<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_19_0116218</id>
	<title>How To Play HD Video On a Netbook</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1266586440000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Barence writes  with some news to interest those with netbooks running Windows: <i>"Netbooks aren't famed for their high-definition video playing prowess, but if you've got about $10 and a few minutes going spare, there is a way to enjoy <a href="http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/2010/02/18/how-to-play-hd-video-on-a-netbook/">high-definition trailers and videos on your Atom-powered portable</a>. You need three things: a copy of Media Player Classic Home Cinema, CoreCodec's CoreAVC codec, and some HD videos encoded in AVC or h.264 formats. This blog takes you through the process."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Barence writes with some news to interest those with netbooks running Windows : " Netbooks are n't famed for their high-definition video playing prowess , but if you 've got about $ 10 and a few minutes going spare , there is a way to enjoy high-definition trailers and videos on your Atom-powered portable .
You need three things : a copy of Media Player Classic Home Cinema , CoreCodec 's CoreAVC codec , and some HD videos encoded in AVC or h.264 formats .
This blog takes you through the process .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Barence writes  with some news to interest those with netbooks running Windows: "Netbooks aren't famed for their high-definition video playing prowess, but if you've got about $10 and a few minutes going spare, there is a way to enjoy high-definition trailers and videos on your Atom-powered portable.
You need three things: a copy of Media Player Classic Home Cinema, CoreCodec's CoreAVC codec, and some HD videos encoded in AVC or h.264 formats.
This blog takes you through the process.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195562</id>
	<title>Re:How for /. has fallen</title>
	<author>GigaplexNZ</author>
	<datestamp>1266513060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In the country where Slashdot is operated and hosted, a consortium of about two dozen companies conspires to keep H.264 decoding out of open source software.</p></div><p>And that consortium has failed. See x264.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In the country where Slashdot is operated and hosted , a consortium of about two dozen companies conspires to keep H.264 decoding out of open source software.And that consortium has failed .
See x264 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the country where Slashdot is operated and hosted, a consortium of about two dozen companies conspires to keep H.264 decoding out of open source software.And that consortium has failed.
See x264.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194754</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194538</id>
	<title>Re:How does this CoreAVC compare to K-lite?</title>
	<author>Barny</author>
	<datestamp>1266505440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>K-lite is just a codec pack, most of these use the standard ffmpeg for h.264, the multi threaded version of which is still "experimental", also coreavc not only is extremely optimised it also supports CUDA, so if you have an NV based netbook it will run much better with very little CPU usage.</p><p>I own a copy of coreavc for all my machines I expect to play h.264 on (3 copies), and was very happy to see haali splitter (along with coreavc) is now 64-bit, so full windows media centre support<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>It works, its cheap, I like paying programmers/companies who do a good job, it makes a nice precedent.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>K-lite is just a codec pack , most of these use the standard ffmpeg for h.264 , the multi threaded version of which is still " experimental " , also coreavc not only is extremely optimised it also supports CUDA , so if you have an NV based netbook it will run much better with very little CPU usage.I own a copy of coreavc for all my machines I expect to play h.264 on ( 3 copies ) , and was very happy to see haali splitter ( along with coreavc ) is now 64-bit , so full windows media centre support : ) It works , its cheap , I like paying programmers/companies who do a good job , it makes a nice precedent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>K-lite is just a codec pack, most of these use the standard ffmpeg for h.264, the multi threaded version of which is still "experimental", also coreavc not only is extremely optimised it also supports CUDA, so if you have an NV based netbook it will run much better with very little CPU usage.I own a copy of coreavc for all my machines I expect to play h.264 on (3 copies), and was very happy to see haali splitter (along with coreavc) is now 64-bit, so full windows media centre support :)It works, its cheap, I like paying programmers/companies who do a good job, it makes a nice precedent.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194320</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194330</id>
	<title>Skip this story</title>
	<author>syousef</author>
	<datestamp>1266504360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's no more than an ad for a codec.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's no more than an ad for a codec .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's no more than an ad for a codec.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194952</id>
	<title>Re:Linux...</title>
	<author>maxume</author>
	<datestamp>1266508080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Blood sacrifice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Blood sacrifice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Blood sacrifice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194338</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31196532</id>
	<title>Re:Skip this story</title>
	<author>BikeHelmet</author>
	<datestamp>1266612540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree. I've had GPU accelerated decoding for over a year now. I had it before it was even available in common codec packs like Klite.</p><p>This seems like a plug for CoreAVC. A great codec, for sure, but it's still a plug.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree .
I 've had GPU accelerated decoding for over a year now .
I had it before it was even available in common codec packs like Klite.This seems like a plug for CoreAVC .
A great codec , for sure , but it 's still a plug .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree.
I've had GPU accelerated decoding for over a year now.
I had it before it was even available in common codec packs like Klite.This seems like a plug for CoreAVC.
A great codec, for sure, but it's still a plug.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194278</id>
	<title>And?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266504060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or I can just get an ION powered netbook, install Linux and use VDPAU, and play any HD without any issue. Why is this news?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or I can just get an ION powered netbook , install Linux and use VDPAU , and play any HD without any issue .
Why is this news ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or I can just get an ION powered netbook, install Linux and use VDPAU, and play any HD without any issue.
Why is this news?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195440</id>
	<title>Re:Linux...</title>
	<author>auntieNeo</author>
	<datestamp>1266511920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>There's a <a href="http://code.google.com/p/coreavc-for-linux/" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">project that lets you use CoreAVC on Linux</a> [google.com] using mplayer and wine. I've used it to play 1080p on my slightly underpowered Opteron box. I'm not sure if it works for the latest versions of CoreAVC though.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a project that lets you use CoreAVC on Linux [ google.com ] using mplayer and wine .
I 've used it to play 1080p on my slightly underpowered Opteron box .
I 'm not sure if it works for the latest versions of CoreAVC though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a project that lets you use CoreAVC on Linux [google.com] using mplayer and wine.
I've used it to play 1080p on my slightly underpowered Opteron box.
I'm not sure if it works for the latest versions of CoreAVC though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194338</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195590</id>
	<title>1080p on '08 MBP</title>
	<author>kromozone</author>
	<datestamp>1266513300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have a 2.2ghz Core2Duo MBP from Early '08 with 4GB of RAM that is incapable of playing back 1080p x264 without stuttering.  I've tried everything - MPlayer, VLC, numerous Boxee release.  I can get close to normal playback if there are absolutely no other applications running, but the CPU still maxes out and stutters during rapid-motion scenes.  It seems there is absolutely no hardware acceleration available for the mac, unless you have a new MBP with a 9400m and are playing back in Quicktime.  Even more frustrating, if I boot into Windows with BootCamp I can play back 1080p video flawlessly with no stuttering as the Windows side supports GPU acceleration.  So much for the wonders of OpenCL in Snow Leopard.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a 2.2ghz Core2Duo MBP from Early '08 with 4GB of RAM that is incapable of playing back 1080p x264 without stuttering .
I 've tried everything - MPlayer , VLC , numerous Boxee release .
I can get close to normal playback if there are absolutely no other applications running , but the CPU still maxes out and stutters during rapid-motion scenes .
It seems there is absolutely no hardware acceleration available for the mac , unless you have a new MBP with a 9400m and are playing back in Quicktime .
Even more frustrating , if I boot into Windows with BootCamp I can play back 1080p video flawlessly with no stuttering as the Windows side supports GPU acceleration .
So much for the wonders of OpenCL in Snow Leopard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a 2.2ghz Core2Duo MBP from Early '08 with 4GB of RAM that is incapable of playing back 1080p x264 without stuttering.
I've tried everything - MPlayer, VLC, numerous Boxee release.
I can get close to normal playback if there are absolutely no other applications running, but the CPU still maxes out and stutters during rapid-motion scenes.
It seems there is absolutely no hardware acceleration available for the mac, unless you have a new MBP with a 9400m and are playing back in Quicktime.
Even more frustrating, if I boot into Windows with BootCamp I can play back 1080p video flawlessly with no stuttering as the Windows side supports GPU acceleration.
So much for the wonders of OpenCL in Snow Leopard.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31209130</id>
	<title>Re:How does this CoreAVC compare to K-lite?</title>
	<author>DaVince21</author>
	<datestamp>1266667980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I like paying programmers who do a good job, too. Guess I'll donate to the MPlayer project for a bit. Heck, they provide the codecs for free.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I like paying programmers who do a good job , too .
Guess I 'll donate to the MPlayer project for a bit .
Heck , they provide the codecs for free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like paying programmers who do a good job, too.
Guess I'll donate to the MPlayer project for a bit.
Heck, they provide the codecs for free.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194538</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194830</id>
	<title>My first generation Wind plays HD fine</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1266507120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My first-generation MSI Wind has no problems playing HD video when running Windows 7. I can even multitask to some extent.</p><p>What's the point of this story? Next are you going to post a summary of how to view webpages on a netbook? Or maybe some special $10 solution to connect your netbook to wifi?</p><p>What a waste of bits.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My first-generation MSI Wind has no problems playing HD video when running Windows 7 .
I can even multitask to some extent.What 's the point of this story ?
Next are you going to post a summary of how to view webpages on a netbook ?
Or maybe some special $ 10 solution to connect your netbook to wifi ? What a waste of bits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My first-generation MSI Wind has no problems playing HD video when running Windows 7.
I can even multitask to some extent.What's the point of this story?
Next are you going to post a summary of how to view webpages on a netbook?
