers or Ontrack ?
No RMA for you , sir ! After all the bullshit and the humps they wanted me to jump through , I jumped ship .
A friend suggested WD on the grounds that their RMA system is a lot easier to deal with ( go to website , enter serial number , accept terms and conditions , print shipping label , pack , post -- no need to call and argue your case to get an RMA # ) .My main PC now runs two 500GB WD RE2s with TLER disabled ( I wanted the 5-year guarantee which at the time was only available on the RE2s ) , and a Seagate 7200.10 as a backup ( the 7200.10s are solid performers , the 7200.11s are turkeys ) .
The PVR has a 1TB WD Caviar-GP GreenPower drive ( first-generation too ) , and I think there 's another 500GB Caviar-GP kicking around in an external drive box somewhere around here...The home server runs a 500GB 7200.10 and a 500GB 7200.11 ( RAID-1 mirrored ) , with latest firmware on the '11 .
The '11 is the one I tried to RMA , but ended up fixing with a home-made terminal cable ( an FTDI TTL-232R-3V cable hooked up to an adapter ) .
Those two are old enough that I 'm considering swapping them out for a pair of 1.5TB WD RE-series or Caviar Black Edition drives.I 've owned Maxtors as well -- I have a 7850AV ( 850MB ATA ) which just wo n't die , and an 80GB D540X ( which was one of the designs they got from Quantum ) which was an RMA replacement for a 40GB drive that failed .
Again , no issues with the RMA -- a quick phone call , send it back in a hard drive shipping box ( " but it 'd be a good idea to put a few layers of bubble wrap around that and put it in a larger , stronger box just to be safe " -- which I did ) , receive new drive a week later.I also note with some interest that Seagate have canned their 5-year guarantee scheme , which does n't exactly inspire confidence in their products... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The whole Barracuda 7200.11 series was a dead bust.
I had a 500GB 7200.11 pack in with the "just plays dead" issue -- basically the SMART log overruns, the drive detects this on boot, then barfs.
A bit later on they admitted there was a firmware bug, but their RMA policy didn't change... Basically:
    - You pay for shipping there, they pay for it back.
But you have to send it back in a Seagate-labelled shipping box -- sending it back in a normal "foam and ESD-bag" HDD box is grounds for them refusing the RMA.
The special Seagate box (which is identical to most HDD shipping boxes) costs £15, plus P&amp;P and VAT.
    - You get a "Seagate reconditioned" or "refurbished" drive back.
Not a repaired version of your drive, not a new drive.
    - Even though they knew the fault was down to a firmware issue (i.e.
their fault) they didn't offer any form of data recovery with the RMA... but conveniently they allowed you to send it to "Seagate Data Recovery" for repair and replacement.
What's that, you sent the drive to Drivesavers or Ontrack?
No RMA for you, sir!After all the bullshit and the humps they wanted me to jump through, I jumped ship.
A friend suggested WD on the grounds that their RMA system is a lot easier to deal with (go to website, enter serial number, accept terms and conditions, print shipping label, pack, post -- no need to call and argue your case to get an RMA#).My main PC now runs two 500GB WD RE2s with TLER disabled (I wanted the 5-year guarantee which at the time was only available on the RE2s), and a Seagate 7200.10 as a backup (the 7200.10s are solid performers, the 7200.11s are turkeys).
The PVR has a 1TB WD Caviar-GP GreenPower drive (first-generation too), and I think there's another 500GB Caviar-GP kicking around in an external drive box somewhere around here...The home server runs a 500GB 7200.10 and a 500GB 7200.11 (RAID-1 mirrored), with latest firmware on the '11.
The '11 is the one I tried to RMA, but ended up fixing with a home-made terminal cable (an FTDI TTL-232R-3V cable hooked up to an adapter).
Those two are old enough that I'm considering swapping them out for a pair of 1.5TB WD RE-series or Caviar Black Edition drives.I've owned Maxtors as well -- I have a 7850AV (850MB ATA) which just won't die, and an 80GB D540X (which was one of the designs they got from Quantum) which was an RMA replacement for a 40GB drive that failed.
