<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_26_1549215</id>
	<title>PC-BSD 8.0 Release Focuses On Desktop Use</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1267201920000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>donadony writes <i>"Last Monday <a href="http://www.pcbsd.org/">PC-BSD 8.0</a> was released. PC-BSD is based on FreeBSD and uses KDE as its default desktop environment. PC-BSD is designed to make BSD much easier for desktop use. The 8.0 release includes support for 3D acceleration with NVIDIA drivers on amd64 and improvements in the USB subsystem. The PC-BSD team has also developed a friendly package manager system with a simple-to-use GUI tool (see the <a href="http://www.unixmen.com/news-today/838-bsd-is-now-much-easier-for-desktop-use-with-pc-bsd-80-installation-and-screenshots">screenshots tour</a>). For a full list of changes, refer to the <a href="http://www.unixmen.com/content/view/151/11/">changelog</a>."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>donadony writes " Last Monday PC-BSD 8.0 was released .
PC-BSD is based on FreeBSD and uses KDE as its default desktop environment .
PC-BSD is designed to make BSD much easier for desktop use .
The 8.0 release includes support for 3D acceleration with NVIDIA drivers on amd64 and improvements in the USB subsystem .
The PC-BSD team has also developed a friendly package manager system with a simple-to-use GUI tool ( see the screenshots tour ) .
For a full list of changes , refer to the changelog .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>donadony writes "Last Monday PC-BSD 8.0 was released.
PC-BSD is based on FreeBSD and uses KDE as its default desktop environment.
PC-BSD is designed to make BSD much easier for desktop use.
The 8.0 release includes support for 3D acceleration with NVIDIA drivers on amd64 and improvements in the USB subsystem.
The PC-BSD team has also developed a friendly package manager system with a simple-to-use GUI tool (see the screenshots tour).
For a full list of changes, refer to the changelog.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287648</id>
	<title>PBI files</title>
	<author>abigor</author>
	<datestamp>1267209900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of the nicest things about PC-BSD is the whole PBI idea, which are basically like<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.pkg files on OS X. When installing apps via PBIs, you get all the dependencies in one shot, which means you don't destabilise your whole system when installing from a central repository where app A requires a library version that breaks apps B, C, D.... This is particularly true when you want to use third party repositories.</p><p>PBIs are simply downloaded and installed from places like <a href="http://www.pbidir.com/" title="pbidir.com">http://www.pbidir.com/</a> [pbidir.com], the process is graphical, and they are easily uninstalled without fuss.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the nicest things about PC-BSD is the whole PBI idea , which are basically like .pkg files on OS X. When installing apps via PBIs , you get all the dependencies in one shot , which means you do n't destabilise your whole system when installing from a central repository where app A requires a library version that breaks apps B , C , D.... This is particularly true when you want to use third party repositories.PBIs are simply downloaded and installed from places like http : //www.pbidir.com/ [ pbidir.com ] , the process is graphical , and they are easily uninstalled without fuss .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the nicest things about PC-BSD is the whole PBI idea, which are basically like .pkg files on OS X. When installing apps via PBIs, you get all the dependencies in one shot, which means you don't destabilise your whole system when installing from a central repository where app A requires a library version that breaks apps B, C, D.... This is particularly true when you want to use third party repositories.PBIs are simply downloaded and installed from places like http://www.pbidir.com/ [pbidir.com], the process is graphical, and they are easily uninstalled without fuss.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31289004</id>
	<title>Re:Why BSD?</title>
	<author>clang\_jangle</author>
	<datestamp>1267214580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Why we need the BSD kernel for desktop? While the Linux kernel has the best hardware support coverage among all open source kernels, I am curious what's the reasons behind to pick BSD for a desktop oriented distro.</p></div></blockquote><p>FreeBSD makes a great developer's desktop, at least for those of us who know how to do what we need to with the CLI (presumably PC-BSD's raison d'etre is to make that caviat obsolete).  Excellent performance, satisfying consistency, and it's a very clean system. Gotta love a system whose kernel is small enough to configure in nano if you want to. <br> <br> I'd used FreeBSD for servers for years, and switched to it for the desktop after I had problems with Debian while using large, external USB hard drives (wonder if they ever fixed that?). Hardware support is surprisingly good, except for TV tuner cards. I still dual-boot Linux on the laptop though (a customized version of the excellent gentoo-based systemrescuecd), mainly for the filesystem drivers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why we need the BSD kernel for desktop ?
While the Linux kernel has the best hardware support coverage among all open source kernels , I am curious what 's the reasons behind to pick BSD for a desktop oriented distro.FreeBSD makes a great developer 's desktop , at least for those of us who know how to do what we need to with the CLI ( presumably PC-BSD 's raison d'etre is to make that caviat obsolete ) .
Excellent performance , satisfying consistency , and it 's a very clean system .
Got ta love a system whose kernel is small enough to configure in nano if you want to .
I 'd used FreeBSD for servers for years , and switched to it for the desktop after I had problems with Debian while using large , external USB hard drives ( wonder if they ever fixed that ? ) .
Hardware support is surprisingly good , except for TV tuner cards .