Or maybe some special $10 solution to connect your netbook to wifi?What a waste of bits.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194386</id>
	<title>It depends on the video</title>
	<author>PhrostyMcByte</author>
	<datestamp>1266504600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Resolution is merely one factor, and is relatively unimportant compared to the others.</p><p>My netbook (Atom N280) can decode 720p, but the bitrate needs to be pretty low (think less than 4mbit -- which is fine for a lot of movies, but really bad for others).  If CAVLC (as opposed to CABAC) is used I can get away with a little higher bitrate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Resolution is merely one factor , and is relatively unimportant compared to the others.My netbook ( Atom N280 ) can decode 720p , but the bitrate needs to be pretty low ( think less than 4mbit -- which is fine for a lot of movies , but really bad for others ) .
If CAVLC ( as opposed to CABAC ) is used I can get away with a little higher bitrate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Resolution is merely one factor, and is relatively unimportant compared to the others.My netbook (Atom N280) can decode 720p, but the bitrate needs to be pretty low (think less than 4mbit -- which is fine for a lot of movies, but really bad for others).
If CAVLC (as opposed to CABAC) is used I can get away with a little higher bitrate.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31199182</id>
	<title>Re:And?</title>
	<author>wed128</author>
	<datestamp>1266594600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wouldn't say the atom is pathetic...it solves a certian problem reasonably well.<br>It's a little slower then your white hot core 2 whatever, but it serves it's purpose as a low-power x86 compatable processor. Beats the crap out of a pentium or celeron running at the same clock.</p><p>That's not to say an arm or similar might not solve the problem better...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would n't say the atom is pathetic...it solves a certian problem reasonably well.It 's a little slower then your white hot core 2 whatever , but it serves it 's purpose as a low-power x86 compatable processor .
Beats the crap out of a pentium or celeron running at the same clock.That 's not to say an arm or similar might not solve the problem better.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wouldn't say the atom is pathetic...it solves a certian problem reasonably well.It's a little slower then your white hot core 2 whatever, but it serves it's purpose as a low-power x86 compatable processor.
Beats the crap out of a pentium or celeron running at the same clock.That's not to say an arm or similar might not solve the problem better...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31196802</id>
	<title>Re:AVC's Secret Sauce</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266573060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>CoreAVC <a href="http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?p=1122940&amp;postcount=6" title="doom9.org" rel="nofollow">doesn't cheat</a> [doom9.org] by lowering quality. The output of a compliant H.264 decoder has to be bit exact in every mode, not just lossless. CoreAVC also uses hardware decoding in newer nvidia cards and there it couldn't cheat even if it wanted to.<br>Most of the time when people have problems with the look of AVC videos it's a <a href="http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=143689" title="doom9.org" rel="nofollow">renderer issue</a> [doom9.org] that makes the colours look washed out, but that's not really the decoders problem and can easily be fixed. Another popular problem is people turning deblocking off on the decoder because they think it is optional. Most H.264 decoders provide such an option to speed up decoding if you have no other way to play the video smoothly, but that can cause serious artifacts like blocking and colour drifts that get progressively worse throughout the GOP. Also on doom9 you sometimes get people who claim 2 screenshots show differences between decoders while when you compare them bit for bit they are the same. Just goes to show that if you really want to see a difference you'll see it whether it's there or not.<br>CoreAVC also doesn't decode video much faster than other (free) AVC decoders these days. ffmpeg came a lot closer to its performance and there is also the DivX AVC decoder and DiAVC which offer comparable performance.</p><p>While we are at the topic of video and H.264: Theora is not in the same league as H.264 and claiming so doesn't do it any good. In fact the Theora developers <a href="http://doom10.org/index.php?topic=170.msg1471#msg1471" title="doom10.org" rel="nofollow">discourage</a> [doom10.org] such claims.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>CoreAVC does n't cheat [ doom9.org ] by lowering quality .
The output of a compliant H.264 decoder has to be bit exact in every mode , not just lossless .
CoreAVC also uses hardware decoding in newer nvidia cards and there it could n't cheat even if it wanted to.Most of the time when people have problems with the look of AVC videos it 's a renderer issue [ doom9.org ] that makes the colours look washed out , but that 's not really the decoders problem and can easily be fixed .
Another popular problem is people turning deblocking off on the decoder because they think it is optional .
Most H.264 decoders provide such an option to speed up decoding if you have no other way to play the video smoothly , but that can cause serious artifacts like blocking and colour drifts that get progressively worse throughout the GOP .
Also on doom9 you sometimes get people who claim 2 screenshots show differences between decoders while when you compare them bit for bit they are the same .
Just goes to show that if you really want to see a difference you 'll see it whether it 's there or not.CoreAVC also does n't decode video much faster than other ( free ) AVC decoders these days .
ffmpeg came a lot closer to its performance and there is also the DivX AVC decoder and DiAVC which offer comparable performance.While we are at the topic of video and H.264 : Theora is not in the same league as H.264 and claiming so does n't do it any good .
In fact the Theora developers discourage [ doom10.org ] such claims .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>CoreAVC doesn't cheat [doom9.org] by lowering quality.
The output of a compliant H.264 decoder has to be bit exact in every mode, not just lossless.
CoreAVC also uses hardware decoding in newer nvidia cards and there it couldn't cheat even if it wanted to.Most of the time when people have problems with the look of AVC videos it's a renderer issue [doom9.org] that makes the colours look washed out, but that's not really the decoders problem and can easily be fixed.
Another popular problem is people turning deblocking off on the decoder because they think it is optional.
Most H.264 decoders provide such an option to speed up decoding if you have no other way to play the video smoothly, but that can cause serious artifacts like blocking and colour drifts that get progressively worse throughout the GOP.
Also on doom9 you sometimes get people who claim 2 screenshots show differences between decoders while when you compare them bit for bit they are the same.
Just goes to show that if you really want to see a difference you'll see it whether it's there or not.CoreAVC also doesn't decode video much faster than other (free) AVC decoders these days.
ffmpeg came a lot closer to its performance and there is also the DivX AVC decoder and DiAVC which offer comparable performance.While we are at the topic of video and H.264: Theora is not in the same league as H.264 and claiming so doesn't do it any good.
In fact the Theora developers discourage [doom10.org] such claims.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195250</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194820</id>
	<title>Athlon Neo</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266507060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I will just use my Athlon Neo MV-40 powered 12.1" "netbook" instead.  It can play all the Windows games too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I will just use my Athlon Neo MV-40 powered 12.1 " " netbook " instead .
It can play all the Windows games too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I will just use my Athlon Neo MV-40 powered 12.1" "netbook" instead.
It can play all the Windows games too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195766</id>
	<title>h.264 accelerator chip</title>
	<author>chill</author>
	<datestamp>1266515340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And to get rid of those unsightly stutters, free up a slot and install a dedicated co-processor.</p><p><a href="http://www.logicsupply.com/blog/2009/11/16/the-little-pcie-card-that-could/" title="logicsupply.com">http://www.logicsupply.com/blog/2009/11/16/the-little-pcie-card-that-could/</a> [logicsupply.com]</p><p>Supported by XBMC under Windows, Linux and OS X.  Cost $49 at that site, under "accessories, adapters".  I just ordered one and will put it thru its paces on my Asus EEE 901 soon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And to get rid of those unsightly stutters , free up a slot and install a dedicated co-processor.http : //www.logicsupply.com/blog/2009/11/16/the-little-pcie-card-that-could/ [ logicsupply.com ] Supported by XBMC under Windows , Linux and OS X. Cost $ 49 at that site , under " accessories , adapters " .
I just ordered one and will put it thru its paces on my Asus EEE 901 soon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And to get rid of those unsightly stutters, free up a slot and install a dedicated co-processor.http://www.logicsupply.com/blog/2009/11/16/the-little-pcie-card-that-could/ [logicsupply.com]Supported by XBMC under Windows, Linux and OS X.  Cost $49 at that site, under "accessories, adapters".
I just ordered one and will put it thru its paces on my Asus EEE 901 soon.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194376</id>
	<title>bah humbug!</title>
	<author>girlintraining</author>
	<datestamp>1266504540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use a PS2 to watch 720p and 1080i video and it can do AC3. I can play from DVD or USB stick. I can buy those for, what $50 on eBay?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use a PS2 to watch 720p and 1080i video and it can do AC3 .
I can play from DVD or USB stick .
I can buy those for , what $ 50 on eBay ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use a PS2 to watch 720p and 1080i video and it can do AC3.
I can play from DVD or USB stick.
I can buy those for, what $50 on eBay?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194450</id>
	<title>Re:And?</title>
	<author>jedidiah</author>
	<datestamp>1266504900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are also laptop upgrade cards that you can get that work as external video decode cards (like the old days of 3D).</p><p>Given how truely pathetic an Atom CPU really is, I kind of doubt that even CoreAVC can let it play HD video.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are also laptop upgrade cards that you can get that work as external video decode cards ( like the old days of 3D ) .Given how truely pathetic an Atom CPU really is , I kind of doubt that even CoreAVC can let it play HD video .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are also laptop upgrade cards that you can get that work as external video decode cards (like the old days of 3D).Given how truely pathetic an Atom CPU really is, I kind of doubt that even CoreAVC can let it play HD video.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194278</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195328</id>
	<title>Re:VLC</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266510840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This works for Windows, Linux, and FreeBSD...</p><p>Step 1. Install VLC.</p><p>Step 2. Done.</p><p>I use Hulu Desktop on my Aspire One under Ubuntu NBR, and there is no magic to it.</p><p>How did this shit make the main page?</p></div><p>I have personally experienced 1080p h264 videos not playing in VLC, but playing fine with MPC/CoreAVC. The performance advantage of the later is small, but it is there.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This works for Windows , Linux , and FreeBSD...Step 1 .
