<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_24_0120245</id>
	<title>The Future of OpenSolaris</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1267006620000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>jjrff writes <i>"Phoronix has a little piece about <a href="http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news\_item&amp;px=ODAwNg">the future (or lack thereof) of OpenSolaris</a>. It appears based on <a href="http://www.sun.com/software/solaris/lifecycle.xml">the current support lifecycle</a>, OpenSolaris may be going away. There is a <a href="http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=124338&amp;tstart=0">fun thread</a> (read: mild flameage) on a ZFS list about it."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>jjrff writes " Phoronix has a little piece about the future ( or lack thereof ) of OpenSolaris .
It appears based on the current support lifecycle , OpenSolaris may be going away .
There is a fun thread ( read : mild flameage ) on a ZFS list about it .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>jjrff writes "Phoronix has a little piece about the future (or lack thereof) of OpenSolaris.
It appears based on the current support lifecycle, OpenSolaris may be going away.
There is a fun thread (read: mild flameage) on a ZFS list about it.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257406</id>
	<title>Fork?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265110380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Even if Oracle ditches Opensolaris all together, shouldn't the community keep going and shouldn't third party companies fill the hole left in the market with regards to support?</p><p>Or is this a question of reality not working out as the theory? Does that mean that, in a similar vein, Monty was right (and Eben was wrong) ranting and going to the EU about the fate of MySQL in the hands of Oracle?</p><p>(I don't know. I don't mean to imply anything. Just asking, sincerely.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Even if Oracle ditches Opensolaris all together , should n't the community keep going and should n't third party companies fill the hole left in the market with regards to support ? Or is this a question of reality not working out as the theory ?
Does that mean that , in a similar vein , Monty was right ( and Eben was wrong ) ranting and going to the EU about the fate of MySQL in the hands of Oracle ?
( I do n't know .
I do n't mean to imply anything .
Just asking , sincerely .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even if Oracle ditches Opensolaris all together, shouldn't the community keep going and shouldn't third party companies fill the hole left in the market with regards to support?Or is this a question of reality not working out as the theory?
Does that mean that, in a similar vein, Monty was right (and Eben was wrong) ranting and going to the EU about the fate of MySQL in the hands of Oracle?
(I don't know.
I don't mean to imply anything.
Just asking, sincerely.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258988</id>
	<title>Re:while we're here, what about linux zfs</title>
	<author>Ant P.</author>
	<datestamp>1265124540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of the major problems is that ZFS was designed as a huge blob of interdependent code, or in other words the complete opposite of the layered Linux VFS design. Even if they hadn't intentionally gone with an incompatible license it would still be a nightmare to port into the kernel, and that's effort that could be spent doing far more productive things (Btrfs, Tux3, Reiser4 etc.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the major problems is that ZFS was designed as a huge blob of interdependent code , or in other words the complete opposite of the layered Linux VFS design .
Even if they had n't intentionally gone with an incompatible license it would still be a nightmare to port into the kernel , and that 's effort that could be spent doing far more productive things ( Btrfs , Tux3 , Reiser4 etc .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the major problems is that ZFS was designed as a huge blob of interdependent code, or in other words the complete opposite of the layered Linux VFS design.
Even if they hadn't intentionally gone with an incompatible license it would still be a nightmare to port into the kernel, and that's effort that could be spent doing far more productive things (Btrfs, Tux3, Reiser4 etc.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257698</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259172</id>
	<title>Drivers are available by download</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265125620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Solaris and OpenSolaris have a well defined device driver interface, sample and real driver source code, and a stable ABI, so third-party ethernet and WiFi drivers are available for the common network devices that Sun themselves don't yet support:</p><p><a href="http://homepage2.nifty.com/mrym3/taiyodo/eng/" title="nifty.com" rel="nofollow">http://homepage2.nifty.com/mrym3/taiyodo/eng/</a> [nifty.com]<br><a href="http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=solaris+ethernet+drivers" title="lmgtfy.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=solaris+ethernet+drivers</a> [lmgtfy.com]</p><p>Put the downloaded drivers on a flash drive or your hard disk.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Solaris and OpenSolaris have a well defined device driver interface , sample and real driver source code , and a stable ABI , so third-party ethernet and WiFi drivers are available for the common network devices that Sun themselves do n't yet support : http : //homepage2.nifty.com/mrym3/taiyodo/eng/ [ nifty.com ] http : //www.lmgtfy.com/ ? q = solaris + ethernet + drivers [ lmgtfy.com ] Put the downloaded drivers on a flash drive or your hard disk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Solaris and OpenSolaris have a well defined device driver interface, sample and real driver source code, and a stable ABI, so third-party ethernet and WiFi drivers are available for the common network devices that Sun themselves don't yet support:http://homepage2.nifty.com/mrym3/taiyodo/eng/ [nifty.com]http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=solaris+ethernet+drivers [lmgtfy.com]Put the downloaded drivers on a flash drive or your hard disk.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259350</id>
	<title>Pure FUD</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265126580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is why I hate the Slashdot community.<br>Half retarded FUD posts like this spread like wildfire over the web.</p><p>Is there paid for support/software updates for Fedora? No you get your 6 months and then on to the next release. How much of stretch is to assume that the same will be true of OpenSolaris? OpenSolaris will have a similar relationship with Solaris 11 as Fedora has with RHEL.</p><p>So quit crying wolf. It makes you all look like terribly uninformed scaremongers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is why I hate the Slashdot community.Half retarded FUD posts like this spread like wildfire over the web.Is there paid for support/software updates for Fedora ?
No you get your 6 months and then on to the next release .
How much of stretch is to assume that the same will be true of OpenSolaris ?
OpenSolaris will have a similar relationship with Solaris 11 as Fedora has with RHEL.So quit crying wolf .
It makes you all look like terribly uninformed scaremongers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is why I hate the Slashdot community.Half retarded FUD posts like this spread like wildfire over the web.Is there paid for support/software updates for Fedora?
No you get your 6 months and then on to the next release.
How much of stretch is to assume that the same will be true of OpenSolaris?
OpenSolaris will have a similar relationship with Solaris 11 as Fedora has with RHEL.So quit crying wolf.
It makes you all look like terribly uninformed scaremongers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31263130</id>
	<title>Re:Well this sucks...</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1265142240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Deduplication looks to be a pretty cool feature - if you copy some data to another part of the HDD, and then you leave it a bit and your hoarding nature kicks in and you don't know whether you can delete it or not - no fear, ZFS will recognize the data as the same, only store it in one place (unless modified of course) and so there is no benefit to deleting the copy other than being a neat freak.</p></div><p>Actually, ZFS does that without deduplication.  It's a copy-on-write filesystem.  When you copy a file, it creates a link.  When you modify one copy, it duplicates the modified blocks and updates one of the copies to reference the new blocks.  Deduplication allows it to combine identical blocks from different sources.  For example, if you do periodic snapshots from a dozen workstations onto your ZFS server, dedup will let it store only one copy of the core OS files, rather than one copy per client per snapshot.  For a home user, it's not a huge win, but it might still be useful if you've got some spare CPU power.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Deduplication looks to be a pretty cool feature - if you copy some data to another part of the HDD , and then you leave it a bit and your hoarding nature kicks in and you do n't know whether you can delete it or not - no fear , ZFS will recognize the data as the same , only store it in one place ( unless modified of course ) and so there is no benefit to deleting the copy other than being a neat freak.Actually , ZFS does that without deduplication .
It 's a copy-on-write filesystem .
When you copy a file , it creates a link .
When you modify one copy , it duplicates the modified blocks and updates one of the copies to reference the new blocks .
Deduplication allows it to combine identical blocks from different sources .
For example , if you do periodic snapshots from a dozen workstations onto your ZFS server , dedup will let it store only one copy of the core OS files , rather than one copy per client per snapshot .
For a home user , it 's not a huge win , but it might still be useful if you 've got some spare CPU power .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Deduplication looks to be a pretty cool feature - if you copy some data to another part of the HDD, and then you leave it a bit and your hoarding nature kicks in and you don't know whether you can delete it or not - no fear, ZFS will recognize the data as the same, only store it in one place (unless modified of course) and so there is no benefit to deleting the copy other than being a neat freak.Actually, ZFS does that without deduplication.
It's a copy-on-write filesystem.
When you copy a file, it creates a link.
When you modify one copy, it duplicates the modified blocks and updates one of the copies to reference the new blocks.
Deduplication allows it to combine identical blocks from different sources.
For example, if you do periodic snapshots from a dozen workstations onto your ZFS server, dedup will let it store only one copy of the core OS files, rather than one copy per client per snapshot.
For a home user, it's not a huge win, but it might still be useful if you've got some spare CPU power.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257912</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31260354</id>
	<title>Re:Wonder if someone can help me here</title>
	<author>nomadic</author>
	<datestamp>1265130900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>slashdot to the way it used to be. That is, with some integrity</i>
<br>
<br>
Man I wish I had some mod points to mod you up funny.</htmltext>
<tokenext>slashdot to the way it used to be .
That is , with some integrity Man I wish I had some mod points to mod you up funny .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>slashdot to the way it used to be.
That is, with some integrity