Again, no issues with the RMA -- a quick phone call, send it back in a hard drive shipping box ("but it'd be a good idea to put a few layers of bubble wrap around that and put it in a larger, stronger box just to be safe" -- which I did), receive new drive a week later.I also note with some interest that Seagate have canned their 5-year guarantee scheme, which doesn't exactly inspire confidence in their products....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146282</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31148010</id>
	<title>Re:Dear WD, Could You Help Us End an EMF Debate?</title>
	<author>arielCo</author>
	<datestamp>1266225660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry, a strong magnet does not an EMF field make. EMFs are about <em>varying</em> fields - an oscillating magnetic field produces an (also oscillating) electric field, and viceversa.</p><p>On top of that, the <em>frequency</em> of said oscillation not only determines <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penetration\_depth" title="wikipedia.org">the depth to which it penetrates the tissue</a> [wikipedia.org], but is also vital to any biological effects, and that's where the argument about <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-ionizing\_radiation" title="wikipedia.org">nonionizing radiation</a> [wikipedia.org] comes.</p><p>The current line of reasoning is more or less: the RF energy sure does not disrupt DNA since no matter how many quanta are hitting you, they are too weak to break the bonds involved; the remaining concern is whether the <em>heat</em> produced in the tissue when it absorbs the radiation can produce any harm over the years. The preliminary consensus so far is "unlikely", but you gotta be sure...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry , a strong magnet does not an EMF field make .
EMFs are about varying fields - an oscillating magnetic field produces an ( also oscillating ) electric field , and viceversa.On top of that , the frequency of said oscillation not only determines the depth to which it penetrates the tissue [ wikipedia.org ] , but is also vital to any biological effects , and that 's where the argument about nonionizing radiation [ wikipedia.org ] comes.The current line of reasoning is more or less : the RF energy sure does not disrupt DNA since no matter how many quanta are hitting you , they are too weak to break the bonds involved ; the remaining concern is whether the heat produced in the tissue when it absorbs the radiation can produce any harm over the years .
The preliminary consensus so far is " unlikely " , but you got ta be sure.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry, a strong magnet does not an EMF field make.
EMFs are about varying fields - an oscillating magnetic field produces an (also oscillating) electric field, and viceversa.On top of that, the frequency of said oscillation not only determines the depth to which it penetrates the tissue [wikipedia.org], but is also vital to any biological effects, and that's where the argument about nonionizing radiation [wikipedia.org] comes.The current line of reasoning is more or less: the RF energy sure does not disrupt DNA since no matter how many quanta are hitting you, they are too weak to break the bonds involved; the remaining concern is whether the heat produced in the tissue when it absorbs the radiation can produce any harm over the years.
The preliminary consensus so far is "unlikely", but you gotta be sure...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145900</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146762</id>
	<title>Re:Drive backup of my brain.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266262860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's been enough for *your* brain for about 5 years now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's been enough for * your * brain for about 5 years now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's been enough for *your* brain for about 5 years now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146514</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147462
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146232
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31148436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146514
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31148062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145900
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146420
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145900
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31148470
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145918
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31150162
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147506
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145900
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145900
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146762
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146514
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31150366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147246
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31154428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31148598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31152006
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146514
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147676
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147246
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31151490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146528
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146232
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31148684
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146282
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145918
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145918
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146514
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147808
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145900
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31150200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146232
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146624
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146650
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31170298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147246
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31154478
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146616
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31149080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31148762
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145900
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31163242
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146232
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31148320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146514
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31148928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146514
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31148010
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145900
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147304
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145918
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_167248_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31155594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_167248.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146616
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31154478
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_167248.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146514
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146762
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31148436
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31152006
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146868
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31148928
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31148320
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_167248.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146670
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_167248.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147246
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147676
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31150366
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31170298
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_167248.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147920
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_167248.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145900
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146024
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31148062
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146508
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146420
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31148010
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147286
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146234
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_167248.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146232
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147462
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31163242
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147326
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146528
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_167248.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146346
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_167248.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145856
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31148598
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147506
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145946
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31154428
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31150200
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31150162
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31151490
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31148762
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146624
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146650
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147808
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31149080
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31155594
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_167248.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145918
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31147304
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146882
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146282
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31148684
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31148470
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_167248.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31145832
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_167248.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146800
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_167248.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_167248.31146000
</commentlist>
</conversation>