Install VLC.Step 2 .
Done.I use Hulu Desktop on my Aspire One under Ubuntu NBR , and there is no magic to it.How did this shit make the main page ? I have personally experienced 1080p h264 videos not playing in VLC , but playing fine with MPC/CoreAVC .
The performance advantage of the later is small , but it is there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This works for Windows, Linux, and FreeBSD...Step 1.
Install VLC.Step 2.
Done.I use Hulu Desktop on my Aspire One under Ubuntu NBR, and there is no magic to it.How did this shit make the main page?I have personally experienced 1080p h264 videos not playing in VLC, but playing fine with MPC/CoreAVC.
The performance advantage of the later is small, but it is there.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194618</id>
	<title>Err...</title>
	<author>rm999</author>
	<datestamp>1266505860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What good is 720p video on my 1024x600 monitor? Too bad they don't make 600p videos.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What good is 720p video on my 1024x600 monitor ?
Too bad they do n't make 600p videos .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What good is 720p video on my 1024x600 monitor?
Too bad they don't make 600p videos.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195890</id>
	<title>Re:bah humbug!</title>
	<author>PitaBred</author>
	<datestamp>1266516960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I didn't realize the PS2 played H.264...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't realize the PS2 played H.264.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't realize the PS2 played H.264...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194376</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194900</id>
	<title>1. install codec. 2. watch movie 3. ???</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266507660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>4. Why is this a story?</p><p>captcha: decoders</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>4 .
Why is this a story ? captcha : decoders</tokentext>
<sentencetext>4.
Why is this a story?captcha: decoders</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31202136</id>
	<title>Re:bah humbug!</title>
	<author>omnichad</author>
	<datestamp>1266608580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I tried to watch 1080i video on an IBM PS/2 once.  Took most of the day to render the first frame!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I tried to watch 1080i video on an IBM PS/2 once .
Took most of the day to render the first frame !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tried to watch 1080i video on an IBM PS/2 once.
Took most of the day to render the first frame!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194376</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194300</id>
	<title>You will also need</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266504180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>An external HD monitor. If you've got an external HD monitor, you're no longer portable, like a netbook should be. Why not just get a complete desktop computer?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>An external HD monitor .
If you 've got an external HD monitor , you 're no longer portable , like a netbook should be .
Why not just get a complete desktop computer ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An external HD monitor.
If you've got an external HD monitor, you're no longer portable, like a netbook should be.
Why not just get a complete desktop computer?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194754</id>
	<title>Re:How for /. has fallen</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266506640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I could maybe understand a story about doing this on an OSS system.</p> </div><p>You'll have to wait at least a decade. In the country where Slashdot is operated and hosted, a consortium of about two dozen companies conspires to keep H.264 decoding out of open source software. This consortium is called MPEG-LA.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I could maybe understand a story about doing this on an OSS system .
You 'll have to wait at least a decade .
In the country where Slashdot is operated and hosted , a consortium of about two dozen companies conspires to keep H.264 decoding out of open source software .
This consortium is called MPEG-LA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I could maybe understand a story about doing this on an OSS system.
You'll have to wait at least a decade.
In the country where Slashdot is operated and hosted, a consortium of about two dozen companies conspires to keep H.264 decoding out of open source software.
This consortium is called MPEG-LA.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194430</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194608</id>
	<title>Screen Resolution</title>
	<author>wisnoskij</author>
	<datestamp>1266505860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As long as the screen resolution is high enough view HD why would HD video take any time or money to get? and if you do not have a screen capable of it then it is going to be impossible.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As long as the screen resolution is high enough view HD why would HD video take any time or money to get ?
and if you do not have a screen capable of it then it is going to be impossible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As long as the screen resolution is high enough view HD why would HD video take any time or money to get?
and if you do not have a screen capable of it then it is going to be impossible.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195060</id>
	<title>Re:Err...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266508860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>until someone comes up with a pure vector based codec, you'll have to accept the fact that most videos won't come in a 1:1 ratio with your display's res.  I'd rather watdch 720p on a 1024x600 display than 480p.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>until someone comes up with a pure vector based codec , you 'll have to accept the fact that most videos wo n't come in a 1 : 1 ratio with your display 's res .
I 'd rather watdch 720p on a 1024x600 display than 480p .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>until someone comes up with a pure vector based codec, you'll have to accept the fact that most videos won't come in a 1:1 ratio with your display's res.
I'd rather watdch 720p on a 1024x600 display than 480p.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194618</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31197406</id>
	<title>Re:VLC</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266579660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Doesn't work on the Asus Eee PC 1008HA I have here...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does n't work on the Asus Eee PC 1008HA I have here.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doesn't work on the Asus Eee PC 1008HA I have here...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194808</id>
	<title>Re:Err...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266507000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not all netbooks have low res. There's a couple of 12 inch that have higher resolution, and some like the nokia booklet have 1280x720 on 10 inch.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not all netbooks have low res .
There 's a couple of 12 inch that have higher resolution , and some like the nokia booklet have 1280x720 on 10 inch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not all netbooks have low res.
There's a couple of 12 inch that have higher resolution, and some like the nokia booklet have 1280x720 on 10 inch.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194618</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31197756</id>
	<title>Re:DXVA</title>
	<author>bami</author>
	<datestamp>1266584040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Meh, my atom 330+GMA950 combo can play most 720p and 1080p content fine, yet for some reason has trouble with this version of Fight Club. It's 720p H.264, yet stutters like there is no tomorrow, while the CPU load is around 30\%. It's even worse now with this codec installed, since it tries to offload from the CPU to the almost non-existant GPU.</p><p>Wish I've waited a couple more months and got something with an ION chipset.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Meh , my atom 330 + GMA950 combo can play most 720p and 1080p content fine , yet for some reason has trouble with this version of Fight Club .
It 's 720p H.264 , yet stutters like there is no tomorrow , while the CPU load is around 30 \ % .
It 's even worse now with this codec installed , since it tries to offload from the CPU to the almost non-existant GPU.Wish I 've waited a couple more months and got something with an ION chipset .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Meh, my atom 330+GMA950 combo can play most 720p and 1080p content fine, yet for some reason has trouble with this version of Fight Club.
It's 720p H.264, yet stutters like there is no tomorrow, while the CPU load is around 30\%.
It's even worse now with this codec installed, since it tries to offload from the CPU to the almost non-existant GPU.Wish I've waited a couple more months and got something with an ION chipset.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194336</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195178</id>
	<title>yuo fail Jit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266509700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>for a l:iving got to the transmiision</htmltext>
<tokenext>for a l : iving got to the transmiision</tokentext>
<sentencetext>for a l:iving got to the transmiision</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195250</id>
	<title>AVC's Secret Sauce</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266510240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The secret to CoreAVC's speed is that it cheats...  If you compare the frames output, with any other codec, you'll see that the results are not the same.  People have commented on how CoreAVC looks different, sometimes "fuzzy".  Again, it's going for lower-precision in exchange for speed.  This is particularly galling in the case of H.264/AVC, since it has lossless modes, which are supposed to be bit-exact, not "close enough".</p><p>Honestly, if you want slightly faster + blurry video, why don't you just grab a lower-resolution copy of the same video, and save yourself the disk space, and money on the software license.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The secret to CoreAVC 's speed is that it cheats... If you compare the frames output , with any other codec , you 'll see that the results are not the same .
People have commented on how CoreAVC looks different , sometimes " fuzzy " .
Again , it 's going for lower-precision in exchange for speed .
This is particularly galling in the case of H.264/AVC , since it has lossless modes , which are supposed to be bit-exact , not " close enough " .Honestly , if you want slightly faster + blurry video , why do n't you just grab a lower-resolution copy of the same video , and save yourself the disk space , and money on the software license .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The secret to CoreAVC's speed is that it cheats...  If you compare the frames output, with any other codec, you'll see that the results are not the same.
People have commented on how CoreAVC looks different, sometimes "fuzzy".
Again, it's going for lower-precision in exchange for speed.
This is particularly galling in the case of H.264/AVC, since it has lossless modes, which are supposed to be bit-exact, not "close enough".Honestly, if you want slightly faster + blurry video, why don't you just grab a lower-resolution copy of the same video, and save yourself the disk space, and money on the software license.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31196824</id>
	<title>Re:Err...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266573300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's a good chance you can actually set your resolution to 720 in display options, or graphics options.<br>But instead of being capable of displaying the full resolution, when you get to the bottom of the screen, it tracks the mouse.</p><p>Then this just made me wonder why more machines don't come with this ability straight out of the box...<br>I'd gladly use 4kx3k resolution if i could, instead of resorting to multimon setups.</p><p>I think i remember seeing someone mention a program capable of doing this somewhere, but i don't remember the name.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a good chance you can actually set your resolution to 720 in display options , or graphics options.But instead of being capable of displaying the full resolution , when you get to the bottom of the screen , it tracks the mouse.Then this just made me wonder why more machines do n't come with this ability straight out of the box...I 'd gladly use 4kx3k resolution if i could , instead of resorting to multimon setups.I think i remember seeing someone mention a program capable of doing this somewhere , but i do n't remember the name .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a good chance you can actually set your resolution to 720 in display options, or graphics options.But instead of being capable of displaying the full resolution, when you get to the bottom of the screen, it tracks the mouse.Then this just made me wonder why more machines don't come with this ability straight out of the box...I'd gladly use 4kx3k resolution if i could, instead of resorting to multimon setups.I think i remember seeing someone mention a program capable of doing this somewhere, but i don't remember the name.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194618</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195628</id>
	<title>How about a free option?</title>
	<author>TavisJohn</author>
	<datestamp>1266513660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All you need are 2 things.</p><p>Download K-Lite Codec Pack:<br><a href="http://www.codecguide.com/download\_kl.htm" title="codecguide.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.codecguide.com/download\_kl.htm</a> [codecguide.com]<br>It includes Media Player Classic...</p><p>AND some HD videos in almost ANY codec.</p><p>Enjoy!</p><p>----------------------<br>This is nothing more than an advert for a $10 codec!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All you need are 2 things.Download K-Lite Codec Pack : http : //www.codecguide.com/download \ _kl.htm [ codecguide.com ] It includes Media Player Classic...AND some HD videos in almost ANY codec.Enjoy ! ----------------------This is nothing more than an advert for a $ 10 codec !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All you need are 2 things.Download K-Lite Codec Pack:http://www.codecguide.com/download\_kl.htm [codecguide.com]It includes Media Player Classic...AND some HD videos in almost ANY codec.Enjoy!----------------------This is nothing more than an advert for a $10 codec!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194338</id>
	<title>Linux...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266504360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So. How do I do this on Linux, which is the OS I actually use on my netbook?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So .