Man I wish I had some mod points to mod you up funny.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259662</id>
	<title>Re:Well this sucks...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265127960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FWIW,  as someone who has invested somewhat heavily in the past in 3rd party filesystems and Linux... Be prepared to stop using ZFS under FreeBSD.</p><p>They can't take it away but unless the community fully takes it over and essentially forks it from Sun,  there will possibly be a time when it simply won't be the filesystem you think it is.   I had some large GNU/Linux systems with XFS and a couple systems with JFS and at one point I even had some ReiserFS systems (which was sort of supported)    IBM and SGI seem to have taken the "port it and it's done" approach and keeping their code up to snuff has fallen on to the community which just isn't that interested,  a couple SGI guys kind of kept fighting the good fight for a while but it looks like it has petered out,  IBM simply dumped it over the fence.   There were routine crashes when I'd update to a kernel provided by a distribution maker.  Then there was also the aspect of which rescue discs supported JFS or XFS,  many seem to but make sure they work before you bank on it, the whole idea in the first place was to have robust filesystems to keep your data safe but if you suffer a crash and your rescue discs won't access it then what do you do?   Ubuntu supports JFS as an option and I've seen it crash when loading the module and then attempting to mount a filesystem.   Then there have been some shifts in greater Linux that have lagged on these systems,  SELinux requires extended attributes which weren't supported and then not supported in some configurations for a while.   (If I'm not mistaken, XFS had xattr but then XFS on LVM didn't for a period of time,  for who knows what reasons.. seems a very odd limitation)     After a few years it just felt like I was on an island.  Then there were the barrier issues when the IO subsystem was redone,  these supposedly "faster" filesystems had some not so pathological cases where they'd slow way way down,  it was fixed with a configuration change but it was just one more thing you had to do differently..</p><p>Don't get me wrong,  for certain types of servers or something it might be a fine way to go.   The filesystems work and I never did lose data (except to reiserfs) but it sure felt like I was getting to a point where it could happen.  I cut everything over to ext3 and haven't really thought about it much since then.   On BSD,  if ZFS doesn't become <b> <i>the</i> </b> filesystem of choice,  then if Solaris closes source and maybe 3 revs of BSD later,  it could easily be an island.   ZFS does have the pooling and such so there are some things that are potentially very useful and unique to it but I never needed the things XFS could do that Ext3 couldn't and even now the limits of ext3 and ext4 are still well beyond what just about everyone will need and btrfs should be good by then.   I remember when FFS didn't get replaced with a logging filesystem because they added soft updates, if those guys have their own plans to make ffs2 or something and they are closer to the core BSD team then ZFS will be an island.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FWIW , as someone who has invested somewhat heavily in the past in 3rd party filesystems and Linux... Be prepared to stop using ZFS under FreeBSD.They ca n't take it away but unless the community fully takes it over and essentially forks it from Sun , there will possibly be a time when it simply wo n't be the filesystem you think it is .
I had some large GNU/Linux systems with XFS and a couple systems with JFS and at one point I even had some ReiserFS systems ( which was sort of supported ) IBM and SGI seem to have taken the " port it and it 's done " approach and keeping their code up to snuff has fallen on to the community which just is n't that interested , a couple SGI guys kind of kept fighting the good fight for a while but it looks like it has petered out , IBM simply dumped it over the fence .
There were routine crashes when I 'd update to a kernel provided by a distribution maker .
Then there was also the aspect of which rescue discs supported JFS or XFS , many seem to but make sure they work before you bank on it , the whole idea in the first place was to have robust filesystems to keep your data safe but if you suffer a crash and your rescue discs wo n't access it then what do you do ?
Ubuntu supports JFS as an option and I 've seen it crash when loading the module and then attempting to mount a filesystem .
Then there have been some shifts in greater Linux that have lagged on these systems , SELinux requires extended attributes which were n't supported and then not supported in some configurations for a while .
( If I 'm not mistaken , XFS had xattr but then XFS on LVM did n't for a period of time , for who knows what reasons.. seems a very odd limitation ) After a few years it just felt like I was on an island .
Then there were the barrier issues when the IO subsystem was redone , these supposedly " faster " filesystems had some not so pathological cases where they 'd slow way way down , it was fixed with a configuration change but it was just one more thing you had to do differently..Do n't get me wrong , for certain types of servers or something it might be a fine way to go .
The filesystems work and I never did lose data ( except to reiserfs ) but it sure felt like I was getting to a point where it could happen .
I cut everything over to ext3 and have n't really thought about it much since then .
On BSD , if ZFS does n't become the filesystem of choice , then if Solaris closes source and maybe 3 revs of BSD later , it could easily be an island .
ZFS does have the pooling and such so there are some things that are potentially very useful and unique to it but I never needed the things XFS could do that Ext3 could n't and even now the limits of ext3 and ext4 are still well beyond what just about everyone will need and btrfs should be good by then .
I remember when FFS did n't get replaced with a logging filesystem because they added soft updates , if those guys have their own plans to make ffs2 or something and they are closer to the core BSD team then ZFS will be an island .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FWIW,  as someone who has invested somewhat heavily in the past in 3rd party filesystems and Linux... Be prepared to stop using ZFS under FreeBSD.They can't take it away but unless the community fully takes it over and essentially forks it from Sun,  there will possibly be a time when it simply won't be the filesystem you think it is.
I had some large GNU/Linux systems with XFS and a couple systems with JFS and at one point I even had some ReiserFS systems (which was sort of supported)    IBM and SGI seem to have taken the "port it and it's done" approach and keeping their code up to snuff has fallen on to the community which just isn't that interested,  a couple SGI guys kind of kept fighting the good fight for a while but it looks like it has petered out,  IBM simply dumped it over the fence.
There were routine crashes when I'd update to a kernel provided by a distribution maker.
Then there was also the aspect of which rescue discs supported JFS or XFS,  many seem to but make sure they work before you bank on it, the whole idea in the first place was to have robust filesystems to keep your data safe but if you suffer a crash and your rescue discs won't access it then what do you do?
Ubuntu supports JFS as an option and I've seen it crash when loading the module and then attempting to mount a filesystem.
Then there have been some shifts in greater Linux that have lagged on these systems,  SELinux requires extended attributes which weren't supported and then not supported in some configurations for a while.
(If I'm not mistaken, XFS had xattr but then XFS on LVM didn't for a period of time,  for who knows what reasons.. seems a very odd limitation)     After a few years it just felt like I was on an island.
Then there were the barrier issues when the IO subsystem was redone,  these supposedly "faster" filesystems had some not so pathological cases where they'd slow way way down,  it was fixed with a configuration change but it was just one more thing you had to do differently..Don't get me wrong,  for certain types of servers or something it might be a fine way to go.
The filesystems work and I never did lose data (except to reiserfs) but it sure felt like I was getting to a point where it could happen.
I cut everything over to ext3 and haven't really thought about it much since then.
On BSD,  if ZFS doesn't become  the  filesystem of choice,  then if Solaris closes source and maybe 3 revs of BSD later,  it could easily be an island.
ZFS does have the pooling and such so there are some things that are potentially very useful and unique to it but I never needed the things XFS could do that Ext3 couldn't and even now the limits of ext3 and ext4 are still well beyond what just about everyone will need and btrfs should be good by then.
I remember when FFS didn't get replaced with a logging filesystem because they added soft updates, if those guys have their own plans to make ffs2 or something and they are closer to the core BSD team then ZFS will be an island.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257912</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257680</id>
	<title>Well this sucks...</title>
	<author>jedirock</author>
	<datestamp>1265113740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was planning to build a file server using OpenSolaris in the coming weeks, but I may have to rethink that now.</p><p>Anyone know a good place to get access to ZFS in another place? Would BSD or FUSE on Linux be better?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was planning to build a file server using OpenSolaris in the coming weeks , but I may have to rethink that now.Anyone know a good place to get access to ZFS in another place ?
Would BSD or FUSE on Linux be better ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was planning to build a file server using OpenSolaris in the coming weeks, but I may have to rethink that now.Anyone know a good place to get access to ZFS in another place?
Would BSD or FUSE on Linux be better?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258516</id>
	<title>Re:What is the reason for abandon fashion lately?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265122020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; When will open source folks understand that older version support, especially for server oriented things is a big deal?</p><p>LOL<br>Debian gets it perfectly. So "open source folks" is too broad a definition.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; When will open source folks understand that older version support , especially for server oriented things is a big deal ? LOLDebian gets it perfectly .
So " open source folks " is too broad a definition .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; When will open source folks understand that older version support, especially for server oriented things is a big deal?LOLDebian gets it perfectly.
So "open source folks" is too broad a definition.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259120</id>
	<title>Re:Well this sucks...</title>
	<author>0100010001010011</author>
	<datestamp>1265125260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Latest FreeBSD supports ZFS on root. Which is nothing short of awesome.</p><p>I haven't tried yet, but I want to pull one of the hard drives and see if it still boots (it should).</p><p>I have 2x2TB as / and 5x1.5TB in RAIDZ2 for my multimedia archive. Irreplaceable family photos are on both (and offsite backed up.)</p><p>It's taken me a while to get used to the "BSD way" over the "Linux Way" and still frequent google with "Freebesd how to X"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Latest FreeBSD supports ZFS on root .
Which is nothing short of awesome.I have n't tried yet , but I want to pull one of the hard drives and see if it still boots ( it should ) .I have 2x2TB as / and 5x1.5TB in RAIDZ2 for my multimedia archive .
Irreplaceable family photos are on both ( and offsite backed up .
) It 's taken me a while to get used to the " BSD way " over the " Linux Way " and still frequent google with " Freebesd how to X "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Latest FreeBSD supports ZFS on root.
Which is nothing short of awesome.I haven't tried yet, but I want to pull one of the hard drives and see if it still boots (it should).I have 2x2TB as / and 5x1.5TB in RAIDZ2 for my multimedia archive.
Irreplaceable family photos are on both (and offsite backed up.
)It's taken me a while to get used to the "BSD way" over the "Linux Way" and still frequent google with "Freebesd how to X"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257680</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257694</id>
	<title>Re:Hardware/apps</title>
	<author>HuguesT</author>
	<datestamp>1265113920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ZFS will probably have to be reimplemented somehow to go on Linux. We'll have to wait for ext5 or 6 to get a reasonable subset of ZFS feature list.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ZFS will probably have to be reimplemented somehow to go on Linux .
We 'll have to wait for ext5 or 6 to get a reasonable subset of ZFS feature list .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ZFS will probably have to be reimplemented somehow to go on Linux.
We'll have to wait for ext5 or 6 to get a reasonable subset of ZFS feature list.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258920</id>
	<title>Sun/Oracle and Sun 7000 Storage w/OpenSolaris</title>
	<author>slieberg</author>
	<datestamp>1265124240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One thing that is interesting is that Oracle has stated that they are committed  to the Sun Open Storage Line(Sun 7000 Line) --&gt; http://searchstorage.techtarget.com/news/article/0,289142,sid5\_gci1379858,00.html and currently that line is built on OpenSolaris. So it will be interesting to see what's going to happen.  I had heard they will be refreshing some of their models in the next couple months. I just put in an order for a Sun 7110 actually.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One thing that is interesting is that Oracle has stated that they are committed to the Sun Open Storage Line ( Sun 7000 Line ) -- &gt; http : //searchstorage.techtarget.com/news/article/0,289142,sid5 \ _gci1379858,00.html and currently that line is built on OpenSolaris .
So it will be interesting to see what 's going to happen .
I had heard they will be refreshing some of their models in the next couple months .
I just put in an order for a Sun 7110 actually .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One thing that is interesting is that Oracle has stated that they are committed  to the Sun Open Storage Line(Sun 7000 Line) --&gt; http://searchstorage.techtarget.com/news/article/0,289142,sid5\_gci1379858,00.html and currently that line is built on OpenSolaris.
So it will be interesting to see what's going to happen.
I had heard they will be refreshing some of their models in the next couple months.
I just put in an order for a Sun 7110 actually.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259242</id>
	<title>Re:Bugger.</title>
	<author>durdur</author>
	<datestamp>1265125980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sun was going to get acquired. The only alternative to Oracle was probably a deal with IBM. You can speculate if IBM would have been a better owner, but IMHO they'd have had many of the same corporate priorities: making money and cutting losses on things they couldn't make money on. If Sun had focused on these things earlier, rather than doing crazy stuff like spending $1B on mySQL, they might have had a chance surviving on their own.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sun was going to get acquired .
The only alternative to Oracle was probably a deal with IBM .
You can speculate if IBM would have been a better owner , but IMHO they 'd have had many of the same corporate priorities : making money and cutting losses on things they could n't make money on .
If Sun had focused on these things earlier , rather than doing crazy stuff like spending $ 1B on mySQL , they might have had a chance surviving on their own .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sun was going to get acquired.
The only alternative to Oracle was probably a deal with IBM.
You can speculate if IBM would have been a better owner, but IMHO they'd have had many of the same corporate priorities: making money and cutting losses on things they couldn't make money on.
If Sun had focused on these things earlier, rather than doing crazy stuff like spending $1B on mySQL, they might have had a chance surviving on their own.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258374</id>
	<title>IBM &amp; AIX - the last man standing</title>
	<author>Colin Smith</author>
	<datestamp>1265120880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nobody cares about open solaris. Nobody in their right mind would have chosen it as a platform.</p><p>I'm not surprised that IBM is the last company, AIX the last proprietary unix platform. Power the last proprietary hardware platform...</p><p>HP &amp; Itanium? Laughable... And Linux on x86 has eaten the rest.</p><p>IBM 'get' services in the way the rest never have. They get that it's the bloody hardware which matters. This is why power is hitting 5GHz. The OS is just there to make it work. You want the fastest, lowest latency, highest throughput. You use IBM. You just want it to work and are on a budget? Linux.</p><p>The 'executives' of the rest of the companies clearly didn't know or care what their customers want, or what their business really is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nobody cares about open solaris .
Nobody in their right mind would have chosen it as a platform.I 'm not surprised that IBM is the last company , AIX the last proprietary unix platform .
Power the last proprietary hardware platform...HP &amp; Itanium ?
Laughable... And Linux on x86 has eaten the rest.IBM 'get ' services in the way the rest never have .
They get that it 's the bloody hardware which matters .
This is why power is hitting 5GHz .
The OS is just there to make it work .
You want the fastest , lowest latency , highest throughput .
You use IBM .
You just want it to work and are on a budget ?
Linux.The 'executives ' of the rest of the companies clearly did n't know or care what their customers want , or what their business really is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nobody cares about open solaris.
Nobody in their right mind would have chosen it as a platform.I'm not surprised that IBM is the last company, AIX the last proprietary unix platform.
Power the last proprietary hardware platform...HP &amp; Itanium?
Laughable... And Linux on x86 has eaten the rest.IBM 'get' services in the way the rest never have.
They get that it's the bloody hardware which matters.
This is why power is hitting 5GHz.
The OS is just there to make it work.
You want the fastest, lowest latency, highest throughput.
You use IBM.
You just want it to work and are on a budget?
Linux.The 'executives' of the rest of the companies clearly didn't know or care what their customers want, or what their business really is.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258418</id>
	<title>It is a culture problem</title>
	<author>Ilgaz</author>
	<datestamp>1265121180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Interestingly, all the issues you have exists on a typical Desktop/Laptop. Especially sound card and Wi-Fi. I guess the issue with OpenSolaris is the company and its culture. Sun is a company who makes gigantic servers having insane amounts of uptime and most of their products (except couple of workstations) doesn't even have the parts like sound card or wifi.</p><p>A good example is Java, for a decade, people using Java plugin had to deal with their hard disk going nuts right after running a basic applet. What did they (finally!) do? A simple, 1 MB application running in low priority that caches most used classes. Problem instantly got fixed. Same guys, while fixing that issue, had the marvelous idea of adding something to startup to check for java updates, running 24/7. That is PR suicide on Windows land, that is one thing users hate more than a virus. Of course, they are disconnected from average desktop user so they thought it won't bother. It didn't change the mind of thousands to flame them. They could, use Apple's method of using system's own scheduler on Windows (for software update) and get away with it.</p><p>I really think it is a culture problem for Sun, they should really get rid of "lets go big on desktop" mad idea and fix their already problematic products like Desktop Java, Open Office. They could start with taking over OS X Java development from Apple, Apple clearly doesn't care and doesn't bother at all. Open Office? They managed to copy MS Office with all its problems in open source. I remember what a great thing it was while it was Star Office. It is like, they code it in a way that everyone has a Solaris Workstation with 4GB of RAM.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Interestingly , all the issues you have exists on a typical Desktop/Laptop .
Especially sound card and Wi-Fi .
I guess the issue with OpenSolaris is the company and its culture .
Sun is a company who makes gigantic servers having insane amounts of uptime and most of their products ( except couple of workstations ) does n't even have the parts like sound card or wifi.A good example is Java , for a decade , people using Java plugin had to deal with their hard disk going nuts right after running a basic applet .
What did they ( finally !
) do ?
A simple , 1 MB application running in low priority that caches most used classes .
Problem instantly got fixed .
Same guys , while fixing that issue , had the marvelous idea of adding something to startup to check for java updates , running 24/7 .
That is PR suicide on Windows land , that is one thing users hate more than a virus .
Of course , they are disconnected from average desktop user so they thought it wo n't bother .
It did n't change the mind of thousands to flame them .
They could , use Apple 's method of using system 's own scheduler on Windows ( for software update ) and get away with it.I really think it is a culture problem for Sun , they should really get rid of " lets go big on desktop " mad idea and fix their already problematic products like Desktop Java , Open Office .
They could start with taking over OS X Java development from Apple , Apple clearly does n't care and does n't bother at all .
Open Office ?
They managed to copy MS Office with all its problems in open source .
I remember what a great thing it was while it was Star Office .
It is like , they code it in a way that everyone has a Solaris Workstation with 4GB of RAM .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interestingly, all the issues you have exists on a typical Desktop/Laptop.
Especially sound card and Wi-Fi.
I guess the issue with OpenSolaris is the company and its culture.
Sun is a company who makes gigantic servers having insane amounts of uptime and most of their products (except couple of workstations) doesn't even have the parts like sound card or wifi.A good example is Java, for a decade, people using Java plugin had to deal with their hard disk going nuts right after running a basic applet.
What did they (finally!
) do?
A simple, 1 MB application running in low priority that caches most used classes.
Problem instantly got fixed.
Same guys, while fixing that issue, had the marvelous idea of adding something to startup to check for java updates, running 24/7.
That is PR suicide on Windows land, that is one thing users hate more than a virus.
Of course, they are disconnected from average desktop user so they thought it won't bother.
It didn't change the mind of thousands to flame them.
They could, use Apple's method of using system's own scheduler on Windows (for software update) and get away with it.I really think it is a culture problem for Sun, they should really get rid of "lets go big on desktop" mad idea and fix their already problematic products like Desktop Java, Open Office.
They could start with taking over OS X Java development from Apple, Apple clearly doesn't care and doesn't bother at all.
Open Office?
They managed to copy MS Office with all its problems in open source.
I remember what a great thing it was while it was Star Office.
It is like, they code it in a way that everyone has a Solaris Workstation with 4GB of RAM.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262918</id>
	<title>Re:Another "dead unix" for the collection.</title>
	<author>DesScorp</author>
	<datestamp>1265141460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>soon: OpenSolaris<br>and if Larry Ellison has a bad dream: Solaris</p><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-(</p></div><p>As far as Ellison is concerned, OpenSolaris probably doesn't equal Solaris. A lot of people thought that GPL'ing Solaris was a stupid marketing stunt that wasn't going to make Sun any money. Ellison has repeatedly stated that he wants to pump money into both Solaris and Sparc. The difference is that he's not going to fool around with the low end. He's going to refocus Sun/Sparc on the high end, which is where you can make a decent business case for a Sparc CPU like the T2. None of Sun's lower end processors... stuff like the UltraSparc III line... can possibly compete.</p><p>Sparc is still popular in Japan, and considering Ellison's fondness for Japan and its industrial culture, don't be terribly surprised if a deal is struck with Fujitstu to eventually produce Sun's hardware for them, with Oracle/Sun basically just doing most of the design and development work. If you ARE going to commit yourself to Sun/Sparc, then spinning off Fujitsu's semiconductor business and merging it with Oracle/Sun makes a lot of sense; a melding of Silicon Valley marketing/software/design with Japanese hardware industry. Since the T1 and T2's designs were GPL'd by the previous failed regime... yes, Schwartz... we're probably going to see a new CPU design in the coming years that will decidedly <i>not</i> be open sourced... and again, focused almost completely on the business high end.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>soon : OpenSolarisand if Larry Ellison has a bad dream : Solaris : - ( As far as Ellison is concerned , OpenSolaris probably does n't equal Solaris .
A lot of people thought that GPL'ing Solaris was a stupid marketing stunt that was n't going to make Sun any money .
Ellison has repeatedly stated that he wants to pump money into both Solaris and Sparc .
The difference is that he 's not going to fool around with the low end .
He 's going to refocus Sun/Sparc on the high end , which is where you can make a decent business case for a Sparc CPU like the T2 .
None of Sun 's lower end processors... stuff like the UltraSparc III line... can possibly compete.Sparc is still popular in Japan , and considering Ellison 's fondness for Japan and its industrial culture , do n't be terribly surprised if a deal is struck with Fujitstu to eventually produce Sun 's hardware for them , with Oracle/Sun basically just doing most of the design and development work .
If you ARE going to commit yourself to Sun/Sparc , then spinning off Fujitsu 's semiconductor business and merging it with Oracle/Sun makes a lot of sense ; a melding of Silicon Valley marketing/software/design with Japanese hardware industry .