How do I do this on Linux , which is the OS I actually use on my netbook ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So.
How do I do this on Linux, which is the OS I actually use on my netbook?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194350</id>
	<title>VLC</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266504420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>This works for Windows, Linux, and FreeBSD...

Step 1. Install VLC.

Step 2. Done.

I use Hulu Desktop on my Aspire One under Ubuntu NBR, and there is no magic to it.

How did this shit make the main page?</htmltext>
<tokenext>This works for Windows , Linux , and FreeBSD.. . Step 1 .
Install VLC .
Step 2 .
Done . I use Hulu Desktop on my Aspire One under Ubuntu NBR , and there is no magic to it .
How did this shit make the main page ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This works for Windows, Linux, and FreeBSD...

Step 1.
Install VLC.
Step 2.
Done.

I use Hulu Desktop on my Aspire One under Ubuntu NBR, and there is no magic to it.
How did this shit make the main page?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194798</id>
	<title>Get the right netbook</title>
	<author>Sheik Yerbouti</author>
	<datestamp>1266506940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just buy the right netbook the Asus 1201N plays High def video perfectly well because it has an Nvidia 9400M graphics processors with Cuda and hardware video decoding. It will even output 1080P via it's HDMI port.  It also has a dual core Atom 330 running at 1.6 ghz. All together it's a hell of a gadget for the money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just buy the right netbook the Asus 1201N plays High def video perfectly well because it has an Nvidia 9400M graphics processors with Cuda and hardware video decoding .
It will even output 1080P via it 's HDMI port .
It also has a dual core Atom 330 running at 1.6 ghz .
All together it 's a hell of a gadget for the money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just buy the right netbook the Asus 1201N plays High def video perfectly well because it has an Nvidia 9400M graphics processors with Cuda and hardware video decoding.
It will even output 1080P via it's HDMI port.
It also has a dual core Atom 330 running at 1.6 ghz.
All together it's a hell of a gadget for the money.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194312</id>
	<title>obligatory</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266504240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have a Celeron 900 you insensitve clod!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a Celeron 900 you insensitve clod !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a Celeron 900 you insensitve clod!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195492</id>
	<title>Re:And?</title>
	<author>0100010001010011</author>
	<datestamp>1266512400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://xbmc.org/davilla/2009/12/29/broadcom-crystal-hd-its-magic/" title="xbmc.org">Crystal HD</a> [xbmc.org] would also be a valid solution.</p><p>XBMC supports it. I'm not sure if mplayer itself does yet.</p><p>It turned my AppleTV into a 1080p beast. Just need a Mini-PCIe slot.</p><p>And if you're reading this and HAVEN'T heard of <a href="http://xbmc.org/" title="xbmc.org">XBMC</a> [xbmc.org] you're missing out on hands down the best HTPC front end ever made.</p><p>I've used it since '05 and on an original XBox and they've come a long way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Crystal HD [ xbmc.org ] would also be a valid solution.XBMC supports it .
I 'm not sure if mplayer itself does yet.It turned my AppleTV into a 1080p beast .
Just need a Mini-PCIe slot.And if you 're reading this and HAVE N'T heard of XBMC [ xbmc.org ] you 're missing out on hands down the best HTPC front end ever made.I 've used it since '05 and on an original XBox and they 've come a long way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Crystal HD [xbmc.org] would also be a valid solution.XBMC supports it.
I'm not sure if mplayer itself does yet.It turned my AppleTV into a 1080p beast.
Just need a Mini-PCIe slot.And if you're reading this and HAVEN'T heard of XBMC [xbmc.org] you're missing out on hands down the best HTPC front end ever made.I've used it since '05 and on an original XBox and they've come a long way.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194278</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195104</id>
	<title>Re:Err...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266509160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>720p just means it's 720/600 times cooler. Must buy now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>720p just means it 's 720/600 times cooler .
Must buy now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>720p just means it's 720/600 times cooler.
Must buy now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194618</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194554</id>
	<title>Broadcom chip</title>
	<author>icegreentea</author>
	<datestamp>1266505560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There was kind of a big splash back in December about this Broadcom chip... Crystal HD or something. Basically, it's a $2 (or some other absurdly low price) video decoder chip that'll take pretty much the full load for decoding most common codecs in use today. It was certified by Intel as well. Wonder why we aren't seeing more netbooks out there being announced with this bugger. I mean, it'll cost next to nothing, and put plain-ass Atoms at par with Ion powered netbooks (well, for 90\% of users who only needed/wanted Ion for the video to begin with).</htmltext>
<tokenext>There was kind of a big splash back in December about this Broadcom chip... Crystal HD or something .
Basically , it 's a $ 2 ( or some other absurdly low price ) video decoder chip that 'll take pretty much the full load for decoding most common codecs in use today .
It was certified by Intel as well .
Wonder why we are n't seeing more netbooks out there being announced with this bugger .
I mean , it 'll cost next to nothing , and put plain-ass Atoms at par with Ion powered netbooks ( well , for 90 \ % of users who only needed/wanted Ion for the video to begin with ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There was kind of a big splash back in December about this Broadcom chip... Crystal HD or something.
Basically, it's a $2 (or some other absurdly low price) video decoder chip that'll take pretty much the full load for decoding most common codecs in use today.
It was certified by Intel as well.
Wonder why we aren't seeing more netbooks out there being announced with this bugger.
I mean, it'll cost next to nothing, and put plain-ass Atoms at par with Ion powered netbooks (well, for 90\% of users who only needed/wanted Ion for the video to begin with).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194408</id>
	<title>what, no cool hardware solution?</title>
	<author>Lazy Jones</author>
	<datestamp>1266504720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I expected some homebrew usb2.0 or somesuch gadget with a hardware decoder<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... That would have been slashdot-worthy, but hey, it would have been <a href="http://www.sammynetbook.com/plugins/forum/forum\_viewtopic.php?36683" title="sammynetbook.com">old news</a> [sammynetbook.com]<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I expected some homebrew usb2.0 or somesuch gadget with a hardware decoder ... That would have been slashdot-worthy , but hey , it would have been old news [ sammynetbook.com ] .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I expected some homebrew usb2.0 or somesuch gadget with a hardware decoder ... That would have been slashdot-worthy, but hey, it would have been old news [sammynetbook.com] ...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195276</id>
	<title>Re:Skip this story</title>
	<author>JThundley</author>
	<datestamp>1266510420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm able to play HD video on my netbook, and it has a shitty VIA 1.2Ghz processor AND video card! Not to mention that it has a higher resolution than typical netbooks. Stupid story.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm able to play HD video on my netbook , and it has a shitty VIA 1.2Ghz processor AND video card !
Not to mention that it has a higher resolution than typical netbooks .
Stupid story .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm able to play HD video on my netbook, and it has a shitty VIA 1.2Ghz processor AND video card!
Not to mention that it has a higher resolution than typical netbooks.
Stupid story.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31197558</id>
	<title>Re:VLC</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266581580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>VLC doesn't use hardware acceleration.  the point of this article is for the people who use VLC and can't figure out why nothing works because they're using software rendering.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>VLC does n't use hardware acceleration .
the point of this article is for the people who use VLC and ca n't figure out why nothing works because they 're using software rendering .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>VLC doesn't use hardware acceleration.
the point of this article is for the people who use VLC and can't figure out why nothing works because they're using software rendering.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194336</id>
	<title>DXVA</title>
	<author>electrosoccertux</author>
	<datestamp>1266504360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>going to need a netbook with a graphics chip that support DXVA 2.0</p><p>If you have a GMA950 you're SOL.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>going to need a netbook with a graphics chip that support DXVA 2.0If you have a GMA950 you 're SOL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>going to need a netbook with a graphics chip that support DXVA 2.0If you have a GMA950 you're SOL.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195666</id>
	<title>Re:Skip this story</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266514080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's no more than an ad for a codec.</p></div><p>Indeed. I was surprised to see this on slashdot.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's no more than an ad for a codec.Indeed .
I was surprised to see this on slashdot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's no more than an ad for a codec.Indeed.
I was surprised to see this on slashdot.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194484</id>
	<title>**** HD Videos</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266505080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They're a pain in the ass. Most of us don't have screens that can make them look any better (especially if those screens are on a netbook!) and don't care if we did. I prefer to convert my HD videos to a lower bitrate so they can display on a generic video adapter without any fancy software. Not always convenient, of course.</p><p>But this post is really an excuse to make a cute observation about netbooks: they seem to be marketed as less powerful than they are! This is mainly in the way netbooks are described to consumers ("if you want to watch videos, you probably want a more powerful machine"), but there are two technical features that seem to be designed to identify netbooks as underpowered.</p><p>The first feature is that the default config typically underclocks the CPU. OK, this makes the battery last longer, but not a <i>lot</i> longer. By accident or by design (I suspect it's by design) most users are going to attempt to play a Netflix stream on their netbooks, watch the video stutter hopelessly and say, "Oh well, they did tell me that the netbook is not a multimedia machine." Little knowing that a few power mode setting changes will fix the problem.</p><p>Maybe your dubious about this first feature being anything but a power-saving thing, but explain this: why do netbooks have really cruddy speakers? Even cheapo zero-legacy computers meant for office workers have decent speakers. Not great, but at least you can make out what somebody in a video is saying, which you can't on a typical netbook speaker. Those are tiny and have the volume of a cracked teaspoon.</p><p>My theory is that the manufacturers deliberately sabotage netbooks' video and audio so they won't be perceived as a cheaper alternative to laptops &mdash; those being what a lot of college students have instead of a TV set.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're a pain in the ass .
Most of us do n't have screens that can make them look any better ( especially if those screens are on a netbook !
) and do n't care if we did .
I prefer to convert my HD videos to a lower bitrate so they can display on a generic video adapter without any fancy software .
Not always convenient , of course.But this post is really an excuse to make a cute observation about netbooks : they seem to be marketed as less powerful than they are !
This is mainly in the way netbooks are described to consumers ( " if you want to watch videos , you probably want a more powerful machine " ) , but there are two technical features that seem to be designed to identify netbooks as underpowered.The first feature is that the default config typically underclocks the CPU .
OK , this makes the battery last longer , but not a lot longer .
By accident or by design ( I suspect it 's by design ) most users are going to attempt to play a Netflix stream on their netbooks , watch the video stutter hopelessly and say , " Oh well , they did tell me that the netbook is not a multimedia machine .
" Little knowing that a few power mode setting changes will fix the problem.Maybe your dubious about this first feature being anything but a power-saving thing , but explain this : why do netbooks have really cruddy speakers ?
Even cheapo zero-legacy computers meant for office workers have decent speakers .
Not great , but at least you can make out what somebody in a video is saying , which you ca n't on a typical netbook speaker .
Those are tiny and have the volume of a cracked teaspoon.My theory is that the manufacturers deliberately sabotage netbooks ' video and audio so they wo n't be perceived as a cheaper alternative to laptops    those being what a lot of college students have instead of a TV set .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're a pain in the ass.
Most of us don't have screens that can make them look any better (especially if those screens are on a netbook!
) and don't care if we did.
I prefer to convert my HD videos to a lower bitrate so they can display on a generic video adapter without any fancy software.
Not always convenient, of course.But this post is really an excuse to make a cute observation about netbooks: they seem to be marketed as less powerful than they are!
This is mainly in the way netbooks are described to consumers ("if you want to watch videos, you probably want a more powerful machine"), but there are two technical features that seem to be designed to identify netbooks as underpowered.The first feature is that the default config typically underclocks the CPU.
OK, this makes the battery last longer, but not a lot longer.
By accident or by design (I suspect it's by design) most users are going to attempt to play a Netflix stream on their netbooks, watch the video stutter hopelessly and say, "Oh well, they did tell me that the netbook is not a multimedia machine.
" Little knowing that a few power mode setting changes will fix the problem.Maybe your dubious about this first feature being anything but a power-saving thing, but explain this: why do netbooks have really cruddy speakers?
Even cheapo zero-legacy computers meant for office workers have decent speakers.
Not great, but at least you can make out what somebody in a video is saying, which you can't on a typical netbook speaker.
Those are tiny and have the volume of a cracked teaspoon.My theory is that the manufacturers deliberately sabotage netbooks' video and audio so they won't be perceived as a cheaper alternative to laptops — those being what a lot of college students have instead of a TV set.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194588</id>
	<title>Excuse me, but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266505740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...any netbook with an ARM chip has hardware video acceleration, and can play HD video in fullscreen without problems.</p><p>Oh, you were talking about an Atom mini-laptop? That&rsquo;s no a <em>real</em> netbook with that platform power profile, now is it?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...any netbook with an ARM chip has hardware video acceleration , and can play HD video in fullscreen without problems.Oh , you were talking about an Atom mini-laptop ?
That    s no a real netbook with that platform power profile , now is it ?
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...any netbook with an ARM chip has hardware video acceleration, and can play HD video in fullscreen without problems.Oh, you were talking about an Atom mini-laptop?
That’s no a real netbook with that platform power profile, now is it?
;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195656</id>
	<title>Re:VLC</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266514080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>How did this shit make the main page?</p></div></blockquote><p>His proper name is timothy. And he made the main page worthless, as usual.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How did this shit make the main page ? His proper name is timothy .
And he made the main page worthless , as usual .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How did this shit make the main page?His proper name is timothy.
And he made the main page worthless, as usual.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31199070</id>
	<title>I agree, this is nothing but an Ad...</title>
	<author>TheNetAvenger</author>
	<datestamp>1266594120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Running Win7 on Netbooks for over a year now, and they all play HD video content just fine.</p><p>Plaing WMV/VC1/h.264 via Media Player or Media Center (yes even Media Center) plays 720p just fine without frame drops.</p><p>The only exceptions is using a Flash HD player, then the player shoots the HT Atom CPU to 100\% for no real reason. The other exception is Silverlight streaming 1080, you only get about 22-24fps (which is not a large drop in FPS), and a bit of overkill on a 1024x600 screen.</p><p>Wow, articles like this are disburbing, as it will have people ripping out the default H.264 codecs from Win7 and then later on have problems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Running Win7 on Netbooks for over a year now , and they all play HD video content just fine.Plaing WMV/VC1/h.264 via Media Player or Media Center ( yes even Media Center ) plays 720p just fine without frame drops.The only exceptions is using a Flash HD player , then the player shoots the HT Atom CPU to 100 \ % for no real reason .
The other exception is Silverlight streaming 1080 , you only get about 22-24fps ( which is not a large drop in FPS ) , and a bit of overkill on a 1024x600 screen.Wow , articles like this are disburbing , as it will have people ripping out the default H.264 codecs from Win7 and then later on have problems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Running Win7 on Netbooks for over a year now, and they all play HD video content just fine.Plaing WMV/VC1/h.264 via Media Player or Media Center (yes even Media Center) plays 720p just fine without frame drops.The only exceptions is using a Flash HD player, then the player shoots the HT Atom CPU to 100\% for no real reason.
The other exception is Silverlight streaming 1080, you only get about 22-24fps (which is not a large drop in FPS), and a bit of overkill on a 1024x600 screen.Wow, articles like this are disburbing, as it will have people ripping out the default H.264 codecs from Win7 and then later on have problems.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195922</id>
	<title>That's easy.</title>
	<author>mweather</author>
	<datestamp>1266517560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you want to play HD on a netbook, just don't encode it in h.264. It may be great for file size, but the hardware requirements are ridiculous.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want to play HD on a netbook , just do n't encode it in h.264 .
It may be great for file size , but the hardware requirements are ridiculous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want to play HD on a netbook, just don't encode it in h.264.
It may be great for file size, but the hardware requirements are ridiculous.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194772</id>
	<title>Re:**** HD Videos</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1266506760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>why do netbooks have really cruddy speakers?</p></div><p>Because good speakers would make the case bigger.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>why do netbooks have really cruddy speakers ? Because good speakers would make the case bigger .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>why do netbooks have really cruddy speakers?Because good speakers would make the case bigger.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31196830</id>
	<title>!netbook</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266573300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That so-called "NetBook" is running Windows 7, hence it can't be a cheap, low-powered, ultra-portable device.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That so-called " NetBook " is running Windows 7 , hence it ca n't be a cheap , low-powered , ultra-portable device .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That so-called "NetBook" is running Windows 7, hence it can't be a cheap, low-powered, ultra-portable device.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194894</id>
	<title>Ummm?</title>
	<author>Anticrawl</author>
	<datestamp>1266507600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or... you could download CCCP, and just use that. With a bit of tweaking and just the stock codecs supplied one can easily get a 720p/1080p video playing on a standard retail netbook. However with an uncompressed bluray rip or something of that nature I'd imagine you're out of luck, I've never tried myself. The ability to play HD video on a netbook is easily obtainable free if you are using the right file format/player and have the proper codecs. As I said though for the average person just download CCCP, it's a free cure-all for your media playing woes with few exceptions.

I'm not sure why this is even posted here. Anyone buying a netbook at a retail store isn't getting anything above a 600p monitor and those of who take the time to shop online for a 1366x768 netbook are more than savvy enough to get it working, not to mention the typical Slashdot posters. Even then I can't imagine a Slashdotter buying netbooks this day and age what with similarly priced ultraportable laptops at the same size that are thinner, more powerful and feature 8-12 hours of battery life standard (Timeline series from Acer for example). I suppose some of us have kids and family members we'd buy netbooks for though.

For a standard 600p netbook though why even bother with this? You want that 400i/p video you got off the internet or from your digital recorder to look nice? Use some nice upconversion software and play it like that to save resources. No way in hell you'll be able to run a real-time quality up-conversion player on a netbook though.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or... you could download CCCP , and just use that .
With a bit of tweaking and just the stock codecs supplied one can easily get a 720p/1080p video playing on a standard retail netbook .
However with an uncompressed bluray rip or something of that nature I 'd imagine you 're out of luck , I 've never tried myself .
The ability to play HD video on a netbook is easily obtainable free if you are using the right file format/player and have the proper codecs .