Since the T1 and T2 's designs were GPL 'd by the previous failed regime... yes , Schwartz... we 're probably going to see a new CPU design in the coming years that will decidedly not be open sourced... and again , focused almost completely on the business high end .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>soon: OpenSolarisand if Larry Ellison has a bad dream: Solaris :-(As far as Ellison is concerned, OpenSolaris probably doesn't equal Solaris.
A lot of people thought that GPL'ing Solaris was a stupid marketing stunt that wasn't going to make Sun any money.
Ellison has repeatedly stated that he wants to pump money into both Solaris and Sparc.
The difference is that he's not going to fool around with the low end.
He's going to refocus Sun/Sparc on the high end, which is where you can make a decent business case for a Sparc CPU like the T2.
None of Sun's lower end processors... stuff like the UltraSparc III line... can possibly compete.Sparc is still popular in Japan, and considering Ellison's fondness for Japan and its industrial culture, don't be terribly surprised if a deal is struck with Fujitstu to eventually produce Sun's hardware for them, with Oracle/Sun basically just doing most of the design and development work.
If you ARE going to commit yourself to Sun/Sparc, then spinning off Fujitsu's semiconductor business and merging it with Oracle/Sun makes a lot of sense; a melding of Silicon Valley marketing/software/design with Japanese hardware industry.
Since the T1 and T2's designs were GPL'd by the previous failed regime... yes, Schwartz... we're probably going to see a new CPU design in the coming years that will decidedly not be open sourced... and again, focused almost completely on the business high end.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257452</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258000</id>
	<title>Not likely</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265117220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Even if ZFS was GPL'ed I very much doubt it could displace Btrfs in the Linux land. Not only because the COW-friendly B-trees of Btrfs look more clean, but because ZFS is not just a filesystem and would require a lot of work. ZFS is a complete reimplementation of everything between the VFS layer and the disk driver, including cache management. Solaris has two IO stacks living together, the old one (UFS, FAT, etc) and the ZFS one. I doubt the Linux hackers would accept something like that in Linux, they would probably require to drop everthing that it's not the filesystem (if Sun wasn't able to make UFS work with the ZFS block subsystem I doubt you can adapt it to work well with the myriad of filesystems that Linux supports). Btrfs in the other hand it's designed to fit in Linux perfectly, and it's already being used by early adopters anyway (I've been using it for 4 months on my desktop with no problems at all)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Even if ZFS was GPL'ed I very much doubt it could displace Btrfs in the Linux land .
Not only because the COW-friendly B-trees of Btrfs look more clean , but because ZFS is not just a filesystem and would require a lot of work .
ZFS is a complete reimplementation of everything between the VFS layer and the disk driver , including cache management .
Solaris has two IO stacks living together , the old one ( UFS , FAT , etc ) and the ZFS one .
I doubt the Linux hackers would accept something like that in Linux , they would probably require to drop everthing that it 's not the filesystem ( if Sun was n't able to make UFS work with the ZFS block subsystem I doubt you can adapt it to work well with the myriad of filesystems that Linux supports ) .
Btrfs in the other hand it 's designed to fit in Linux perfectly , and it 's already being used by early adopters anyway ( I 've been using it for 4 months on my desktop with no problems at all )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even if ZFS was GPL'ed I very much doubt it could displace Btrfs in the Linux land.
Not only because the COW-friendly B-trees of Btrfs look more clean, but because ZFS is not just a filesystem and would require a lot of work.
ZFS is a complete reimplementation of everything between the VFS layer and the disk driver, including cache management.
Solaris has two IO stacks living together, the old one (UFS, FAT, etc) and the ZFS one.
I doubt the Linux hackers would accept something like that in Linux, they would probably require to drop everthing that it's not the filesystem (if Sun wasn't able to make UFS work with the ZFS block subsystem I doubt you can adapt it to work well with the myriad of filesystems that Linux supports).
Btrfs in the other hand it's designed to fit in Linux perfectly, and it's already being used by early adopters anyway (I've been using it for 4 months on my desktop with no problems at all)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257698</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257622</id>
	<title>Re:Bugger.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265113020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>postgres?</htmltext>
<tokenext>postgres ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>postgres?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31260686</id>
	<title>I wish Oracle would GPL ZFS</title>
	<author>melted</author>
	<datestamp>1265132340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And some other Solaris tech. Heck, they should GPL the whole thing and get a group of engineers to port the juiciest morsels of it to Linux. That way, Solaris going away would be much less of a loss, and Linus would be a happy man (he said, half-jokingly, he wants Solaris to die<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And some other Solaris tech .
Heck , they should GPL the whole thing and get a group of engineers to port the juiciest morsels of it to Linux .
That way , Solaris going away would be much less of a loss , and Linus would be a happy man ( he said , half-jokingly , he wants Solaris to die : - ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And some other Solaris tech.
Heck, they should GPL the whole thing and get a group of engineers to port the juiciest morsels of it to Linux.
That way, Solaris going away would be much less of a loss, and Linus would be a happy man (he said, half-jokingly, he wants Solaris to die :-).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257418</id>
	<title>Re:Bugger.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265110500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Synergy"?</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Synergy " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Synergy"?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257894</id>
	<title>Opensolaris != Solaris</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265116140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Note that Opensolaris and Solaris are two different things...Opensolaris is to Solaris what Fedora is to Red Hat. Oracle is going to support and invest in Solaris, it's opensolaris what may change.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Note that Opensolaris and Solaris are two different things...Opensolaris is to Solaris what Fedora is to Red Hat .
Oracle is going to support and invest in Solaris , it 's opensolaris what may change .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Note that Opensolaris and Solaris are two different things...Opensolaris is to Solaris what Fedora is to Red Hat.
Oracle is going to support and invest in Solaris, it's opensolaris what may change.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258108</id>
	<title>Re:while we're here, what about linux zfs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265118420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>almost exactly the same as the license issues that stop FAT32 being in the kernel. microsofts implementation of FAT32 was not GPL compatable, so the code could not be copy'n'pasted into Linux. Some one had to sit down and write a GPL implementation of FAT32. of course there is no promise that MS wont say you infringed their patents.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>almost exactly the same as the license issues that stop FAT32 being in the kernel .
microsofts implementation of FAT32 was not GPL compatable , so the code could not be copy'n'pasted into Linux .
Some one had to sit down and write a GPL implementation of FAT32 .
of course there is no promise that MS wont say you infringed their patents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>almost exactly the same as the license issues that stop FAT32 being in the kernel.
microsofts implementation of FAT32 was not GPL compatable, so the code could not be copy'n'pasted into Linux.
Some one had to sit down and write a GPL implementation of FAT32.
of course there is no promise that MS wont say you infringed their patents.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257698</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31265914</id>
	<title>Move to FBSD?</title>
	<author>ducomputergeek</author>
	<datestamp>1265110860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FreeBSD fully supports ZFS and DTRACE in version 8.  Version 7 ZFS was still listed as experimental.  I know we looked at OpenSolaris, but once those features were in FreeBSD, we decided to stick with what we had.  (That being said, we're still running FBSD 6.x on the production machines)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FreeBSD fully supports ZFS and DTRACE in version 8 .
Version 7 ZFS was still listed as experimental .
I know we looked at OpenSolaris , but once those features were in FreeBSD , we decided to stick with what we had .
( That being said , we 're still running FBSD 6.x on the production machines )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FreeBSD fully supports ZFS and DTRACE in version 8.
Version 7 ZFS was still listed as experimental.
I know we looked at OpenSolaris, but once those features were in FreeBSD, we decided to stick with what we had.
(That being said, we're still running FBSD 6.x on the production machines)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259868</id>
	<title>Solaris is not gone, neither is SPARC.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265128740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oracle also gets services.</p><p>They are selling the full integratade package, the layers they were missing where Virtualisation/OS and hardware. With Sun now they have that.</p><p>Yesterday Oracle presented in London part of their strategy (in the Royal Oper House, nice venue, great food, did I win the iPad?) and both Sun hardware/virtualization and Solaris are there.</p><p>Right now Oracle is making available virtual machines in a similar fashion to what is possible with VMware. Even LDOMs have been renamed to OracleVM . And you can download them for free without paying any licenses.</p><p>If Oracle is planning to ditch Solaris and SPARC then they have to explain why they had Sun hadware in central stage as the solution for "private clouds" they were parading all day yesterday during their first main presentation in Europe since they got Sun.....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oracle also gets services.They are selling the full integratade package , the layers they were missing where Virtualisation/OS and hardware .
With Sun now they have that.Yesterday Oracle presented in London part of their strategy ( in the Royal Oper House , nice venue , great food , did I win the iPad ?
) and both Sun hardware/virtualization and Solaris are there.Right now Oracle is making available virtual machines in a similar fashion to what is possible with VMware .
Even LDOMs have been renamed to OracleVM .
And you can download them for free without paying any licenses.If Oracle is planning to ditch Solaris and SPARC then they have to explain why they had Sun hadware in central stage as the solution for " private clouds " they were parading all day yesterday during their first main presentation in Europe since they got Sun.... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oracle also gets services.They are selling the full integratade package, the layers they were missing where Virtualisation/OS and hardware.
With Sun now they have that.Yesterday Oracle presented in London part of their strategy (in the Royal Oper House, nice venue, great food, did I win the iPad?
) and both Sun hardware/virtualization and Solaris are there.Right now Oracle is making available virtual machines in a similar fashion to what is possible with VMware.
Even LDOMs have been renamed to OracleVM .
And you can download them for free without paying any licenses.If Oracle is planning to ditch Solaris and SPARC then they have to explain why they had Sun hadware in central stage as the solution for "private clouds" they were parading all day yesterday during their first main presentation in Europe since they got Sun.....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257356</id>
	<title>FUD</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265109780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nothing about this says OpenSolaris is going away. Just support for older versions</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nothing about this says OpenSolaris is going away .
Just support for older versions</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nothing about this says OpenSolaris is going away.
Just support for older versions</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257778</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265114880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who cares.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who cares .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who cares.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257978</id>
	<title>Re:Well this sucks...</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1265116980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FUSE involves overhead. You don't want to use it when you're trying to achieve maximum performance.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FUSE involves overhead .
You do n't want to use it when you 're trying to achieve maximum performance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FUSE involves overhead.
You don't want to use it when you're trying to achieve maximum performance.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257680</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259650</id>
	<title>Re:Well this sucks...</title>
	<author>cbhacking</author>
	<datestamp>1265127900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not sure if the project is still alive or not, but might the DesktopBSD bits be useful here? FreeBSD with a pre-installed/configured X server and KDE. I tried it once, and rather liked it, but it's kernel was a full version behind the actual FreeBSD codebase (6.something when FreeBSD was at 7.2 or somesuch). There was a beta version using 7.x that I never got around to trying, and this was all several years ago, but at the time it was a pretty nice setup, and according to their site you could simply install their userland components on top of a base FreeBSD system if you wanted to, and get what was essentially the result of using their nice graphical installer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not sure if the project is still alive or not , but might the DesktopBSD bits be useful here ?
FreeBSD with a pre-installed/configured X server and KDE .
I tried it once , and rather liked it , but it 's kernel was a full version behind the actual FreeBSD codebase ( 6.something when FreeBSD was at 7.2 or somesuch ) .
There was a beta version using 7.x that I never got around to trying , and this was all several years ago , but at the time it was a pretty nice setup , and according to their site you could simply install their userland components on top of a base FreeBSD system if you wanted to , and get what was essentially the result of using their nice graphical installer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not sure if the project is still alive or not, but might the DesktopBSD bits be useful here?
FreeBSD with a pre-installed/configured X server and KDE.
I tried it once, and rather liked it, but it's kernel was a full version behind the actual FreeBSD codebase (6.something when FreeBSD was at 7.2 or somesuch).
There was a beta version using 7.x that I never got around to trying, and this was all several years ago, but at the time it was a pretty nice setup, and according to their site you could simply install their userland components on top of a base FreeBSD system if you wanted to, and get what was essentially the result of using their nice graphical installer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257912</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258078</id>
	<title>Backspace in the Opensolaris/x86 console pls</title>
	<author>crispi</author>
	<datestamp>1265118180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>solaris console login: ^H</p><p>Grrrr.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>solaris console login : ^ HGrrrr .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>solaris console login: ^HGrrrr.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257654</id>
	<title>Re:Bugger.</title>
	<author>ubersoldat2k7</author>
	<datestamp>1265113440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>SUN's website changing its color to red instead of that gay blue?</htmltext>
<tokenext>SUN 's website changing its color to red instead of that gay blue ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SUN's website changing its color to red instead of that gay blue?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258022</id>
	<title>Re:FUD</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265117400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So you are saying you are able to get support for the current OpenSolaris version? It seems to me that is impossible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So you are saying you are able to get support for the current OpenSolaris version ?
It seems to me that is impossible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you are saying you are able to get support for the current OpenSolaris version?
It seems to me that is impossible.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258616</id>
	<title>Re:while we're here, what about linux zfs</title>
	<author>Rysc</author>
	<datestamp>1265122680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are some other nice things about solaris/opensolaris. Linux distributions could learn a lot about integration from looking at how solaris solves some of its problems. Not that they're perfect, but compared to Linux "throw everything in a big pile" distributions it's better.</p><p>And of course there's DTrace. too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are some other nice things about solaris/opensolaris .
Linux distributions could learn a lot about integration from looking at how solaris solves some of its problems .
Not that they 're perfect , but compared to Linux " throw everything in a big pile " distributions it 's better.And of course there 's DTrace .
too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are some other nice things about solaris/opensolaris.
Linux distributions could learn a lot about integration from looking at how solaris solves some of its problems.
Not that they're perfect, but compared to Linux "throw everything in a big pile" distributions it's better.And of course there's DTrace.
too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257698</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31264666</id>
	<title>Re:IBM &amp; AIX - the last man standing</title>
	<author>ishobo</author>
	<datestamp>1265105760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Gee, I feel the same way about Linux</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Gee , I feel the same way about Linux</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gee, I feel the same way about Linux</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258374</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257780</id>
	<title>Re:Another "dead unix" for the collection.</title>
	<author>segedunum</author>
	<datestamp>1265114940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When IBM decices to cut maintenance and development costs on AIX, which they're already showing signs of doing, you can add that to your list.</htmltext>
<tokenext>When IBM decices to cut maintenance and development costs on AIX , which they 're already showing signs of doing , you can add that to your list .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When IBM decices to cut maintenance and development costs on AIX, which they're already showing signs of doing, you can add that to your list.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257452</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31260040</id>
	<title>WHat are you talking about?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265129520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pretty much all the GNU chain is availilable.</p><p>Sun itslef put GNOME in place as the dsktop envirnoment.</p><p>Apache, perl, MySql, PHP.</p><p>What exactly are you missing?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pretty much all the GNU chain is availilable.Sun itslef put GNOME in place as the dsktop envirnoment.Apache , perl , MySql , PHP.What exactly are you missing ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pretty much all the GNU chain is availilable.Sun itslef put GNOME in place as the dsktop envirnoment.Apache, perl, MySql, PHP.What exactly are you missing?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259310</id>
	<title>Re:Another "dead unix" for the collection.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265126340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>More bullshit from an WinBlows/Linsucks fanboi who still hasn't figured out that quality and stability matter. Go back to writing that killer clock app you've been trying to get working for the last ten years.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>More bullshit from an WinBlows/Linsucks fanboi who still has n't figured out that quality and stability matter .
Go back to writing that killer clock app you 've been trying to get working for the last ten years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More bullshit from an WinBlows/Linsucks fanboi who still hasn't figured out that quality and stability matter.
Go back to writing that killer clock app you've been trying to get working for the last ten years.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257452</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31260704</id>
	<title>Re:What is the reason for abandon fashion lately?</title>
	<author>Ltap</author>
	<datestamp>1265132400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No. There is plenty of support for older stuff - look at Apache 1.
<br> <br>
You're saying "oh well, open-source devs should support users who update once every ten years." Why? If you have obsolete software, you suffer consequences like additional exploits and fewer features. This is a bad thing, and the companies' idea that they can just install something and then leave it written in stone is bad, and lazy, and should stop.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
There is plenty of support for older stuff - look at Apache 1 .
You 're saying " oh well , open-source devs should support users who update once every ten years .
" Why ?
If you have obsolete software , you suffer consequences like additional exploits and fewer features .
This is a bad thing , and the companies ' idea that they can just install something and then leave it written in stone is bad , and lazy , and should stop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
There is plenty of support for older stuff - look at Apache 1.
You're saying "oh well, open-source devs should support users who update once every ten years.
" Why?
If you have obsolete software, you suffer consequences like additional exploits and fewer features.
This is a bad thing, and the companies' idea that they can just install something and then leave it written in stone is bad, and lazy, and should stop.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258288</id>
	<title>What is the reason for abandon fashion lately?</title>
	<author>Ilgaz</author>
	<datestamp>1265120340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When will open source folks understand that older version support, especially for server oriented things is a big deal?</p><p>There is a company who makes living with OS upgrades/sales and they still release updates for Windows XP you know. An OS from 2003 or something.</p><p>Right, they don't release directx 11 for XP but at least their consumers (and IT guys) don't feel abandoned in sense of security updates.</p><p>Same mistake is being done almost monthly in open source scene and they wonder why companies choose a $2K price instead of their "free" product.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When will open source folks understand that older version support , especially for server oriented things is a big deal ? There is a company who makes living with OS upgrades/sales and they still release updates for Windows XP you know .
An OS from 2003 or something.Right , they do n't release directx 11 for XP but at least their consumers ( and IT guys ) do n't feel abandoned in sense of security updates.Same mistake is being done almost monthly in open source scene and they wonder why companies choose a $ 2K price instead of their " free " product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When will open source folks understand that older version support, especially for server oriented things is a big deal?There is a company who makes living with OS upgrades/sales and they still release updates for Windows XP you know.
An OS from 2003 or something.Right, they don't release directx 11 for XP but at least their consumers (and IT guys) don't feel abandoned in sense of security updates.Same mistake is being done almost monthly in open source scene and they wonder why companies choose a $2K price instead of their "free" product.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31261650</id>
	<title>A chance to get ZFS on Linux?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1265136060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do we then at least get ZFS (The fast original implementation. Not the slow and huge FUSE one) for Linux?</p><p>Or will it end like with Lotus SmartSuite (best. office. suite. ever. full stop.), and die, never to be opened?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do we then at least get ZFS ( The fast original implementation .
Not the slow and huge FUSE one ) for Linux ? Or will it end like with Lotus SmartSuite ( best .
office. suite .
ever. full stop .
) , and die , never to be opened ?
: /</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do we then at least get ZFS (The fast original implementation.
Not the slow and huge FUSE one) for Linux?Or will it end like with Lotus SmartSuite (best.
office. suite.
ever. full stop.
), and die, never to be opened?
:/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31269098</id>