As I said though for the average person just download CCCP , it 's a free cure-all for your media playing woes with few exceptions .
I 'm not sure why this is even posted here .
Anyone buying a netbook at a retail store is n't getting anything above a 600p monitor and those of who take the time to shop online for a 1366x768 netbook are more than savvy enough to get it working , not to mention the typical Slashdot posters .
Even then I ca n't imagine a Slashdotter buying netbooks this day and age what with similarly priced ultraportable laptops at the same size that are thinner , more powerful and feature 8-12 hours of battery life standard ( Timeline series from Acer for example ) .
I suppose some of us have kids and family members we 'd buy netbooks for though .
For a standard 600p netbook though why even bother with this ?
You want that 400i/p video you got off the internet or from your digital recorder to look nice ?
Use some nice upconversion software and play it like that to save resources .
No way in hell you 'll be able to run a real-time quality up-conversion player on a netbook though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or... you could download CCCP, and just use that.
With a bit of tweaking and just the stock codecs supplied one can easily get a 720p/1080p video playing on a standard retail netbook.
However with an uncompressed bluray rip or something of that nature I'd imagine you're out of luck, I've never tried myself.
The ability to play HD video on a netbook is easily obtainable free if you are using the right file format/player and have the proper codecs.
As I said though for the average person just download CCCP, it's a free cure-all for your media playing woes with few exceptions.
I'm not sure why this is even posted here.
Anyone buying a netbook at a retail store isn't getting anything above a 600p monitor and those of who take the time to shop online for a 1366x768 netbook are more than savvy enough to get it working, not to mention the typical Slashdot posters.
Even then I can't imagine a Slashdotter buying netbooks this day and age what with similarly priced ultraportable laptops at the same size that are thinner, more powerful and feature 8-12 hours of battery life standard (Timeline series from Acer for example).
I suppose some of us have kids and family members we'd buy netbooks for though.
For a standard 600p netbook though why even bother with this?
You want that 400i/p video you got off the internet or from your digital recorder to look nice?
Use some nice upconversion software and play it like that to save resources.
No way in hell you'll be able to run a real-time quality up-conversion player on a netbook though.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31198038</id>
	<title>Re:Err...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266587220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's a version of the Lenovo S10-2 out there with a 1280x720 screen on 10". Almost 720p.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a version of the Lenovo S10-2 out there with a 1280x720 screen on 10 " .
Almost 720p .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a version of the Lenovo S10-2 out there with a 1280x720 screen on 10".
Almost 720p.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194808</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194320</id>
	<title>How does this CoreAVC compare to K-lite?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266504300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Shame the article doesn't do any actual comparisons between any two codecs. Nope, the TFA just has one codec, and so the sum of the article is "look, this codec plays videos!" Way to prove you're not just an advertisement.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Shame the article does n't do any actual comparisons between any two codecs .
Nope , the TFA just has one codec , and so the sum of the article is " look , this codec plays videos !
" Way to prove you 're not just an advertisement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shame the article doesn't do any actual comparisons between any two codecs.
Nope, the TFA just has one codec, and so the sum of the article is "look, this codec plays videos!
" Way to prove you're not just an advertisement.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195724</id>
	<title>Re:Err...</title>
	<author>nxtw</author>
	<datestamp>1266514800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> What good is 720p video on my 1024x600 monitor?</p></div></blockquote><p>You might be interested in learning about the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VGA\_connector" title="wikipedia.org">VGA port</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What good is 720p video on my 1024x600 monitor ? You might be interested in learning about the VGA port [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> What good is 720p video on my 1024x600 monitor?You might be interested in learning about the VGA port [wikipedia.org].
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194618</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195664</id>
	<title>Re:**** HD Videos</title>
	<author>nxtw</author>
	<datestamp>1266514080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> Most of us don't have screens that can make them look any better</p></div></blockquote><p>Do you have a screen with more than 480/576 lines?</p><blockquote><div><p>why do netbooks have really cruddy speakers?</p></div></blockquote><p>Do you have headphones?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Most of us do n't have screens that can make them look any betterDo you have a screen with more than 480/576 lines ? why do netbooks have really cruddy speakers ? Do you have headphones ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Most of us don't have screens that can make them look any betterDo you have a screen with more than 480/576 lines?why do netbooks have really cruddy speakers?Do you have headphones?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31196464</id>
	<title>Re:bah humbug!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266611700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Years ago, I bought an old $150 IPAQ HP3950 off Amazon and upgraded it to PPC2003. (Probably the only MS upgrade to actually improve speed)</p><p>It's more portable than a PS2, laptop or netbook. Movie resolutions are only 320x240 (STD) or 320x160 (WS), but with TCPMP MPEG4 video and AAC audio it's fair quality and the videos are 180-350MB (99-160min) each. At that size, a 4GB SD card can hold about 24 hours of video (overclocked to 472:115 during playback, it runs about 2 hours before the battery's low voltage causes the PDA to crash).</p><p>P.S. Don't buy a PDA as old as a 3800/3900 unless you're nuts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Years ago , I bought an old $ 150 IPAQ HP3950 off Amazon and upgraded it to PPC2003 .
( Probably the only MS upgrade to actually improve speed ) It 's more portable than a PS2 , laptop or netbook .
Movie resolutions are only 320x240 ( STD ) or 320x160 ( WS ) , but with TCPMP MPEG4 video and AAC audio it 's fair quality and the videos are 180-350MB ( 99-160min ) each .
At that size , a 4GB SD card can hold about 24 hours of video ( overclocked to 472 : 115 during playback , it runs about 2 hours before the battery 's low voltage causes the PDA to crash ) .P.S .
Do n't buy a PDA as old as a 3800/3900 unless you 're nuts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Years ago, I bought an old $150 IPAQ HP3950 off Amazon and upgraded it to PPC2003.
(Probably the only MS upgrade to actually improve speed)It's more portable than a PS2, laptop or netbook.
Movie resolutions are only 320x240 (STD) or 320x160 (WS), but with TCPMP MPEG4 video and AAC audio it's fair quality and the videos are 180-350MB (99-160min) each.
At that size, a 4GB SD card can hold about 24 hours of video (overclocked to 472:115 during playback, it runs about 2 hours before the battery's low voltage causes the PDA to crash).P.S.
Don't buy a PDA as old as a 3800/3900 unless you're nuts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194376</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194430</id>
	<title>How for /. has fallen</title>
	<author>tji</author>
	<datestamp>1266504840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Come on..  an advertisement for a commercial codec to use in a Windows system / application?</p><p>How did this make it as a story?</p><p>I could maybe understand a story about doing this on an OSS system.   But, that would not have been news because many of us have been doing that for years.</p><p>When the OSS Nvidia or Radeon driver gets full VDPAU support, that merits a front page story.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Come on.. an advertisement for a commercial codec to use in a Windows system / application ? How did this make it as a story ? I could maybe understand a story about doing this on an OSS system .
But , that would not have been news because many of us have been doing that for years.When the OSS Nvidia or Radeon driver gets full VDPAU support , that merits a front page story .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Come on..  an advertisement for a commercial codec to use in a Windows system / application?How did this make it as a story?I could maybe understand a story about doing this on an OSS system.
But, that would not have been news because many of us have been doing that for years.When the OSS Nvidia or Radeon driver gets full VDPAU support, that merits a front page story.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31196544</id>
	<title>Re:Err...</title>
	<author>BikeHelmet</author>
	<datestamp>1266612660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ever resized a blurry image to be smaller? It gets sharper.</p><p>Same thing applies to video. 720p on 1024x600 looks very sharp! At its native size, it might look a tad less nice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ever resized a blurry image to be smaller ?
It gets sharper.Same thing applies to video .
720p on 1024x600 looks very sharp !
At its native size , it might look a tad less nice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ever resized a blurry image to be smaller?
It gets sharper.Same thing applies to video.
720p on 1024x600 looks very sharp!
At its native size, it might look a tad less nice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194618</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31197458</id>
	<title>Re:VLC</title>
	<author>kitgerrits</author>
	<datestamp>1266580380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Step 3: grab a cup of coffee, because the standard h264 codec with VLC can't manage 720p on a netbook. (have you even tried the listed video?)<br>Corecodec is a highly-optimized codec that can squeeze just that extra bit of power out of your CPU. There's even a wrapper for it on Linux.<br>Should you be (un)lucky enough to have a GMA500 GPU in your netbook, it can take care of the decoding for you by using mplayer-vaapi (custom build)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Step 3 : grab a cup of coffee , because the standard h264 codec with VLC ca n't manage 720p on a netbook .
( have you even tried the listed video ?
) Corecodec is a highly-optimized codec that can squeeze just that extra bit of power out of your CPU .
There 's even a wrapper for it on Linux.Should you be ( un ) lucky enough to have a GMA500 GPU in your netbook , it can take care of the decoding for you by using mplayer-vaapi ( custom build )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Step 3: grab a cup of coffee, because the standard h264 codec with VLC can't manage 720p on a netbook.
(have you even tried the listed video?
)Corecodec is a highly-optimized codec that can squeeze just that extra bit of power out of your CPU.
There's even a wrapper for it on Linux.Should you be (un)lucky enough to have a GMA500 GPU in your netbook, it can take care of the decoding for you by using mplayer-vaapi (custom build)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31196902</id>
	<title>Re:And?</title>
	<author>nmg196</author>
	<datestamp>1266574320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That requires buying a new netbook, instead of using one you've already got. Duh!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That requires buying a new netbook , instead of using one you 've already got .
Duh !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That requires buying a new netbook, instead of using one you've already got.
Duh!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194278</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195092</id>
	<title>Re:obligatory</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266509100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you have low-bitrate 1080p videos, a celeron 900 *might* be able to handle it, but only with no deblocking and no deinterlacing (which reduces quality).</p><p>In actual experience, I've found ~8-12GB 1080p h.264 blu-ray rips to be a slide show on an atom N280, regardless of codec or settings. It just doesn't work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you have low-bitrate 1080p videos , a celeron 900 * might * be able to handle it , but only with no deblocking and no deinterlacing ( which reduces quality ) .In actual experience , I 've found ~ 8-12GB 1080p h.264 blu-ray rips to be a slide show on an atom N280 , regardless of codec or settings .
It just does n't work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you have low-bitrate 1080p videos, a celeron 900 *might* be able to handle it, but only with no deblocking and no deinterlacing (which reduces quality).In actual experience, I've found ~8-12GB 1080p h.264 blu-ray rips to be a slide show on an atom N280, regardless of codec or settings.
It just doesn't work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194312</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195292</id>
	<title>why not just use VLC</title>
	<author>axor1337</author>
	<datestamp>1266510660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>it has h.264 support and is free</htmltext>
<tokenext>it has h.264 support and is free</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it has h.264 support and is free</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194500</id>
	<title>But I only have 1024x600</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266505200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And connecting an external monitor defeats the point.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And connecting an external monitor defeats the point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And connecting an external monitor defeats the point.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194714</id>
	<title>Which of you fucktard voted up Spam?</title>
	<author>pecosdave</author>
	<datestamp>1266506520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously, this is looks like any of the rest of the spam, especially with the opening statement.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , this is looks like any of the rest of the spam , especially with the opening statement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, this is looks like any of the rest of the spam, especially with the opening statement.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31198254</id>
	<title>How is this fucking news?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266589440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've had a Dell Mini 9 for over a year and it is able to play 1080p video out of the box (Ubuntu).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've had a Dell Mini 9 for over a year and it is able to play 1080p video out of the box ( Ubuntu ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've had a Dell Mini 9 for over a year and it is able to play 1080p video out of the box (Ubuntu).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31197486</id>
	<title>Re:How does this CoreAVC compare to K-lite?</title>
	<author>RDW</author>
	<datestamp>1266580740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>'Shame the article doesn't do any actual comparisons between any two codecs.'</p><p>I compared CoreAVC with ffmpeg, vlc etc. a while back, using a Samsung NC10 Atom-based netbook to play relatively low bitrate 720p stuff from the BBC iPlayer (thanks to get\_iplayer). CoreAVC was the only codec that came close to handling these videos (most just ground to a halt after a few seconds). MPC + CoreAVC gave decent picture quality on a 720p TV, but some audio synch issues and slight cyclic speeding up/slowing down of playback. Skipping deblocking as the original article suggests may help with this, but really killed the picture quality for me, with obvious blocky artefacts. It was an interesting experiment, and actually the first time I'd seen HD playback on my TV, but not quite good enough for regular use. YMMV.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>'Shame the article does n't do any actual comparisons between any two codecs .
'I compared CoreAVC with ffmpeg , vlc etc .
a while back , using a Samsung NC10 Atom-based netbook to play relatively low bitrate 720p stuff from the BBC iPlayer ( thanks to get \ _iplayer ) .
CoreAVC was the only codec that came close to handling these videos ( most just ground to a halt after a few seconds ) .
MPC + CoreAVC gave decent picture quality on a 720p TV , but some audio synch issues and slight cyclic speeding up/slowing down of playback .
Skipping deblocking as the original article suggests may help with this , but really killed the picture quality for me , with obvious blocky artefacts .
It was an interesting experiment , and actually the first time I 'd seen HD playback on my TV , but not quite good enough for regular use .
YMMV .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'Shame the article doesn't do any actual comparisons between any two codecs.
'I compared CoreAVC with ffmpeg, vlc etc.
a while back, using a Samsung NC10 Atom-based netbook to play relatively low bitrate 720p stuff from the BBC iPlayer (thanks to get\_iplayer).
CoreAVC was the only codec that came close to handling these videos (most just ground to a halt after a few seconds).
MPC + CoreAVC gave decent picture quality on a 720p TV, but some audio synch issues and slight cyclic speeding up/slowing down of playback.
Skipping deblocking as the original article suggests may help with this, but really killed the picture quality for me, with obvious blocky artefacts.
It was an interesting experiment, and actually the first time I'd seen HD playback on my TV, but not quite good enough for regular use.
YMMV.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194320</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31197986</id>
	<title>Re:Err...</title>
	<author>Soul-Burn666</author>
	<datestamp>1266586500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Definitely not all.<br>I have a 8.9" netbook with a 1280x720 display (KJS SX3) and a friend of mine has the truly ultra-portable Fujitsu U2010 with a surprisingly clear 5.6" 1280x720 display.<br>Sure, it's rather smallish, but it definitely looks sharper than non-HD video content.<br>The only codec which can really handle these videos with nearly 0 artifacts is the advertised CoreAVC.<br>For those who'd rather no shell out money for it, the Microsoft codec that comes with Vista and 7 work really quite well too (Microsoft DVD/DTV codec), just enable it as a preferred filter in MPC and you're ready to go.<br>Oh, you'd have to temporarily disable Desktop Composition for it to work well...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Definitely not all.I have a 8.9 " netbook with a 1280x720 display ( KJS SX3 ) and a friend of mine has the truly ultra-portable Fujitsu U2010 with a surprisingly clear 5.6 " 1280x720 display.Sure , it 's rather smallish , but it definitely looks sharper than non-HD video content.The only codec which can really handle these videos with nearly 0 artifacts is the advertised CoreAVC.For those who 'd rather no shell out money for it , the Microsoft codec that comes with Vista and 7 work really quite well too ( Microsoft DVD/DTV codec ) , just enable it as a preferred filter in MPC and you 're ready to go.Oh , you 'd have to temporarily disable Desktop Composition for it to work well.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Definitely not all.I have a 8.9" netbook with a 1280x720 display (KJS SX3) and a friend of mine has the truly ultra-portable Fujitsu U2010 with a surprisingly clear 5.6" 1280x720 display.Sure, it's rather smallish, but it definitely looks sharper than non-HD video content.The only codec which can really handle these videos with nearly 0 artifacts is the advertised CoreAVC.For those who'd rather no shell out money for it, the Microsoft codec that comes with Vista and 7 work really quite well too (Microsoft DVD/DTV codec), just enable it as a preferred filter in MPC and you're ready to go.Oh, you'd have to temporarily disable Desktop Composition for it to work well...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194808</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194940</id>
	<title>Re:Err...</title>
	<author>Trogre</author>
	<datestamp>1266508020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you might appreciate the ability to play back 720p content when your friend sends you his high-resolution videos and you don't want to wait a few hours while your netbook transcodes them down to 600p.</p><p>Honestly, do people not think about these things?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you might appreciate the ability to play back 720p content when your friend sends you his high-resolution videos and you do n't want to wait a few hours while your netbook transcodes them down to 600p.Honestly , do people not think about these things ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you might appreciate the ability to play back 720p content when your friend sends you his high-resolution videos and you don't want to wait a few hours while your netbook transcodes them down to 600p.Honestly, do people not think about these things?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194618</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31200076</id>
	<title>Re:bah humbug!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266598860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The PS2 barley plays 720p video, and supports no digital output. DVD or USB stick? What a pain. Any reasonable set top box (myth tv, heck a 200$ popcorn hour) will atleast play over the network....</p><p>What did your comment add to this<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/netbook/ discussion?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The PS2 barley plays 720p video , and supports no digital output .
DVD or USB stick ?
What a pain .
Any reasonable set top box ( myth tv , heck a 200 $ popcorn hour ) will atleast play over the network....What did your comment add to this /netbook/ discussion ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The PS2 barley plays 720p video, and supports no digital output.
DVD or USB stick?
What a pain.
Any reasonable set top box (myth tv, heck a 200$ popcorn hour) will atleast play over the network....What did your comment add to this /netbook/ discussion?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194376</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194954</id>
	<title>Re:Err...</title>
	<author>Kitkoan</author>
	<datestamp>1266508140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Not all netbooks have low res. There's a couple of 12 inch that have higher resolution, and some like the nokia booklet have 1280x720 on 10 inch.</p></div><p>That still isn't going to play a 1080p video as mentioned in the article. 1080p needs a screen size of 1920x1080. If your going to go through this much effort to get the best picture would be better to just re-encode the video to your screens pixel size, would make it not stutter either.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not all netbooks have low res .
There 's a couple of 12 inch that have higher resolution , and some like the nokia booklet have 1280x720 on 10 inch.That still is n't going to play a 1080p video as mentioned in the article .
1080p needs a screen size of 1920x1080 .
If your going to go through this much effort to get the best picture would be better to just re-encode the video to your screens pixel size , would make it not stutter either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not all netbooks have low res.
There's a couple of 12 inch that have higher resolution, and some like the nokia booklet have 1280x720 on 10 inch.That still isn't going to play a 1080p video as mentioned in the article.
1080p needs a screen size of 1920x1080.
If your going to go through this much effort to get the best picture would be better to just re-encode the video to your screens pixel size, would make it not stutter either.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194808</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195540</id>
	<title>Re:**** HD Videos</title>
	<author>cryptoluddite</author>
	<datestamp>1266512880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The first feature is that the default config typically underclocks the CPU. OK, this makes the battery last longer, but not a lot longer.</p></div><p>You're sort of right.  Changing the cpu frequency on a netbook saves a small amount of power... a few percent.  Lowering the <i>core clock</i> speed saves <i>tons</i> of power... for instance there's about 30\% difference in idle power between the normal and low power modes using ASUS's utility to change the bus frequency.  This corresponds to hours of battery life, and it's a big deal.  Changing the cpu freq only saves minutes.</p><p>But getting linux to easily change the core clock speed is really difficult.  There's no icon that's just sitting there in the tray that you just click on like in Windows.  So lots of people using linux on their netbook don't understand that you can actually get a lot more battery life, and run a lot cooler.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The first feature is that the default config typically underclocks the CPU .