	<title>Re:Well this sucks...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265138580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>have you gotten to the bit yet that says FreeBSD zfs is lagging 2 years behind opensolaris version?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>have you gotten to the bit yet that says FreeBSD zfs is lagging 2 years behind opensolaris version ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>have you gotten to the bit yet that says FreeBSD zfs is lagging 2 years behind opensolaris version?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257912</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262706</id>
	<title>Re:Bugger.</title>
	<author>bill\_mcgonigle</author>
	<datestamp>1265140380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Can somebody show me something good to come from the Oracle-Sun deal? Anything?</i></p><p>For whom?  Oracle made the purchase, so that's the only place to look for benefits.  They at least got hardware that could continue to scale their database for another few years while they retool to provide a hadoop-ish backend and a whole services organization.  ZFS is nice to come along for the ride, but I doubt it figured heavily in the calculation (to me that's the nicest thing Sun had, but I didn't buy Sun so that doesn't matter).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can somebody show me something good to come from the Oracle-Sun deal ?
Anything ? For whom ?
Oracle made the purchase , so that 's the only place to look for benefits .
They at least got hardware that could continue to scale their database for another few years while they retool to provide a hadoop-ish backend and a whole services organization .
ZFS is nice to come along for the ride , but I doubt it figured heavily in the calculation ( to me that 's the nicest thing Sun had , but I did n't buy Sun so that does n't matter ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can somebody show me something good to come from the Oracle-Sun deal?
Anything?For whom?
Oracle made the purchase, so that's the only place to look for benefits.
They at least got hardware that could continue to scale their database for another few years while they retool to provide a hadoop-ish backend and a whole services organization.
ZFS is nice to come along for the ride, but I doubt it figured heavily in the calculation (to me that's the nicest thing Sun had, but I didn't buy Sun so that doesn't matter).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31270110</id>
	<title>Re:I wish Oracle would GPL ZFS</title>
	<author>SolitaryMan</author>
	<datestamp>1267095720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm afraid that "GPL something" is the last thing you can expect from Oracle.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm afraid that " GPL something " is the last thing you can expect from Oracle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm afraid that "GPL something" is the last thing you can expect from Oracle.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31260686</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257996</id>
	<title>Re:Well this sucks...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265117160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ZFS has been ported to FreeBSD 2 years ago. It's quite stable there by now and there are people using FreeBSD with ZFS on mission critical servers. Big ones too.</p><p>Just, a few features are missing, since FreeBSD does not have bits for it in kernel(sharesmb and shareiscsi properties do nothing in FreeBSD since the kernel does not have native suport for serving those protocols, you'll have to installa samba and create widnows shares the old way).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ZFS has been ported to FreeBSD 2 years ago .
It 's quite stable there by now and there are people using FreeBSD with ZFS on mission critical servers .
Big ones too.Just , a few features are missing , since FreeBSD does not have bits for it in kernel ( sharesmb and shareiscsi properties do nothing in FreeBSD since the kernel does not have native suport for serving those protocols , you 'll have to installa samba and create widnows shares the old way ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ZFS has been ported to FreeBSD 2 years ago.
It's quite stable there by now and there are people using FreeBSD with ZFS on mission critical servers.
Big ones too.Just, a few features are missing, since FreeBSD does not have bits for it in kernel(sharesmb and shareiscsi properties do nothing in FreeBSD since the kernel does not have native suport for serving those protocols, you'll have to installa samba and create widnows shares the old way).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257680</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31260166</id>
	<title>Business focus.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265129940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yesterday in Oracle's Cloud Computing presentation in London you saw a clear example of this.</p><p>Most people were Oracle, there was a chap from Sun.</p><p>While the Sun chap provided tons of technical data (boring us all to death), the Oracle guys provided a vision.</p><p>You may think this is glib, but everybody understood what Oracle wants to achieve and you may or may not buy into it, but at least are not left scratching your head regarding their strategy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yesterday in Oracle 's Cloud Computing presentation in London you saw a clear example of this.Most people were Oracle , there was a chap from Sun.While the Sun chap provided tons of technical data ( boring us all to death ) , the Oracle guys provided a vision.You may think this is glib , but everybody understood what Oracle wants to achieve and you may or may not buy into it , but at least are not left scratching your head regarding their strategy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yesterday in Oracle's Cloud Computing presentation in London you saw a clear example of this.Most people were Oracle, there was a chap from Sun.While the Sun chap provided tons of technical data (boring us all to death), the Oracle guys provided a vision.You may think this is glib, but everybody understood what Oracle wants to achieve and you may or may not buy into it, but at least are not left scratching your head regarding their strategy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258218</id>
	<title>Re:computer industry needs more standards...</title>
	<author>Rysc</author>
	<datestamp>1265119740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This problem was solved--correctly--years ago, and by Sun no less! You want <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open\_Firmware" title="wikipedia.org">OpenFirmware</a> [wikipedia.org], though sadly that Intel went all NIH and is pushing EFI for x86 instead, which is similar but not nearly as good.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This problem was solved--correctly--years ago , and by Sun no less !
You want OpenFirmware [ wikipedia.org ] , though sadly that Intel went all NIH and is pushing EFI for x86 instead , which is similar but not nearly as good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This problem was solved--correctly--years ago, and by Sun no less!
You want OpenFirmware [wikipedia.org], though sadly that Intel went all NIH and is pushing EFI for x86 instead, which is similar but not nearly as good.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257890</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262880</id>
	<title>Re:Well this sucks...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265141340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And Dtrace, whatever happened to that<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And Dtrace , whatever happened to that .. ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And Dtrace, whatever happened to that ..?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257912</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258044</id>
	<title>Re:while we're here, what about linux zfs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265117700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I believe <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZFS#Linux" title="wikipedia.org">this Wikipedia summary</a> [wikipedia.org] is as good as an update as anyone has of the progress and likelihood of future progress. An alternative is <a href="http://www.freebsd.org/releases/8.0R/announce.html" title="freebsd.org">FreeBSD 8</a> [freebsd.org] (released Nov. 2009), which includes ZFS as an officially supported feature for the first time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe this Wikipedia summary [ wikipedia.org ] is as good as an update as anyone has of the progress and likelihood of future progress .
An alternative is FreeBSD 8 [ freebsd.org ] ( released Nov. 2009 ) , which includes ZFS as an officially supported feature for the first time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe this Wikipedia summary [wikipedia.org] is as good as an update as anyone has of the progress and likelihood of future progress.
An alternative is FreeBSD 8 [freebsd.org] (released Nov. 2009), which includes ZFS as an officially supported feature for the first time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257698</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259050</id>
	<title>Re:Well this sucks...</title>
	<author>moosesocks</author>
	<datestamp>1265124900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ZFS itself isn't exactly a performance screamer, although it offers some of the best volume management and redundancy options in the business.  A few features (such as the ability to grow a raidz pool) are still waiting on the sidelines, although they are for the most part very competitive with what you'd get from an enterprise-grade RAID controller.</p><p>Of course, if you want high performance and redundancy, you'll still need to resort to one of those expensive RAID controllers, and something like iSCSI, which allows for graceful and transparent failover in the event of a hardware failure in the array itself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ZFS itself is n't exactly a performance screamer , although it offers some of the best volume management and redundancy options in the business .
A few features ( such as the ability to grow a raidz pool ) are still waiting on the sidelines , although they are for the most part very competitive with what you 'd get from an enterprise-grade RAID controller.Of course , if you want high performance and redundancy , you 'll still need to resort to one of those expensive RAID controllers , and something like iSCSI , which allows for graceful and transparent failover in the event of a hardware failure in the array itself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ZFS itself isn't exactly a performance screamer, although it offers some of the best volume management and redundancy options in the business.
A few features (such as the ability to grow a raidz pool) are still waiting on the sidelines, although they are for the most part very competitive with what you'd get from an enterprise-grade RAID controller.Of course, if you want high performance and redundancy, you'll still need to resort to one of those expensive RAID controllers, and something like iSCSI, which allows for graceful and transparent failover in the event of a hardware failure in the array itself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257978</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257920</id>
	<title>Does Oracle own Sun yet?</title>
	<author>Viol8</author>
	<datestamp>1265116440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With all the legal wrangling , especially in europe , I've rather lost the thread of this ongoing buyout.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With all the legal wrangling , especially in europe , I 've rather lost the thread of this ongoing buyout .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With all the legal wrangling , especially in europe , I've rather lost the thread of this ongoing buyout.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258066</id>
	<title>Re:FUD</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265117940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>OpenSolaris? It's dead, Jim.<br> <br>
Deal with it--suck it up and be a man. Then get on with your life. After all, it's only an operating system for God's sake. And not a very good one at that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>OpenSolaris ?
It 's dead , Jim .
Deal with it--suck it up and be a man .
Then get on with your life .
After all , it 's only an operating system for God 's sake .
And not a very good one at that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OpenSolaris?
It's dead, Jim.
Deal with it--suck it up and be a man.
Then get on with your life.
After all, it's only an operating system for God's sake.
And not a very good one at that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262290</id>
	<title>Re:Another "dead unix" for the collection.</title>
	<author>jeffstar</author>
	<datestamp>1265138520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>HP-UX didn't make your list?!  I would have thought the writing was on the wall for it too, as well as everything HP except for printer ink.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>HP-UX did n't make your list ? !
I would have thought the writing was on the wall for it too , as well as everything HP except for printer ink .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>HP-UX didn't make your list?!
I would have thought the writing was on the wall for it too, as well as everything HP except for printer ink.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257452</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262490</id>
	<title>Re:while we're here, what about linux zfs</title>
	<author>bill\_mcgonigle</author>
	<datestamp>1265139420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>the supposedly intractable licensing issues that prevent ZFS from being incorporated into the linux kernel? Is it still hopeless?</i></p><p>There are two problems:</p><p>1) CDDL code can't be integrated with GPL code due to license incompatibilities.  That's the minor one.<br>2) Sun(Oracle) has a large patent portfolio on ZFS.  You only get patent indemnification from Sun if you use their CDDL code.  So, even though ZFS isn't a large code base, and a re-implementation is technically feasible, governments the world over may attack you on behalf of Sun/Oracle if you try it.</p><p>But even if you bold ZFS onto linux, which may be nice, the solaris kernel has additional efficiencies that make ZFS a win.  I recently built a RAIDZ2 using commodity 7200RPM Seagate drives and it can write 750MB/s, without compression being on.  I've never seen anywhere near that performance from a Linux install on the same kind of hardware.  So, ZFS on Linux is also less interesting from the performance perspective - unless it's ZFS's "rampant layering violations" that make this performance possible.  In that case then there's a real good debate to be had about the cost of those layers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the supposedly intractable licensing issues that prevent ZFS from being incorporated into the linux kernel ?
Is it still hopeless ? There are two problems : 1 ) CDDL code ca n't be integrated with GPL code due to license incompatibilities .
That 's the minor one.2 ) Sun ( Oracle ) has a large patent portfolio on ZFS .
You only get patent indemnification from Sun if you use their CDDL code .
So , even though ZFS is n't a large code base , and a re-implementation is technically feasible , governments the world over may attack you on behalf of Sun/Oracle if you try it.But even if you bold ZFS onto linux , which may be nice , the solaris kernel has additional efficiencies that make ZFS a win .
I recently built a RAIDZ2 using commodity 7200RPM Seagate drives and it can write 750MB/s , without compression being on .
I 've never seen anywhere near that performance from a Linux install on the same kind of hardware .
So , ZFS on Linux is also less interesting from the performance perspective - unless it 's ZFS 's " rampant layering violations " that make this performance possible .
In that case then there 's a real good debate to be had about the cost of those layers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the supposedly intractable licensing issues that prevent ZFS from being incorporated into the linux kernel?
Is it still hopeless?There are two problems:1) CDDL code can't be integrated with GPL code due to license incompatibilities.
That's the minor one.2) Sun(Oracle) has a large patent portfolio on ZFS.
You only get patent indemnification from Sun if you use their CDDL code.
So, even though ZFS isn't a large code base, and a re-implementation is technically feasible, governments the world over may attack you on behalf of Sun/Oracle if you try it.But even if you bold ZFS onto linux, which may be nice, the solaris kernel has additional efficiencies that make ZFS a win.
I recently built a RAIDZ2 using commodity 7200RPM Seagate drives and it can write 750MB/s, without compression being on.
I've never seen anywhere near that performance from a Linux install on the same kind of hardware.
So, ZFS on Linux is also less interesting from the performance perspective - unless it's ZFS's "rampant layering violations" that make this performance possible.
In that case then there's a real good debate to be had about the cost of those layers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257698</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257890</id>
	<title>computer industry needs more standards...</title>
	<author>h00manist</author>
	<datestamp>1265116080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>However, it didn't detect: the wifi adaptor the ethernet adaptor the sound </p></div><p>If there's one thing that would make the computer industry move ahead faster, it would be more standards. Why on earth can't simple mundane things like ethernet, sound, etc interfaces come with some sort of descriptors or standards which allow at least basic functionalities to be found more easily by an OS?  Couldn't chipmakers, driver and OS writers try to save some work for themselves and talk? Every new OS version has to re-create, re-test, etc every driver for every device on the planet.  The mere discussion of standards seems to have been killed by the whole 'de facto' notion, which is basically quitting.  Even if we exclude MS, there enough active people now to have some debate over some driver and chip detection standards. VMware, linux, xbsd, the livecd scene, motherboard, device, and chipmakers, etc.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>However , it did n't detect : the wifi adaptor the ethernet adaptor the sound If there 's one thing that would make the computer industry move ahead faster , it would be more standards .
Why on earth ca n't simple mundane things like ethernet , sound , etc interfaces come with some sort of descriptors or standards which allow at least basic functionalities to be found more easily by an OS ?
Could n't chipmakers , driver and OS writers try to save some work for themselves and talk ?
Every new OS version has to re-create , re-test , etc every driver for every device on the planet .
The mere discussion of standards seems to have been killed by the whole 'de facto ' notion , which is basically quitting .
Even if we exclude MS , there enough active people now to have some debate over some driver and chip detection standards .
VMware , linux , xbsd , the livecd scene , motherboard , device , and chipmakers , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>However, it didn't detect: the wifi adaptor the ethernet adaptor the sound If there's one thing that would make the computer industry move ahead faster, it would be more standards.
Why on earth can't simple mundane things like ethernet, sound, etc interfaces come with some sort of descriptors or standards which allow at least basic functionalities to be found more easily by an OS?
Couldn't chipmakers, driver and OS writers try to save some work for themselves and talk?
Every new OS version has to re-create, re-test, etc every driver for every device on the planet.
The mere discussion of standards seems to have been killed by the whole 'de facto' notion, which is basically quitting.
Even if we exclude MS, there enough active people now to have some debate over some driver and chip detection standards.
VMware, linux, xbsd, the livecd scene, motherboard, device, and chipmakers, etc.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31264036</id>
	<title>mdb</title>
	<author>mzs</author>
	<datestamp>1265103060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everyone mentions ZFS and Dtrace, I will really miss mdb if solaris ever goes away. mdb is the single best debugger ever created. I have shell scripts that use truss to stop on an bug in closed source code, then use mdb to change some registers, and then use prun to carry-on. That completely ignores all the useful dcmds too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone mentions ZFS and Dtrace , I will really miss mdb if solaris ever goes away .
mdb is the single best debugger ever created .
I have shell scripts that use truss to stop on an bug in closed source code , then use mdb to change some registers , and then use prun to carry-on .
That completely ignores all the useful dcmds too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone mentions ZFS and Dtrace, I will really miss mdb if solaris ever goes away.
mdb is the single best debugger ever created.
I have shell scripts that use truss to stop on an bug in closed source code, then use mdb to change some registers, and then use prun to carry-on.
That completely ignores all the useful dcmds too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262316</id>
	<title>Re:Backspace in the Opensolaris/x86 console pls</title>
	<author>bhtooefr</author>
	<datestamp>1265138580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IIRC, it's just as bad on SPARC - ^?/delete is backspace in the console, ^H is backspace in the GUI.</p><p>Of course, this wasn't as insane on the Type 4 keyboard, where delete was directly above backspace, and the same size, in the function key row. But Type 5 broke that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IIRC , it 's just as bad on SPARC - ^ ? /delete is backspace in the console , ^ H is backspace in the GUI.Of course , this was n't as insane on the Type 4 keyboard , where delete was directly above backspace , and the same size , in the function key row .
But Type 5 broke that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IIRC, it's just as bad on SPARC - ^?/delete is backspace in the console, ^H is backspace in the GUI.Of course, this wasn't as insane on the Type 4 keyboard, where delete was directly above backspace, and the same size, in the function key row.
But Type 5 broke that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258078</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258150</id>
	<title>Anyone actually read the article at Oracle yet?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265119080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Those, who are crying here "OpenSolaris gone", read the fucking article CAREFULLY (never happens on Slashdot, though):</p><p>So use letter-by-letter approach if you're unable to see word-by-word or sentence-by-sentence:<b>"Future releases of the Solaris OS will also be based on the OpenSolaris community codebase."</b> </p><p>That means RedHat/Fedora model. Clear now?</p><p>http://www.sun.com/software/solaris/lifecycle.xml</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Those , who are crying here " OpenSolaris gone " , read the fucking article CAREFULLY ( never happens on Slashdot , though ) : So use letter-by-letter approach if you 're unable to see word-by-word or sentence-by-sentence : " Future releases of the Solaris OS will also be based on the OpenSolaris community codebase .
" That means RedHat/Fedora model .
Clear now ? http : //www.sun.com/software/solaris/lifecycle.xml</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those, who are crying here "OpenSolaris gone", read the fucking article CAREFULLY (never happens on Slashdot, though):So use letter-by-letter approach if you're unable to see word-by-word or sentence-by-sentence:"Future releases of the Solaris OS will also be based on the OpenSolaris community codebase.
" That means RedHat/Fedora model.
Clear now?http://www.sun.com/software/solaris/lifecycle.xml</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257408</id>
	<title>Obligatory Netcraft</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265110380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Breaking: Netcraft now confirms OpenSolaris is dying.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Breaking : Netcraft now confirms OpenSolaris is dying .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Breaking: Netcraft now confirms OpenSolaris is dying.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257970</id>
	<title>Re:Bugger.</title>
	<author>Trepidity</author>
	<datestamp>1265116860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, Oracle offered about 3x the prevailing Sun stock price, so the Sun shareholders have done well. At least, well in relative terms--- some probably still lost money, but there was really not much else on the horizon that was looking likely to triple Sun's stock price. Before Oracle came along, the just-over-$3.00 stock was almost mocking its owners with its stock ticker of JAVA, an anachronism from the days that Sun management thought Java would somehow make them rich.</p><p>Coincidentally, for public companies, if you make a really good offer to stockholders (something &gt;2x the current stock price usually qualifies), it's usually an offer the buyout target will find hard to refuse. That's the tradeoff you make when you IPO a company and put its ownership in the hands of the stockowning public.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , Oracle offered about 3x the prevailing Sun stock price , so the Sun shareholders have done well .
At least , well in relative terms--- some probably still lost money , but there was really not much else on the horizon that was looking likely to triple Sun 's stock price .
Before Oracle came along , the just-over- $ 3.00 stock was almost mocking its owners with its stock ticker of JAVA , an anachronism from the days that Sun management thought Java would somehow make them rich.Coincidentally , for public companies , if you make a really good offer to stockholders ( something &gt; 2x the current stock price usually qualifies ) , it 's usually an offer the buyout target will find hard to refuse .
That 's the tradeoff you make when you IPO a company and put its ownership in the hands of the stockowning public .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, Oracle offered about 3x the prevailing Sun stock price, so the Sun shareholders have done well.
At least, well in relative terms--- some probably still lost money, but there was really not much else on the horizon that was looking likely to triple Sun's stock price.
Before Oracle came along, the just-over-$3.00 stock was almost mocking its owners with its stock ticker of JAVA, an anachronism from the days that Sun management thought Java would somehow make them rich.Coincidentally, for public companies, if you make a really good offer to stockholders (something &gt;2x the current stock price usually qualifies), it's usually an offer the buyout target will find hard to refuse.
That's the tradeoff you make when you IPO a company and put its ownership in the hands of the stockowning public.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257466</id>
	<title>Re:Fork?</title>
	<author>DennisZeMenace</author>
	<datestamp>1265111040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>How big is that community really ? And what percentage of that community is actually made out of Sun employees ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How big is that community really ?
And what percentage of that community is actually made out of Sun employees ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How big is that community really ?
And what percentage of that community is actually made out of Sun employees ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257406</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262588</id>
	<title>Re:Article Doesn't Quite Say it, But Not Suprised</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265139780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>but that end of life page for OpenSolaris looks pretty damn final to me and there is little room for interpretation.</p></div><p>Are you mad?</p><p>"This describes the OpenSolaris End Of Service Life timeline for OpenSolaris OS releases."</p><p>"Sun provides contractual support on the OpenSolaris OS for up to five years from the product's first General Availability (GA) date as follows."</p><p>It's not an EOL page for OpenSolaris, it's the EOL schedule for OpenSolaris RELEASES.  There IS little room for interpretation, how the fuck did you get this so twisted?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>but that end of life page for OpenSolaris looks pretty damn final to me and there is little room for interpretation.Are you mad ?
" This describes the OpenSolaris End Of Service Life timeline for OpenSolaris OS releases .
" " Sun provides contractual support on the OpenSolaris OS for up to five years from the product 's first General Availability ( GA ) date as follows .
" It 's not an EOL page for OpenSolaris , it 's the EOL schedule for OpenSolaris RELEASES .
There IS little room for interpretation , how the fuck did you get this so twisted ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but that end of life page for OpenSolaris looks pretty damn final to me and there is little room for interpretation.Are you mad?
"This describes the OpenSolaris End Of Service Life timeline for OpenSolaris OS releases.
""Sun provides contractual support on the OpenSolaris OS for up to five years from the product's first General Availability (GA) date as follows.
"It's not an EOL page for OpenSolaris, it's the EOL schedule for OpenSolaris RELEASES.
There IS little room for interpretation, how the fuck did you get this so twisted?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259878</id>
	<title>Re:Well this sucks...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265128740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Version specific handbooks: <a href="http://docs.freebsd.org/doc/" title="freebsd.org" rel="nofollow">http://docs.freebsd.org/doc/</a> [freebsd.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Version specific handbooks : http : //docs.freebsd.org/doc/ [ freebsd.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Version specific handbooks: http://docs.freebsd.org/doc/ [freebsd.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257912</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31267184</id>
	<title>Re:IBM &amp; AIX - the last man standing</title>
	<author>jwhitener</author>
	<datestamp>1265118840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Nobody cares about open solaris. Nobody in their right mind would have chosen it as a platform.</p><p>I'm not surprised that IBM is the last company, AIX the last proprietary unix platform. Power the last proprietary hardware platform...</p><p>HP &amp; Itanium? Laughable... And Linux on x86 has eaten the rest.</p><p>IBM 'get' services in the way the rest never have. They get that it's the bloody hardware which matters. This is why power is hitting 5GHz. The OS is just there to make it work. You want the fastest, lowest latency, highest throughput. You use IBM. You just want it to work and are on a budget? Linux.</p><p>The 'executives' of the rest of the companies clearly didn't know or care what their customers want, or what their business really is.</p></div><p>Why is this insightful?  And it is especially not insightful after a merger with Oracle, who has declared they will increase support and development for Solaris.</p><p>Solaris is currently the most common platform for Oracle installations in higher ed. and many other business types.  It runs on both very powerful proprietary cpus (Ultrasparcs) and on commodity x86 hardware.  It contains support for multiple variations of virtualization, ZFS (learn a bit more about the power of ZFS if you think it is a minor advantage), and can run practically any software that linux or other unix systems can.  See sunfreeware.com</p><p>In addition to the added power of Oracle's backing and software lineup, Solaris has a complete stack of solutions for the enterprise.  Ldap, email, identity management, etc..  All of which will run on other platforms, but in my experience, run best on Solaris.</p><p>Google around:  http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2004/11/16/solaris\_remains\_top\_choice\_among\_fortune\_100.html</p><p>Solaris is everywhere.  Just because you may not be in areas of business that use it, declaring "that nobody in their right mind" would use it is just silly.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nobody cares about open solaris .
Nobody in their right mind would have chosen it as a platform.I 'm not surprised that IBM is the last company , AIX the last proprietary unix platform .
Power the last proprietary hardware platform...HP &amp; Itanium ?
Laughable... And Linux on x86 has eaten the rest.IBM 'get ' services in the way the rest never have .
They get that it 's the bloody hardware which matters .
This is why power is hitting 5GHz .
The OS is just there to make it work .
You want the fastest , lowest latency , highest throughput .
You use IBM .
You just want it to work and are on a budget ?
Linux.The 'executives ' of the rest of the companies clearly did n't know or care what their customers want , or what their business really is.Why is this insightful ?
And it is especially not insightful after a merger with Oracle , who has declared they will increase support and development for Solaris.Solaris is currently the most common platform for Oracle installations in higher ed .
and many other business types .
It runs on both very powerful proprietary cpus ( Ultrasparcs ) and on commodity x86 hardware .
It contains support for multiple variations of virtualization , ZFS ( learn a bit more about the power of ZFS if you think it is a minor advantage ) , and can run practically any software that linux or other unix systems can .
See sunfreeware.comIn addition to the added power of Oracle 's backing and software lineup , Solaris has a complete stack of solutions for the enterprise .
Ldap , email , identity management , etc.. All of which will run on other platforms , but in my experience , run best on Solaris.Google around : http : //news.netcraft.com/archives/2004/11/16/solaris \ _remains \ _top \ _choice \ _among \ _fortune \ _100.htmlSolaris is everywhere .
Just because you may not be in areas of business that use it , declaring " that nobody in their right mind " would use it is just silly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nobody cares about open solaris.
Nobody in their right mind would have chosen it as a platform.I'm not surprised that IBM is the last company, AIX the last proprietary unix platform.
Power the last proprietary hardware platform...HP &amp; Itanium?
Laughable... And Linux on x86 has eaten the rest.IBM 'get' services in the way the rest never have.
They get that it's the bloody hardware which matters.
This is why power is hitting 5GHz.
The OS is just there to make it work.
You want the fastest, lowest latency, highest throughput.
You use IBM.
You just want it to work and are on a budget?
Linux.The 'executives' of the rest of the companies clearly didn't know or care what their customers want, or what their business really is.Why is this insightful?
And it is especially not insightful after a merger with Oracle, who has declared they will increase support and development for Solaris.Solaris is currently the most common platform for Oracle installations in higher ed.
and many other business types.
It runs on both very powerful proprietary cpus (Ultrasparcs) and on commodity x86 hardware.
It contains support for multiple variations of virtualization, ZFS (learn a bit more about the power of ZFS if you think it is a minor advantage), and can run practically any software that linux or other unix systems can.
See sunfreeware.comIn addition to the added power of Oracle's backing and software lineup, Solaris has a complete stack of solutions for the enterprise.
Ldap, email, identity management, etc..  All of which will run on other platforms, but in my experience, run best on Solaris.Google around:  http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2004/11/16/solaris\_remains\_top\_choice\_among\_fortune\_100.htmlSolaris is everywhere.
Just because you may not be in areas of business that use it, declaring "that nobody in their right mind" would use it is just silly.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258374</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257366</id>
	<title>OS going away, or just "contractual support"?</title>
	<author>Darkon</author>
	<datestamp>1265109900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To be honest I didn't even know they provided "contractual support" for OpenSolaris, but surely the fact that they won't support you in using it doesn't nesessarily imply that it's being canned. Maybe it'll just be an unsupported "unstable" version that you can play with before getting "real" Solaris.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To be honest I did n't even know they provided " contractual support " for OpenSolaris , but surely the fact that they wo n't support you in using it does n't nesessarily imply that it 's being canned .
Maybe it 'll just be an unsupported " unstable " version that you can play with before getting " real " Solaris .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To be honest I didn't even know they provided "contractual support" for OpenSolaris, but surely the fact that they won't support you in using it doesn't nesessarily imply that it's being canned.
Maybe it'll just be an unsupported "unstable" version that you can play with before getting "real" Solaris.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31282070</id>
	<title>Re:I wanted to like OpenSolaris but...</title>
	<author>bingoUV</author>
	<datestamp>1267126200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree driver support for OpenSolaris is not that great. While it has the disadvantage of lower driver availability over Linux, it also has a big advantage: kernel ABI stability. So a driver, once it is created for OpenSolaris, will keep working for a long time. Unlike the linux drivers which can break during any kernel update, and the driver needs to be actively maintained so that it keeps working on latest kernel versions.</p><p>One example that I see: Cisco VPN. On every new distro release, I have to find out the linux kernel version and figure out whether Cisco VPN will work with it or not. No such uncertainty with OpenSolaris, it just works.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree driver support for OpenSolaris is not that great .
While it has the disadvantage of lower driver availability over Linux , it also has a big advantage : kernel ABI stability .
So a driver , once it is created for OpenSolaris , will keep working for a long time .
Unlike the linux drivers which can break during any kernel update , and the driver needs to be actively maintained so that it keeps working on latest kernel versions.One example that I see : Cisco VPN .
On every new distro release , I have to find out the linux kernel version and figure out whether Cisco VPN will work with it or not .
No such uncertainty with OpenSolaris , it just works .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree driver support for OpenSolaris is not that great.
While it has the disadvantage of lower driver availability over Linux, it also has a big advantage: kernel ABI stability.
So a driver, once it is created for OpenSolaris, will keep working for a long time.
Unlike the linux drivers which can break during any kernel update, and the driver needs to be actively maintained so that it keeps working on latest kernel versions.One example that I see: Cisco VPN.
On every new distro release, I have to find out the linux kernel version and figure out whether Cisco VPN will work with it or not.
No such uncertainty with OpenSolaris, it just works.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31261542</id>
	<title>Re:Bugger.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265135700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most enterprise users of Solaris are also running Oracle as their RDBMS.  If Sun were to failscade, many of those customers would migrate to WinTel solutions where they could.  In those situations, they would most likely consider SQLServer over Oracle.  It would have been an overnight disaster to Oracle as much as Sun.</p><p>Thats why Oracle bought Sun.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most enterprise users of Solaris are also running Oracle as their RDBMS .
If Sun were to failscade , many of those customers would migrate to WinTel solutions where they could .
In those situations , they would most likely consider SQLServer over Oracle .
It would have been an overnight disaster to Oracle as much as Sun.Thats why Oracle bought Sun .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most enterprise users of Solaris are also running Oracle as their RDBMS.
If Sun were to failscade, many of those customers would migrate to WinTel solutions where they could.
In those situations, they would most likely consider SQLServer over Oracle.
It would have been an overnight disaster to Oracle as much as Sun.Thats why Oracle bought Sun.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257764</id>
	<title>Re:Bugger.</title>
	<author>segedunum</author>
	<datestamp>1265114820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Can somebody show me something good to come from the Oracle-Sun deal? Anything?</p></div></blockquote><p>
Errrrrr, survival and preventing Sun from going bust, just off the top of my head?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Can somebody show me something good to come from the Oracle-Sun deal ?
Anything ? Errrrrr , survival and preventing Sun from going bust , just off the top of my head ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can somebody show me something good to come from the Oracle-Sun deal?
Anything?
Errrrrr, survival and preventing Sun from going bust, just off the top of my head?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259518</id>
	<title>And this is why I no longer push Solaris</title>
	<author>WindBourne</author>
	<datestamp>1265127420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Years ago, I use to support Sun and their OSS efforts. First time that they opened Solaris, I was all over it. The second time, I said that I did not fully trust sun. Pending what really happens, it proves exactly how I feel about code that comes from companies like this.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Years ago , I use to support Sun and their OSS efforts .
First time that they opened Solaris , I was all over it .
The second time , I said that I did not fully trust sun .
Pending what really happens , it proves exactly how I feel about code that comes from companies like this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Years ago, I use to support Sun and their OSS efforts.
First time that they opened Solaris, I was all over it.
The second time, I said that I did not fully trust sun.
Pending what really happens, it proves exactly how I feel about code that comes from companies like this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257604</id>
	<title>Hardware/apps</title>
	<author>cbuosi</author>
	<datestamp>1265112780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I, like others, tested OpenSolaris and the 2 main problems that i saw where, 1) lack of support for fancy/new hardware. 2) not so many  native programs as Linux/BSD. I think that OpenSolaris will live forever, but not as a OS, its bests features (ZFS, others) will be incorporated in linux/free bsd/ others)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I , like others , tested OpenSolaris and the 2 main problems that i saw where , 1 ) lack of support for fancy/new hardware .
2 ) not so many native programs as Linux/BSD .
I think that OpenSolaris will live forever , but not as a OS , its bests features ( ZFS , others ) will be incorporated in linux/free bsd/ others )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I, like others, tested OpenSolaris and the 2 main problems that i saw where, 1) lack of support for fancy/new hardware.
2) not so many  native programs as Linux/BSD.
I think that OpenSolaris will live forever, but not as a OS, its bests features (ZFS, others) will be incorporated in linux/free bsd/ others)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262722</id>
	<title>Re:Bugger.</title>
	<author>DesScorp</author>
	<datestamp>1265140500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Can somebody show me something good to come from the Oracle-Sun deal? Anything?</p></div><p>Are you serious? Sun was slowly dying. Solaris was on the path to extinction. There are valid reasons to no want a GPL'd operating system, so if you wanted to run a commercially supported Unix in the enterprise, you'd be down to IBM, who seemingly is more enamored with Linux than with their own AIX (not to knock Apple; OSX is a fine server product, but Apple really isn't aiming for the same market that the Microsoft's/IBM's/Sun's are). Larry Ellison seems thus far geniunely interested in not only keeping solaris and sparc alive, but growing and developing them and growing their market.</p><p>What good did it do? It keeps us from <i>having</i> to pick Linux or Windows or zOS. It gives business another processor platform choice besides Intel and Power. Isn't choice a good enough reason for you?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Can somebody show me something good to come from the Oracle-Sun deal ?
Anything ? Are you serious ?
Sun was slowly dying .
Solaris was on the path to extinction .
There are valid reasons to no want a GPL 'd operating system , so if you wanted to run a commercially supported Unix in the enterprise , you 'd be down to IBM , who seemingly is more enamored with Linux than with their own AIX ( not to knock Apple ; OSX is a fine server product , but Apple really is n't aiming for the same market that the Microsoft 's/IBM 's/Sun 's are ) .
Larry Ellison seems thus far geniunely interested in not only keeping solaris and sparc alive , but growing and developing them and growing their market.What good did it do ?
It keeps us from having to pick Linux or Windows or zOS .
It gives business another processor platform choice besides Intel and Power .
Is n't choice a good enough reason for you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can somebody show me something good to come from the Oracle-Sun deal?
Anything?Are you serious?
Sun was slowly dying.
Solaris was on the path to extinction.
There are valid reasons to no want a GPL'd operating system, so if you wanted to run a commercially supported Unix in the enterprise, you'd be down to IBM, who seemingly is more enamored with Linux than with their own AIX (not to knock Apple; OSX is a fine server product, but Apple really isn't aiming for the same market that the Microsoft's/IBM's/Sun's are).
Larry Ellison seems thus far geniunely interested in not only keeping solaris and sparc alive, but growing and developing them and growing their market.What good did it do?
It keeps us from having to pick Linux or Windows or zOS.
It gives business another processor platform choice besides Intel and Power.
Isn't choice a good enough reason for you?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31282068</id>
	<title>Oracle is the primary driving force behind btrfs</title>
	<author>melted</author>
	<datestamp>1267126200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oracle is the primary driving force behind btrfs, which is a ZFS-like next generation FS for Linux. Now that they own ZFS, continuing development of btrfs makes far less sense.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oracle is the primary driving force behind btrfs , which is a ZFS-like next generation FS for Linux .
Now that they own ZFS , continuing development of btrfs makes far less sense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oracle is the primary driving force behind btrfs, which is a ZFS-like next generation FS for Linux.
Now that they own ZFS, continuing development of btrfs makes far less sense.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31270110</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31267604</id>
	<title>Oracle does not canning OpenSolaris!!</title>
	<author>hotfireball</author>
	<datestamp>1265122860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anyone has been read the thing at Oracle? They say they will release their Solaris on top of the codebase of OpenSolaris. In other words, commercial Solaris from Oracle is a same as an OpenSolaris++. Oracle will add some proprietary features to Solaris that will be enabled only on their exclusive hardware.</p><p>In other words, this is Fedora/RHEL or OpenSuSE/SLES model. You like generic OS and you like to piss with it yourself, wasting a load of time, then go ahed, get OpenSolaris and GA support, if you like. But if you want advanced stuff and you have no time to waste a time for the cheap mess, then get Oracle Solaris for pay, get Oracle hardware and that's it.</p><p>So that's basically a message. Which is very good: it will actually push generic OpenSolaris to be up to date and financed by Oracle.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone has been read the thing at Oracle ?
They say they will release their Solaris on top of the codebase of OpenSolaris .
In other words , commercial Solaris from Oracle is a same as an OpenSolaris + + .
Oracle will add some proprietary features to Solaris that will be enabled only on their exclusive hardware.In other words , this is Fedora/RHEL or OpenSuSE/SLES model .
You like generic OS and you like to piss with it yourself , wasting a load of time , then go ahed , get OpenSolaris and GA support , if you like .
But if you want advanced stuff and you have no time to waste a time for the cheap mess , then get Oracle Solaris for pay , get Oracle hardware and that 's it.So that 's basically a message .
Which is very good : it will actually push generic OpenSolaris to be up to date and financed by Oracle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone has been read the thing at Oracle?
They say they will release their Solaris on top of the codebase of OpenSolaris.
In other words, commercial Solaris from Oracle is a same as an OpenSolaris++.
Oracle will add some proprietary features to Solaris that will be enabled only on their exclusive hardware.In other words, this is Fedora/RHEL or OpenSuSE/SLES model.
You like generic OS and you like to piss with it yourself, wasting a load of time, then go ahed, get OpenSolaris and GA support, if you like.
But if you want advanced stuff and you have no time to waste a time for the cheap mess, then get Oracle Solaris for pay, get Oracle hardware and that's it.So that's basically a message.
Which is very good: it will actually push generic OpenSolaris to be up to date and financed by Oracle.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257842</id>
	<title>Re:Hardware/apps</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1265115540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I think that OpenSolaris will live forever, but not as a OS, its bests features (ZFS, others) will be incorporated in linux/free bsd/ others)</p></div><p>They won't be incorporated into Linux unless Oracle changes the license. Sun chose the license for OpenSolaris specifically to make it incompatible with Linux's license, in order to prevent Linux from gaining a further competitive advantage over Solaris, mostly in the form of ZFS. The best features might be <em>replicated</em> in Linux. Of course, BSD already has ZFS, because their license is compatible... Which of course has stolen some users from Linux.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think that OpenSolaris will live forever , but not as a OS , its bests features ( ZFS , others ) will be incorporated in linux/free bsd/ others ) They wo n't be incorporated into Linux unless Oracle changes the license .
Sun chose the license for OpenSolaris specifically to make it incompatible with Linux 's license , in order to prevent Linux from gaining a further competitive advantage over Solaris , mostly in the form of ZFS .
The best features might be replicated in Linux .
Of course , BSD already has ZFS , because their license is compatible... Which of course has stolen some users from Linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think that OpenSolaris will live forever, but not as a OS, its bests features (ZFS, others) will be incorporated in linux/free bsd/ others)They won't be incorporated into Linux unless Oracle changes the license.
Sun chose the license for OpenSolaris specifically to make it incompatible with Linux's license, in order to prevent Linux from gaining a further competitive advantage over Solaris, mostly in the form of ZFS.
The best features might be replicated in Linux.
Of course, BSD already has ZFS, because their license is compatible... Which of course has stolen some users from Linux.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257698</id>
	<title>while we're here, what about linux zfs</title>
	<author>drfireman</author>
	<datestamp>1265113980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So far as I can tell, zfs is the only piece of opensolaris that's exciting enough to make anyone want to install if if they'd otherwise want to install a linux distribution.  With that in mind, could someone post an authoritative update on the supposedly intractable licensing issues that prevent ZFS from being incorporated into the linux kernel?  Is it still hopeless?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So far as I can tell , zfs is the only piece of opensolaris that 's exciting enough to make anyone want to install if if they 'd otherwise want to install a linux distribution .
With that in mind , could someone post an authoritative update on the supposedly intractable licensing issues that prevent ZFS from being incorporated into the linux kernel ?
Is it still hopeless ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So far as I can tell, zfs is the only piece of opensolaris that's exciting enough to make anyone want to install if if they'd otherwise want to install a linux distribution.
With that in mind, could someone post an authoritative update on the supposedly intractable licensing issues that prevent ZFS from being incorporated into the linux kernel?
Is it still hopeless?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262670</id>
	<title>Re:IBM &amp; AIX - the last man standing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265140200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Highest throughput? That would be UltraSPARC Niagara. It is built for throughput.