OK , this makes the battery last longer , but not a lot longer.You 're sort of right .
Changing the cpu frequency on a netbook saves a small amount of power... a few percent .
Lowering the core clock speed saves tons of power... for instance there 's about 30 \ % difference in idle power between the normal and low power modes using ASUS 's utility to change the bus frequency .
This corresponds to hours of battery life , and it 's a big deal .
Changing the cpu freq only saves minutes.But getting linux to easily change the core clock speed is really difficult .
There 's no icon that 's just sitting there in the tray that you just click on like in Windows .
So lots of people using linux on their netbook do n't understand that you can actually get a lot more battery life , and run a lot cooler .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first feature is that the default config typically underclocks the CPU.
OK, this makes the battery last longer, but not a lot longer.You're sort of right.
Changing the cpu frequency on a netbook saves a small amount of power... a few percent.
Lowering the core clock speed saves tons of power... for instance there's about 30\% difference in idle power between the normal and low power modes using ASUS's utility to change the bus frequency.
This corresponds to hours of battery life, and it's a big deal.
Changing the cpu freq only saves minutes.But getting linux to easily change the core clock speed is really difficult.
There's no icon that's just sitting there in the tray that you just click on like in Windows.
So lots of people using linux on their netbook don't understand that you can actually get a lot more battery life, and run a lot cooler.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194990</id>
	<title>Why is this here...</title>
	<author>mariushm</author>
	<datestamp>1266508380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And actually MPC-HC is capable of decoding videos using the hardware h264 decoder the laptop probably already has built in. CoreAVC would just decode the video in software.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And actually MPC-HC is capable of decoding videos using the hardware h264 decoder the laptop probably already has built in .
CoreAVC would just decode the video in software .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And actually MPC-HC is capable of decoding videos using the hardware h264 decoder the laptop probably already has built in.
CoreAVC would just decode the video in software.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195320</id>
	<title>Re:Broadcom chip</title>
	<author>KillShill</author>
	<datestamp>1266510840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's what monopolists are for.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's what monopolists are for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's what monopolists are for.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31201634</id>
	<title>Re:How does this CoreAVC compare to K-lite?</title>
	<author>tabdelgawad</author>
	<datestamp>1266605700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The latest free Divx codec decodes h.264 quite nicely and I'm almost certain it's multithreaded.  K-Lite codec pack includes the free Divx decoder as an option for decoding h.264, so that's another way to get it on your system besides downloading the Divx bundle.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The latest free Divx codec decodes h.264 quite nicely and I 'm almost certain it 's multithreaded .
K-Lite codec pack includes the free Divx decoder as an option for decoding h.264 , so that 's another way to get it on your system besides downloading the Divx bundle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The latest free Divx codec decodes h.264 quite nicely and I'm almost certain it's multithreaded.
K-Lite codec pack includes the free Divx decoder as an option for decoding h.264, so that's another way to get it on your system besides downloading the Divx bundle.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194538</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195132</id>
	<title>Re:And?</title>
	<author>neorush</author>
	<datestamp>1266509340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>That may not be easier
<a href="http://xkcd.com/349/" title="xkcd.com" rel="nofollow">http://xkcd.com/349/</a> [xkcd.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>That may not be easier http : //xkcd.com/349/ [ xkcd.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That may not be easier
http://xkcd.com/349/ [xkcd.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194278</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31196622</id>
	<title>DivX's AVC codec is free and faster than CoreAVC</title>
	<author>Fluffy Bunnies</author>
	<datestamp>1266571020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>K-lite just uses ffmpeg. Di-AVC also seems to beat CoreAVC but it's going to be payware too. DivX is free; just make sure you don't install any other crap from their installer. You only want their AVC filter, not the divx codec and certainly not their media player, etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>K-lite just uses ffmpeg .
Di-AVC also seems to beat CoreAVC but it 's going to be payware too .
DivX is free ; just make sure you do n't install any other crap from their installer .
You only want their AVC filter , not the divx codec and certainly not their media player , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>K-lite just uses ffmpeg.
Di-AVC also seems to beat CoreAVC but it's going to be payware too.
DivX is free; just make sure you don't install any other crap from their installer.
You only want their AVC filter, not the divx codec and certainly not their media player, etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194320</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31208586</id>
	<title>$9.95 makes it unshippable on netbooks</title>
	<author>wdef</author>
	<datestamp>1266656940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My guess is this is too much moola to add to the BOM for most netbooks, so don't expect CoreAVC to ship preinstalled.  Unless CoreAVC will do a massive bulk discount to OEMs.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My guess is this is too much moola to add to the BOM for most netbooks , so do n't expect CoreAVC to ship preinstalled .
Unless CoreAVC will do a massive bulk discount to OEMs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My guess is this is too much moola to add to the BOM for most netbooks, so don't expect CoreAVC to ship preinstalled.
Unless CoreAVC will do a massive bulk discount to OEMs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31196384</id>
	<title>Re:Err...</title>
	<author>cbope</author>
	<datestamp>1266610740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Exactly. I just don't understand all the whining... "I can't play HD videos on my netbook...". Your freaking SCREEN doesn't have the resolution for it, why even bother? Pal DVD's are already 576 lines, which is close enough to the majority of netbook screen's vertical resolution of 600 lines. Even if you could play back HD on a netbook, I doubt you can tell the difference on a small netbook screen, which was built to a price point to keep it cheap and lacks resolution.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly .
I just do n't understand all the whining... " I ca n't play HD videos on my netbook... " .
Your freaking SCREEN does n't have the resolution for it , why even bother ?
Pal DVD 's are already 576 lines , which is close enough to the majority of netbook screen 's vertical resolution of 600 lines .
Even if you could play back HD on a netbook , I doubt you can tell the difference on a small netbook screen , which was built to a price point to keep it cheap and lacks resolution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly.
I just don't understand all the whining... "I can't play HD videos on my netbook...".
Your freaking SCREEN doesn't have the resolution for it, why even bother?
Pal DVD's are already 576 lines, which is close enough to the majority of netbook screen's vertical resolution of 600 lines.
Even if you could play back HD on a netbook, I doubt you can tell the difference on a small netbook screen, which was built to a price point to keep it cheap and lacks resolution.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194618</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194926</id>
	<title>Re:And?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266507900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you're playing HD MKV files on Windows 7 just install DivX for Windows. It includes a media foundation component that lets Windows Media Player read the MKV file then decode it using DXVA. If you don't want to install the whole DivX bundle you can even get the component <a href="http://labs.divx.com/mkvwin7preview" title="divx.com">standalone from DivX Labs</a> [divx.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're playing HD MKV files on Windows 7 just install DivX for Windows .
It includes a media foundation component that lets Windows Media Player read the MKV file then decode it using DXVA .
If you do n't want to install the whole DivX bundle you can even get the component standalone from DivX Labs [ divx.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're playing HD MKV files on Windows 7 just install DivX for Windows.
It includes a media foundation component that lets Windows Media Player read the MKV file then decode it using DXVA.
If you don't want to install the whole DivX bundle you can even get the component standalone from DivX Labs [divx.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194278</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31205200</id>
	<title>free alternative</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266578580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://nunnally.ahmygoddess.net/watching-h264-videos-using-dxva/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //nunnally.ahmygoddess.net/watching-h264-videos-using-dxva/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://nunnally.ahmygoddess.net/watching-h264-videos-using-dxva/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31197558
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194618
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31196544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194618
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31197756
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194336
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194278
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194278
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31200076
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194376
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31199182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194278
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194554
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31197986
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194808
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194618
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194618
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31196622
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194320
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31196384
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194618
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194618
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31196824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194618
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31197406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194312
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195666
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195724
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194618
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31196464
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194376
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31197458
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195132
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194278
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195890
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194376
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194772
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31196802
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195250
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31202136
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194376
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195656
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194754
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194430
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194338
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31201634
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194538
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194320
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31196902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194278
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31196532
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194952
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194338
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31209130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194538
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194320
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31197486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194320
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194954
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194808
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194618
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_0116218_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31198038
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194808
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194618
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_0116218.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31198254
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_0116218.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195628
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_0116218.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194312
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195092
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_0116218.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194330
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195276
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31196532
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195666
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_0116218.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194990
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_0116218.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194320
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31196622
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31197486
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194538
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31201634
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31209130
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_0116218.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194386
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_0116218.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195250
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31196802
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_0116218.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194588
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_0116218.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194350
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195328
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31197406
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31197458
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31197558
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195656
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_0116218.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194338
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194952
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195440
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_0116218.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195922
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_0116218.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194300
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_0116218.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194430
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194754
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195562
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_0116218.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194278
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31196902
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194450
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31199182
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194926
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195132
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195492
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_0116218.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194484
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195540
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194772
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195664
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_0116218.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194554
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195320
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_0116218.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194618
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31196824
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194940
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195724
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194808
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31197986
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194954
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31198038
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31196544
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195104
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195060
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31196384
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_0116218.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194336
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31197756
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_0116218.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194608
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_0116218.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31208586
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_0116218.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31194376
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31195890
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31200076
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31202136
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_0116218.31196464
</commentlist>
</conversation>