On Siebel v8 benchmarks, you need 28 of the 5GHz POWER6 to match 4 of the 1.4GHz Niagara. The POWER7 is in general 3x times faster than POWER6 (sometimes slower, sometimes faster). So you need 9 of the high clocked POWER7 to match 4 of the 1.4GHz Niagara. POWER is not very efficient, it needs high Hz, similar to Pentium 4.

You need four 5GHz POWER6 to match two 2.93GHz Intel Nehalem on official TPC-C benchmarks.

Intel Nehalem-EX will be comparable to POWER7 in terms of performance, but for a much lower price.

Frankly I dont see what expensive POWER7 offers compared to much cheaper x86 CPUs? 12-core AMD bulldozer, 8-core Intel Nehalem-EX, etc. I expect POWER to diminish in favour of new generation x86 CPUs.

OTOH, Niagara has extreme throughput, it is many times faster than POWER7 and Nehalem-EX.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Highest throughput ?
That would be UltraSPARC Niagara .
It is built for throughput .
On Siebel v8 benchmarks , you need 28 of the 5GHz POWER6 to match 4 of the 1.4GHz Niagara .
The POWER7 is in general 3x times faster than POWER6 ( sometimes slower , sometimes faster ) .
So you need 9 of the high clocked POWER7 to match 4 of the 1.4GHz Niagara .
POWER is not very efficient , it needs high Hz , similar to Pentium 4 .
You need four 5GHz POWER6 to match two 2.93GHz Intel Nehalem on official TPC-C benchmarks .
Intel Nehalem-EX will be comparable to POWER7 in terms of performance , but for a much lower price .
Frankly I dont see what expensive POWER7 offers compared to much cheaper x86 CPUs ?
12-core AMD bulldozer , 8-core Intel Nehalem-EX , etc .
I expect POWER to diminish in favour of new generation x86 CPUs .
OTOH , Niagara has extreme throughput , it is many times faster than POWER7 and Nehalem-EX .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Highest throughput?
That would be UltraSPARC Niagara.
It is built for throughput.
On Siebel v8 benchmarks, you need 28 of the 5GHz POWER6 to match 4 of the 1.4GHz Niagara.
The POWER7 is in general 3x times faster than POWER6 (sometimes slower, sometimes faster).
So you need 9 of the high clocked POWER7 to match 4 of the 1.4GHz Niagara.
POWER is not very efficient, it needs high Hz, similar to Pentium 4.
You need four 5GHz POWER6 to match two 2.93GHz Intel Nehalem on official TPC-C benchmarks.
Intel Nehalem-EX will be comparable to POWER7 in terms of performance, but for a much lower price.
Frankly I dont see what expensive POWER7 offers compared to much cheaper x86 CPUs?
12-core AMD bulldozer, 8-core Intel Nehalem-EX, etc.
I expect POWER to diminish in favour of new generation x86 CPUs.
OTOH, Niagara has extreme throughput, it is many times faster than POWER7 and Nehalem-EX.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258374</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31267574</id>
	<title>Re:Well this sucks...</title>
	<author>hotfireball</author>
	<datestamp>1265122500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But keep in mind that FreeBSD is <a href="http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&amp;item=linux\_bsd\_opensolaris&amp;num=8" title="phoronix.com" rel="nofollow">a slowest OS</a> [phoronix.com]. And probably the most conservative and really old at ecosystem. And also has completely f*cked up release time schedule (even Warner Losh himself agreed on that). As well as quality is quite shitty for other things than just a network router. And threads there are mostly crap.</p><p>OpenSolaris has *valid* open source license, so your statement "I want fully free and opensource, hence FreeBSD" -- is sounds more like a FUD.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p><p>YMMV.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But keep in mind that FreeBSD is a slowest OS [ phoronix.com ] .
And probably the most conservative and really old at ecosystem .
And also has completely f * cked up release time schedule ( even Warner Losh himself agreed on that ) .
As well as quality is quite shitty for other things than just a network router .
And threads there are mostly crap.OpenSolaris has * valid * open source license , so your statement " I want fully free and opensource , hence FreeBSD " -- is sounds more like a FUD .
: - ) YMMV .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But keep in mind that FreeBSD is a slowest OS [phoronix.com].
And probably the most conservative and really old at ecosystem.
And also has completely f*cked up release time schedule (even Warner Losh himself agreed on that).
As well as quality is quite shitty for other things than just a network router.
And threads there are mostly crap.OpenSolaris has *valid* open source license, so your statement "I want fully free and opensource, hence FreeBSD" -- is sounds more like a FUD.
:-)YMMV.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257912</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31260780</id>
	<title>Whither Nexenta?</title>
	<author>newdsfornerds</author>
	<datestamp>1265132700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What happens to projects that depend on Open Solaris?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What happens to projects that depend on Open Solaris ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What happens to projects that depend on Open Solaris?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31265554</id>
	<title>Lost opportunity</title>
	<author>recharged95</author>
	<datestamp>1265109360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wonder what will happen to Nexenta OS? I know the effort is currently low-key, but OpenSolaris, ZFS, Debian pkgs.... sounded like a best of both worlds.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder what will happen to Nexenta OS ?
I know the effort is currently low-key , but OpenSolaris , ZFS , Debian pkgs.... sounded like a best of both worlds .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder what will happen to Nexenta OS?
I know the effort is currently low-key, but OpenSolaris, ZFS, Debian pkgs.... sounded like a best of both worlds.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257514</id>
	<title>Re:Fork?</title>
	<author>c6gunner</author>
	<datestamp>1265111700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Even if Oracle ditches Opensolaris all together, shouldn't the community keep going</p></div><p>I doubt that OpenSolaris has enough of a following.  If businesses ditch it due to a lack of support, it's unlikely that there will be enough of a "community" left to prop it up.</p><p>Personally, while I use OpenSolaris myself, I'd be more than happy to ditch it if the BTRFS project lives up to the hype.  As far as I can see, ZFS is the only reason to prefer OpenSolaris over Linux for personal use, and I know that a significant percentage of the non-business users feel the same way.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>and shouldn't third party companies fill the hole left in the market with regards to support?</p></div><p>I believe some already do.  NexentaOS is built on OpenSolaris, and they at least provide support for their own products.  I'm pretty sure they offer support contracts for OpenSolaris in general.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Even if Oracle ditches Opensolaris all together , should n't the community keep goingI doubt that OpenSolaris has enough of a following .
If businesses ditch it due to a lack of support , it 's unlikely that there will be enough of a " community " left to prop it up.Personally , while I use OpenSolaris myself , I 'd be more than happy to ditch it if the BTRFS project lives up to the hype .
As far as I can see , ZFS is the only reason to prefer OpenSolaris over Linux for personal use , and I know that a significant percentage of the non-business users feel the same way.and should n't third party companies fill the hole left in the market with regards to support ? I believe some already do .
NexentaOS is built on OpenSolaris , and they at least provide support for their own products .
I 'm pretty sure they offer support contracts for OpenSolaris in general .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even if Oracle ditches Opensolaris all together, shouldn't the community keep goingI doubt that OpenSolaris has enough of a following.
If businesses ditch it due to a lack of support, it's unlikely that there will be enough of a "community" left to prop it up.Personally, while I use OpenSolaris myself, I'd be more than happy to ditch it if the BTRFS project lives up to the hype.
As far as I can see, ZFS is the only reason to prefer OpenSolaris over Linux for personal use, and I know that a significant percentage of the non-business users feel the same way.and shouldn't third party companies fill the hole left in the market with regards to support?I believe some already do.
NexentaOS is built on OpenSolaris, and they at least provide support for their own products.
I'm pretty sure they offer support contracts for OpenSolaris in general.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257406</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257500</id>
	<title>I wanted to like OpenSolaris but...</title>
	<author>Viol8</author>
	<datestamp>1265111460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... I tried installing the latest version (as of november) on my year old laptop (ok , not its natural enviroment but if they want to compete with linux...) and it looked nice.</p><p>However, it didn't detect:</p><p>the wifi adaptor<br>the ethernet adaptor<br>the sound ship</p><p>wifi and sound I can just about live without , but no ethernet is a show stopper. If I can't access any networks then its little use for any real work. On the same laptop even years old opensuse 10.2 which I installed as a temporary OS when I first bought it saw the ethernet adaptor so we're not talking some brand new chip fresh out the design foundry.</p><p>So while I wish opensolaris all the best I think its going to remain a niche OS even if it doesn't get the chop.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... I tried installing the latest version ( as of november ) on my year old laptop ( ok , not its natural enviroment but if they want to compete with linux... ) and it looked nice.However , it did n't detect : the wifi adaptorthe ethernet adaptorthe sound shipwifi and sound I can just about live without , but no ethernet is a show stopper .
If I ca n't access any networks then its little use for any real work .
On the same laptop even years old opensuse 10.2 which I installed as a temporary OS when I first bought it saw the ethernet adaptor so we 're not talking some brand new chip fresh out the design foundry.So while I wish opensolaris all the best I think its going to remain a niche OS even if it does n't get the chop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... I tried installing the latest version (as of november) on my year old laptop (ok , not its natural enviroment but if they want to compete with linux...) and it looked nice.However, it didn't detect:the wifi adaptorthe ethernet adaptorthe sound shipwifi and sound I can just about live without , but no ethernet is a show stopper.
If I can't access any networks then its little use for any real work.
On the same laptop even years old opensuse 10.2 which I installed as a temporary OS when I first bought it saw the ethernet adaptor so we're not talking some brand new chip fresh out the design foundry.So while I wish opensolaris all the best I think its going to remain a niche OS even if it doesn't get the chop.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31261450</id>
	<title>Re:Article Doesn't Quite Say it, But Not Suprised</title>
	<author>cpghost</author>
	<datestamp>1265135400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Development still hasn't been opened and there is no public repository development model.</p></div></blockquote><p>

ON sources (i.e. the base sources + kernel, something like FreeBSD's<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/src tree) are under Mercurial though, and one can easily clone <a href="http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/Project+onnv/WebHome" title="opensolaris.org">the repository</a> [opensolaris.org]. So they're moving in the right direction.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Development still has n't been opened and there is no public repository development model .
ON sources ( i.e .
the base sources + kernel , something like FreeBSD 's /usr/src tree ) are under Mercurial though , and one can easily clone the repository [ opensolaris.org ] .
So they 're moving in the right direction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Development still hasn't been opened and there is no public repository development model.
ON sources (i.e.
the base sources + kernel, something like FreeBSD's /usr/src tree) are under Mercurial though, and one can easily clone the repository [opensolaris.org].
So they're moving in the right direction.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258344</id>
	<title>Wonder if someone can help me here</title>
	<author>sleeponthemic</author>
	<datestamp>1265120640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is there a way I can filter all KDawson articles out?  Rather than endlessly whine about it, I'm looking for a way to return slashdot to the way it used to be.  That is, with some integrity.  I think I've read three piece of shit, antagonistically misleading articles posted by this bastion of all that is wrong with journalism today alone.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is there a way I can filter all KDawson articles out ?
Rather than endlessly whine about it , I 'm looking for a way to return slashdot to the way it used to be .
That is , with some integrity .
I think I 've read three piece of shit , antagonistically misleading articles posted by this bastion of all that is wrong with journalism today alone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is there a way I can filter all KDawson articles out?
Rather than endlessly whine about it, I'm looking for a way to return slashdot to the way it used to be.
That is, with some integrity.
I think I've read three piece of shit, antagonistically misleading articles posted by this bastion of all that is wrong with journalism today alone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257626</id>
	<title>Article Doesn't Quite Say it, But Not Suprised</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265113080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The article doesn't quite say it, and it doesn't have the smoking gun of "We're canning OpenSolaris", but that end of life page for OpenSolaris looks pretty damn final to me and there is little room for interpretation.<br> <br>

I wouldn't be surprised if Open Solaris went the journey. The whole point of it was to arrest the slide of Solaris in the face of Linux, in particular, and so that Sun could tell everyone that Solaris was open and just like Linux. Unfortunately, OpenSolaris has contributed little, if anything, to Solaris. There's no community of developers apart from those Sun sanctioned and things like Solaris's driver support is still a long way behind where Linux is. Development still hasn't been opened and there is no public repository development model. Sun, or Oracle now, is bankrolling it with none of the cost savings you would expect from such a project.<br> <br>

One can only hope that Oracle won't follow the same 'strategy' that Sun have followed for the past ten years, because it got Sun into trouble and it'll cost Oracle rather a lot of money if they get it wrong. However, they look as if they're doing swift about-turns on that and a statement of their future intent is clear when you go to www.sun.com - it redirects straight to www.oracle.com.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The article does n't quite say it , and it does n't have the smoking gun of " We 're canning OpenSolaris " , but that end of life page for OpenSolaris looks pretty damn final to me and there is little room for interpretation .
I would n't be surprised if Open Solaris went the journey .
The whole point of it was to arrest the slide of Solaris in the face of Linux , in particular , and so that Sun could tell everyone that Solaris was open and just like Linux .
Unfortunately , OpenSolaris has contributed little , if anything , to Solaris .
There 's no community of developers apart from those Sun sanctioned and things like Solaris 's driver support is still a long way behind where Linux is .
Development still has n't been opened and there is no public repository development model .
Sun , or Oracle now , is bankrolling it with none of the cost savings you would expect from such a project .
One can only hope that Oracle wo n't follow the same 'strategy ' that Sun have followed for the past ten years , because it got Sun into trouble and it 'll cost Oracle rather a lot of money if they get it wrong .
However , they look as if they 're doing swift about-turns on that and a statement of their future intent is clear when you go to www.sun.com - it redirects straight to www.oracle.com .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The article doesn't quite say it, and it doesn't have the smoking gun of "We're canning OpenSolaris", but that end of life page for OpenSolaris looks pretty damn final to me and there is little room for interpretation.
I wouldn't be surprised if Open Solaris went the journey.
The whole point of it was to arrest the slide of Solaris in the face of Linux, in particular, and so that Sun could tell everyone that Solaris was open and just like Linux.
Unfortunately, OpenSolaris has contributed little, if anything, to Solaris.
There's no community of developers apart from those Sun sanctioned and things like Solaris's driver support is still a long way behind where Linux is.
Development still hasn't been opened and there is no public repository development model.
Sun, or Oracle now, is bankrolling it with none of the cost savings you would expect from such a project.
One can only hope that Oracle won't follow the same 'strategy' that Sun have followed for the past ten years, because it got Sun into trouble and it'll cost Oracle rather a lot of money if they get it wrong.
However, they look as if they're doing swift about-turns on that and a statement of their future intent is clear when you go to www.sun.com - it redirects straight to www.oracle.com.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257986</id>
	<title>Re:while we're here, what about linux zfs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265117100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well according to the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZFS#Linux" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">wikipedia info</a> [wikipedia.org] (not sure how up to date it is) - the problem is that Sun chose (on purpose) an open license (CDDL) that makes distributing a derivative work of it and GPL software illegal.</p><p>Even a clean room implementation may have issues due to patents.</p><p>You can apparently try to run it in userspace (that's the FUSE stuff the other posters are talking about) but that's a messy solution for sure.</p><p>Chances are we'll have a production <a href="http://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Main\_Page" title="kernel.org" rel="nofollow">btrfs</a> [kernel.org] before we get an in-kernel ZFS implementation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well according to the wikipedia info [ wikipedia.org ] ( not sure how up to date it is ) - the problem is that Sun chose ( on purpose ) an open license ( CDDL ) that makes distributing a derivative work of it and GPL software illegal.Even a clean room implementation may have issues due to patents.You can apparently try to run it in userspace ( that 's the FUSE stuff the other posters are talking about ) but that 's a messy solution for sure.Chances are we 'll have a production btrfs [ kernel.org ] before we get an in-kernel ZFS implementation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well according to the wikipedia info [wikipedia.org] (not sure how up to date it is) - the problem is that Sun chose (on purpose) an open license (CDDL) that makes distributing a derivative work of it and GPL software illegal.Even a clean room implementation may have issues due to patents.You can apparently try to run it in userspace (that's the FUSE stuff the other posters are talking about) but that's a messy solution for sure.Chances are we'll have a production btrfs [kernel.org] before we get an in-kernel ZFS implementation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257698</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257602</id>
	<title>Re:Bugger.</title>
	<author>Random Person 1372</author>
	<datestamp>1265112720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>MySQL dying? SCNR.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>MySQL dying ?
SCNR .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MySQL dying?
SCNR.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31261366</id>
	<title>Solaris and SPARC: standing tall</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265135040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Nobody cares about open solaris. Nobody in their right mind would have chosen it as a platform.</p><p>I'm not surprised that IBM is the last company, AIX the last proprietary unix platform. Power the last proprietary hardware platform...</p></div><p>SPARC, the last open hardware platform. Many chips are under the GPL, and you can license yourself to manufacture chips. Ellison has publicly stated they're investing more R&amp;D into the platofrm.</p><p>OpenSolaris is like Fedora: a test bed for new ideas that will eventually become the next release of the commercial OS. It just happens that official support is available (unlike Fedora or OpenSuSE), and <em>that</em> is what's up-in-the-air.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nobody cares about open solaris .
Nobody in their right mind would have chosen it as a platform.I 'm not surprised that IBM is the last company , AIX the last proprietary unix platform .
Power the last proprietary hardware platform...SPARC , the last open hardware platform .
Many chips are under the GPL , and you can license yourself to manufacture chips .
Ellison has publicly stated they 're investing more R&amp;D into the platofrm.OpenSolaris is like Fedora : a test bed for new ideas that will eventually become the next release of the commercial OS .
It just happens that official support is available ( unlike Fedora or OpenSuSE ) , and that is what 's up-in-the-air .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nobody cares about open solaris.
Nobody in their right mind would have chosen it as a platform.I'm not surprised that IBM is the last company, AIX the last proprietary unix platform.
Power the last proprietary hardware platform...SPARC, the last open hardware platform.
Many chips are under the GPL, and you can license yourself to manufacture chips.
Ellison has publicly stated they're investing more R&amp;D into the platofrm.OpenSolaris is like Fedora: a test bed for new ideas that will eventually become the next release of the commercial OS.
It just happens that official support is available (unlike Fedora or OpenSuSE), and that is what's up-in-the-air.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258374</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262668</id>
	<title>Re:computer industry needs more standards...</title>
	<author>bill\_mcgonigle</author>
	<datestamp>1265140140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>simple mundane things like ethernet, sound, etc interfaces come with some sort of descriptors or standards which allow at least basic functionalities to be found more easily by an OS?</i></p><p>You're describing USB.  Bluetooth adopted the USB driver model for this very reason.</p><p>USB3 can help on the low end, but something like USB profiles on PCIe might also be interesting given hardware encapsulation support.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>simple mundane things like ethernet , sound , etc interfaces come with some sort of descriptors or standards which allow at least basic functionalities to be found more easily by an OS ? You 're describing USB .
Bluetooth adopted the USB driver model for this very reason.USB3 can help on the low end , but something like USB profiles on PCIe might also be interesting given hardware encapsulation support .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>simple mundane things like ethernet, sound, etc interfaces come with some sort of descriptors or standards which allow at least basic functionalities to be found more easily by an OS?You're describing USB.
Bluetooth adopted the USB driver model for this very reason.USB3 can help on the low end, but something like USB profiles on PCIe might also be interesting given hardware encapsulation support.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257890</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31261538</id>
	<title>Re:Bugger.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265135700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Can somebody show me something good to come from the Oracle-Sun deal? Anything?</p></div><p>Look at the performance numbers of the Oracle Exadata V2.</p><p>Larry Ellison feels that the integration of computer components is happening at the wrong layer. He wants to recreate what IBM did under T. J. Watson Jr. and sell systems that Just Work(tm). He thinks selling people a bunch of random shit and having them treat it as a DIY kit (or hiring consultants to put the kit together) is dumb.</p><p>You call up Oracle/Sun, tell them you need something that does X with performance parameter Y, and they'll drop a box in your loading dock. If it doesn't perform you call one number and they fix it for you (instead of finger pointing).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Can somebody show me something good to come from the Oracle-Sun deal ?
Anything ? Look at the performance numbers of the Oracle Exadata V2.Larry Ellison feels that the integration of computer components is happening at the wrong layer .
He wants to recreate what IBM did under T. J. Watson Jr. and sell systems that Just Work ( tm ) .
He thinks selling people a bunch of random shit and having them treat it as a DIY kit ( or hiring consultants to put the kit together ) is dumb.You call up Oracle/Sun , tell them you need something that does X with performance parameter Y , and they 'll drop a box in your loading dock .
If it does n't perform you call one number and they fix it for you ( instead of finger pointing ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can somebody show me something good to come from the Oracle-Sun deal?
Anything?Look at the performance numbers of the Oracle Exadata V2.Larry Ellison feels that the integration of computer components is happening at the wrong layer.
He wants to recreate what IBM did under T. J. Watson Jr. and sell systems that Just Work(tm).
He thinks selling people a bunch of random shit and having them treat it as a DIY kit (or hiring consultants to put the kit together) is dumb.You call up Oracle/Sun, tell them you need something that does X with performance parameter Y, and they'll drop a box in your loading dock.
If it doesn't perform you call one number and they fix it for you (instead of finger pointing).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259690</id>
	<title>Re:What is the reason for abandon fashion lately?</title>
	<author>Dare nMc</author>
	<datestamp>1265128020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At least opensolaris is technically supportable.  Sounds like Oracle is laying off the best developers.  So you have the source, and you can hire the developer...  When closed source does the same thing, you can hire the developer, but he could only start from scratch (legally.)<br>Granted this is pricey support, but you likely can't get better support than that IMHO.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At least opensolaris is technically supportable .
Sounds like Oracle is laying off the best developers .
So you have the source , and you can hire the developer... When closed source does the same thing , you can hire the developer , but he could only start from scratch ( legally .
) Granted this is pricey support , but you likely ca n't get better support than that IMHO .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At least opensolaris is technically supportable.
Sounds like Oracle is laying off the best developers.
So you have the source, and you can hire the developer...  When closed source does the same thing, you can hire the developer, but he could only start from scratch (legally.
)Granted this is pricey support, but you likely can't get better support than that IMHO.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31260914</id>
	<title>Re:Well this sucks...</title>
	<author>Colonel Fahlt</author>
	<datestamp>1265133120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The porting of ZFS to NetBSD is in progress.<br> <br>

<a href="http://wiki.netbsd.org/users/haad/porting\_zfs/" title="netbsd.org" rel="nofollow">http://wiki.netbsd.org/users/haad/porting\_zfs/</a> [netbsd.org] <br> <br>

NetBSD is also seeing work done on integrating DTrace, incidentally.<br> <br>

<a href="http://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-kern/2010/02/15/msg007333.html" title="netbsd.org" rel="nofollow">http://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-kern/2010/02/15/msg007333.html</a> [netbsd.org] <br> <br>

I'm not very familiar with DragonFlyBSD, but they have a different approach called HAMMER.<br> <br>

<a href="http://kerneltrap.org/DragonFlyBSD/HAMMER\_Filesystem\_Design" title="kerneltrap.org" rel="nofollow">http://kerneltrap.org/DragonFlyBSD/HAMMER\_Filesystem\_Design</a> [kerneltrap.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>The porting of ZFS to NetBSD is in progress .
http : //wiki.netbsd.org/users/haad/porting \ _zfs/ [ netbsd.org ] NetBSD is also seeing work done on integrating DTrace , incidentally .
http : //mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-kern/2010/02/15/msg007333.html [ netbsd.org ] I 'm not very familiar with DragonFlyBSD , but they have a different approach called HAMMER .
http : //kerneltrap.org/DragonFlyBSD/HAMMER \ _Filesystem \ _Design [ kerneltrap.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The porting of ZFS to NetBSD is in progress.
http://wiki.netbsd.org/users/haad/porting\_zfs/ [netbsd.org]  

NetBSD is also seeing work done on integrating DTrace, incidentally.
http://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-kern/2010/02/15/msg007333.html [netbsd.org]  

I'm not very familiar with DragonFlyBSD, but they have a different approach called HAMMER.
http://kerneltrap.org/DragonFlyBSD/HAMMER\_Filesystem\_Design [kerneltrap.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257912</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257912</id>
	<title>Re:Well this sucks...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265116320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Anyone know a good place to get access to ZFS in another place? Would BSD or FUSE on Linux be better?</p></div></blockquote><p>
FreeBSD - ZFS is no longer in experimental status as of version 8.0. I haven't heard anyone recommend FUSE on Linux. As far as other BSDs go, I know that at least OpenBSD has no plans to include it at this stage.
</p><p>
<a href="http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/openbsd-misc/2009/1/17/4750954" title="kerneltrap.org">http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/openbsd-misc/2009/1/17/4750954</a> [kerneltrap.org] - But that was over a year ago.
</p><p>
At the moment I'm learning FreeBSD over OpenSolaris because I want ZFS, FreeBSD is fully free and open source, FreeBSD looks to have a wider array of ports, which should be easy to install, even though with the LiveCD of OpenSolaris it boots up straight to X. On a production server or maybe even workstation, I think the choice would be down to FreeBSD versus Solaris, rather than OpenSolaris. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. Solaris does have a lot of nice features though, FMA (fault management architecture - lets you know when something has gone kaput and what to do about it.) And FreeBSD will lag in terms of the version of ZFS it supports. Deduplication looks to be a pretty cool feature - if you copy some data to another part of the HDD, and then you leave it a bit and your hoarding nature kicks in and you don't know whether you can delete it or not - no fear, ZFS will recognize the data as the same, only store it in one place (unless modified of course) and so there is no benefit to deleting the copy other than being a neat freak.
</p><p>
I'm presently wrestling with setting up FreeBSD on wireless. After that I have to get X set up. It would be nice if FreeBSD had version specific handbooks ala PostgreSQL, but they don't. So it's a combination of man pages, handbook, googling, etc to get me where I want to go. It's a bit of a contrast to Ubuntu which I set up on another box in the space of about an hour, including updates. Unmetered FOSS mirrors on ISPs kick ass!
</p><p>
Anyway, I suspect that the user base of FreeBSD will grow by leaps and bounds when people realize the advantages of ZFS and don't want to wait for BTRFS or whatever the results of this meeting might be: <a href="http://blogs.sun.com/bonwick/entry/casablanca" title="sun.com">http://blogs.sun.com/bonwick/entry/casablanca</a> [sun.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone know a good place to get access to ZFS in another place ?
Would BSD or FUSE on Linux be better ?
FreeBSD - ZFS is no longer in experimental status as of version 8.0 .
I have n't heard anyone recommend FUSE on Linux .
As far as other BSDs go , I know that at least OpenBSD has no plans to include it at this stage .
http : //kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/openbsd-misc/2009/1/17/4750954 [ kerneltrap.org ] - But that was over a year ago .
At the moment I 'm learning FreeBSD over OpenSolaris because I want ZFS , FreeBSD is fully free and open source , FreeBSD looks to have a wider array of ports , which should be easy to install , even though with the LiveCD of OpenSolaris it boots up straight to X. On a production server or maybe even workstation , I think the choice would be down to FreeBSD versus Solaris , rather than OpenSolaris .
Someone correct me if I 'm wrong .
Solaris does have a lot of nice features though , FMA ( fault management architecture - lets you know when something has gone kaput and what to do about it .
) And FreeBSD will lag in terms of the version of ZFS it supports .
Deduplication looks to be a pretty cool feature - if you copy some data to another part of the HDD , and then you leave it a bit and your hoarding nature kicks in and you do n't know whether you can delete it or not - no fear , ZFS will recognize the data as the same , only store it in one place ( unless modified of course ) and so there is no benefit to deleting the copy other than being a neat freak .
I 'm presently wrestling with setting up FreeBSD on wireless .
After that I have to get X set up .
It would be nice if FreeBSD had version specific handbooks ala PostgreSQL , but they do n't .
So it 's a combination of man pages , handbook , googling , etc to get me where I want to go .
It 's a bit of a contrast to Ubuntu which I set up on another box in the space of about an hour , including updates .
Unmetered FOSS mirrors on ISPs kick ass !
Anyway , I suspect that the user base of FreeBSD will grow by leaps and bounds when people realize the advantages of ZFS and do n't want to wait for BTRFS or whatever the results of this meeting might be : http : //blogs.sun.com/bonwick/entry/casablanca [ sun.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone know a good place to get access to ZFS in another place?
Would BSD or FUSE on Linux be better?
FreeBSD - ZFS is no longer in experimental status as of version 8.0.
I haven't heard anyone recommend FUSE on Linux.
As far as other BSDs go, I know that at least OpenBSD has no plans to include it at this stage.
http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/openbsd-misc/2009/1/17/4750954 [kerneltrap.org] - But that was over a year ago.
At the moment I'm learning FreeBSD over OpenSolaris because I want ZFS, FreeBSD is fully free and open source, FreeBSD looks to have a wider array of ports, which should be easy to install, even though with the LiveCD of OpenSolaris it boots up straight to X. On a production server or maybe even workstation, I think the choice would be down to FreeBSD versus Solaris, rather than OpenSolaris.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
Solaris does have a lot of nice features though, FMA (fault management architecture - lets you know when something has gone kaput and what to do about it.
) And FreeBSD will lag in terms of the version of ZFS it supports.
Deduplication looks to be a pretty cool feature - if you copy some data to another part of the HDD, and then you leave it a bit and your hoarding nature kicks in and you don't know whether you can delete it or not - no fear, ZFS will recognize the data as the same, only store it in one place (unless modified of course) and so there is no benefit to deleting the copy other than being a neat freak.
I'm presently wrestling with setting up FreeBSD on wireless.
After that I have to get X set up.
It would be nice if FreeBSD had version specific handbooks ala PostgreSQL, but they don't.
So it's a combination of man pages, handbook, googling, etc to get me where I want to go.
It's a bit of a contrast to Ubuntu which I set up on another box in the space of about an hour, including updates.
Unmetered FOSS mirrors on ISPs kick ass!
Anyway, I suspect that the user base of FreeBSD will grow by leaps and bounds when people realize the advantages of ZFS and don't want to wait for BTRFS or whatever the results of this meeting might be: http://blogs.sun.com/bonwick/entry/casablanca [sun.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257680</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257462</id>
	<title>Re:Fork?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265110980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The OpenSolaris community is awfully small. It really can't do very well to be honest. Couple dozen active people are not enough to keep an entire operating system afloat and meaningful.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The OpenSolaris community is awfully small .
It really ca n't do very well to be honest .
Couple dozen active people are not enough to keep an entire operating system afloat and meaningful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The OpenSolaris community is awfully small.
It really can't do very well to be honest.
Couple dozen active people are not enough to keep an entire operating system afloat and meaningful.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257406</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31264242</id>
	<title>Re:Another "dead unix" for the collection.</title>
	<author>Colin Smith</author>
	<datestamp>1265104020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>DG/UX</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>DG/UX</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DG/UX</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257452</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31265406</id>
	<title>Re:IBM &amp; AIX - the last man standing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265108760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Glad to see someone else here understands the modern day enterprise market.   Of course POWER hit 5Ghz because they ripped out out-of-order execution from power6 and in doing so killed a lot of the real-world performance improvements from it.  Looking like POWER7 is fixing that though (of course clock speed is going down again).</p><p>The reality is that x86 in 2010 looks very different from x86 in 2000.  NUMA, on-die memory controllers, 12-core processors, etc etc.  x86 is pretty viable for "large" workloads these days even though most arm-chair server engineers still think you need a slow-as-shit SPARC box for the 'highend'.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Glad to see someone else here understands the modern day enterprise market .
Of course POWER hit 5Ghz because they ripped out out-of-order execution from power6 and in doing so killed a lot of the real-world performance improvements from it .
Looking like POWER7 is fixing that though ( of course clock speed is going down again ) .The reality is that x86 in 2010 looks very different from x86 in 2000 .
NUMA , on-die memory controllers , 12-core processors , etc etc .
x86 is pretty viable for " large " workloads these days even though most arm-chair server engineers still think you need a slow-as-shit SPARC box for the 'highend' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Glad to see someone else here understands the modern day enterprise market.
Of course POWER hit 5Ghz because they ripped out out-of-order execution from power6 and in doing so killed a lot of the real-world performance improvements from it.
Looking like POWER7 is fixing that though (of course clock speed is going down again).The reality is that x86 in 2010 looks very different from x86 in 2000.
NUMA, on-die memory controllers, 12-core processors, etc etc.
x86 is pretty viable for "large" workloads these days even though most arm-chair server engineers still think you need a slow-as-shit SPARC box for the 'highend'.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258374</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31260068</id>
	<title>Re:Another "dead unix" for the collection.</title>
	<author>tadas</author>
	<datestamp>1265129580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>A/UX
IRIX
Unicos
Xenix
Ultrix
OSF/1

soon: OpenSolaris
and if Larry Ellison has a bad dream: Solaris<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-(</p></div>
</blockquote><p>

But has Netcraft confirmed it?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A/UX IRIX Unicos Xenix Ultrix OSF/1 soon : OpenSolaris and if Larry Ellison has a bad dream : Solaris : - ( But has Netcraft confirmed it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A/UX
IRIX
Unicos
Xenix
Ultrix
OSF/1

soon: OpenSolaris
and if Larry Ellison has a bad dream: Solaris :-(


But has Netcraft confirmed it?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257452</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257362</id>
	<title>Bugger.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265109840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can somebody show me something good to come from the Oracle-Sun deal? Anything?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can somebody show me something good to come from the Oracle-Sun deal ?
Anything ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can somebody show me something good to come from the Oracle-Sun deal?
Anything?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262066</id>
	<title>Re:Article Doesn't Quite Say it, But Not Suprised</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265137680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hopefully Oracle has enough experience with its Unbreakable Linux and how the whole RH/Fedora ecosystem works, that it can use that knowledge to make a Solaris/OpenSolaris ecosystem work too.</p><p>It's that or kiss Solaris good bye... OpenSolaris is pretty much its last chance to get mainstream. But Sun hasn't been doing a good job at opening it and now there are a lot of questions. If Oracle is commited to something like RH/Fedora, even then it will take a while. Development of OpenSolaris is way too closed... and if you search around, you can find people complaining Sun didn't benefit much from open sourcing it. Of course, half assed project it was so far, how could it benefit fully.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hopefully Oracle has enough experience with its Unbreakable Linux and how the whole RH/Fedora ecosystem works , that it can use that knowledge to make a Solaris/OpenSolaris ecosystem work too.It 's that or kiss Solaris good bye... OpenSolaris is pretty much its last chance to get mainstream .
But Sun has n't been doing a good job at opening it and now there are a lot of questions .
If Oracle is commited to something like RH/Fedora , even then it will take a while .
Development of OpenSolaris is way too closed... and if you search around , you can find people complaining Sun did n't benefit much from open sourcing it .
Of course , half assed project it was so far , how could it benefit fully .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hopefully Oracle has enough experience with its Unbreakable Linux and how the whole RH/Fedora ecosystem works, that it can use that knowledge to make a Solaris/OpenSolaris ecosystem work too.It's that or kiss Solaris good bye... OpenSolaris is pretty much its last chance to get mainstream.
But Sun hasn't been doing a good job at opening it and now there are a lot of questions.
If Oracle is commited to something like RH/Fedora, even then it will take a while.
Development of OpenSolaris is way too closed... and if you search around, you can find people complaining Sun didn't benefit much from open sourcing it.
Of course, half assed project it was so far, how could it benefit fully.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257452</id>
	<title>Another "dead unix" for the collection.</title>
	<author>psergiu</author>
	<datestamp>1265110860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A/UX<br>IRIX<br>Unicos<br>Xenix<br>Ultrix<br>OSF/1</p><p>soon: OpenSolaris<br>and if Larry Ellison has a bad dream: Solaris</p><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A/UXIRIXUnicosXenixUltrixOSF/1soon : OpenSolarisand if Larry Ellison has a bad dream : Solaris : - (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A/UXIRIXUnicosXenixUltrixOSF/1soon: OpenSolarisand if Larry Ellison has a bad dream: Solaris :-(</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257680
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257780
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257452
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31260166
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31267574
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257680
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31269098
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257680
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262706
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258044
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257698
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262722
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259690
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257356
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31261450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257626
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31260040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262316
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258078
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257694
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31264666
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258374
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257406
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258616
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257698
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31261538
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257462
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257406
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31261542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257680
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262290
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257452
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257626
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259050
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257680
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258218
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257890
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257626
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259172
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258516
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257356
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31264242
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257452
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257680
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257654
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257970
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257452
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257680
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31260914
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257680
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31261366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258374
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259242
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31263130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257680
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31282070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31260354
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31267184
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258374
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257986
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257698
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258000
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257698
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257698
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31265406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258374
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257698
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257406
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258108
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257698
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257356
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257680
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262668
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257890
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259650
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257680
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257622
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257356
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258374
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31260704
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257356
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31282068
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31270110
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31260686
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31260068
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257452
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_0120245_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257452
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_0120245.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257366
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_0120245.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258344
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31260354
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_0120245.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257604
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31260040
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257842
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257694
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_0120245.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257778
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_0120245.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258374
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31261366
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31264666
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262670
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31265406
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31267184
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_0120245.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257356
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258022
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258066
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258288
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258516
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259690
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31260704
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_0120245.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257362
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257654
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257764
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259242
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31261542
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257602
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262706
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257622
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31261538
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257970
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262722
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257418
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31260166
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_0120245.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257452
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31264242
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257780
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259310
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262918
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262290
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31260068
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_0120245.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257406
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257514
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257466
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257462
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_0120245.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257920
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_0120245.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257626
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262588
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31261450
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262066
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_0120245.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258078
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262316
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_0120245.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31261650
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_0120245.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257698
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257986
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258000
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258108
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262490
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258616
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258044
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258988
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_0120245.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257500
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31282070
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257890
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262668
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258218
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31258418
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259172
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_0120245.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257680
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257978
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259050
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257996
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259120
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257912
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31262880
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31269098
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31263130
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31260914
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259662
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259878
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31267574
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31259650
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_0120245.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31260686
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31270110
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31282068
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_0120245.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_0120245.31257408
</commentlist>
</conversation>