I still dual-boot Linux on the laptop though ( a customized version of the excellent gentoo-based systemrescuecd ) , mainly for the filesystem drivers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why we need the BSD kernel for desktop?
While the Linux kernel has the best hardware support coverage among all open source kernels, I am curious what's the reasons behind to pick BSD for a desktop oriented distro.FreeBSD makes a great developer's desktop, at least for those of us who know how to do what we need to with the CLI (presumably PC-BSD's raison d'etre is to make that caviat obsolete).
Excellent performance, satisfying consistency, and it's a very clean system.
Gotta love a system whose kernel is small enough to configure in nano if you want to.
I'd used FreeBSD for servers for years, and switched to it for the desktop after I had problems with Debian while using large, external USB hard drives (wonder if they ever fixed that?).
Hardware support is surprisingly good, except for TV tuner cards.
I still dual-boot Linux on the laptop though (a customized version of the excellent gentoo-based systemrescuecd), mainly for the filesystem drivers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31289754</id>
	<title>Re:Limited selection of PBIs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267217940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The lack of a PBI to install a proper usenet newsreader has always been the deal-killer for me.</p></div></blockquote><p> Oh, please... If "cd<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/ports/mail/slrn &amp;&amp; sudo make install clean" is too much work for you then maybe you should seriously reconsider this whole "computer" thing and go buy an iPad!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The lack of a PBI to install a proper usenet newsreader has always been the deal-killer for me .
Oh , please... If " cd /usr/ports/mail/slrn &amp;&amp; sudo make install clean " is too much work for you then maybe you should seriously reconsider this whole " computer " thing and go buy an iPad !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The lack of a PBI to install a proper usenet newsreader has always been the deal-killer for me.
Oh, please... If "cd /usr/ports/mail/slrn &amp;&amp; sudo make install clean" is too much work for you then maybe you should seriously reconsider this whole "computer" thing and go buy an iPad!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288122</id>
	<title>Too hard to switch again</title>
	<author>wrencherd</author>
	<datestamp>1267211400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I tried PC-BSD a few years ago (it was based on FreeBSD 5.5 then).</p><p>I think it's a good idea, but at the time it seemed like a lot of trouble to learn a new kind of "port system" when I'd already invested a lot in learning FreeBSD's (not that I've ever mastered it or anything).</p><p>I know these Ubuntu-like distributions are supposed to make things easier for those starting out, but sometimes it seems like just another learning curve.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I tried PC-BSD a few years ago ( it was based on FreeBSD 5.5 then ) .I think it 's a good idea , but at the time it seemed like a lot of trouble to learn a new kind of " port system " when I 'd already invested a lot in learning FreeBSD 's ( not that I 've ever mastered it or anything ) .I know these Ubuntu-like distributions are supposed to make things easier for those starting out , but sometimes it seems like just another learning curve .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tried PC-BSD a few years ago (it was based on FreeBSD 5.5 then).I think it's a good idea, but at the time it seemed like a lot of trouble to learn a new kind of "port system" when I'd already invested a lot in learning FreeBSD's (not that I've ever mastered it or anything).I know these Ubuntu-like distributions are supposed to make things easier for those starting out, but sometimes it seems like just another learning curve.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288552</id>
	<title>Limited selection of PBIs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267212780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've tried PC-BSD a couple of times and liked it but I've never stuck with it.  The lack of a PBI to install a proper usenet newsreader has always been the deal-killer for me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've tried PC-BSD a couple of times and liked it but I 've never stuck with it .
The lack of a PBI to install a proper usenet newsreader has always been the deal-killer for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've tried PC-BSD a couple of times and liked it but I've never stuck with it.
The lack of a PBI to install a proper usenet newsreader has always been the deal-killer for me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286658</id>
	<title>Re:Am I the only ignorant one to think...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267206600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, you are. But this is a linux fanbois site so your comment is not entirely unexpected. Stop writing your own material.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , you are .
But this is a linux fanbois site so your comment is not entirely unexpected .
Stop writing your own material .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, you are.
But this is a linux fanbois site so your comment is not entirely unexpected.
Stop writing your own material.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286358</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286780</id>
	<title>Been testing it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267207020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And this is a BIG improvement over version 7. Still some bugs to be worked out, but it's got far better integration with the PBI installer (similar to synaptic), a very good GUI installer, and the very latest nvidia drivers.</p><p>Very nice, very well executed. They turned it out pretty fast too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And this is a BIG improvement over version 7 .
Still some bugs to be worked out , but it 's got far better integration with the PBI installer ( similar to synaptic ) , a very good GUI installer , and the very latest nvidia drivers.Very nice , very well executed .
They turned it out pretty fast too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And this is a BIG improvement over version 7.
Still some bugs to be worked out, but it's got far better integration with the PBI installer (similar to synaptic), a very good GUI installer, and the very latest nvidia drivers.Very nice, very well executed.
They turned it out pretty fast too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31311418</id>
	<title>Re:PBI files</title>
	<author>Baloo Uriza</author>
	<datestamp>1267372440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, because static linking is so easy on hard disk space, and does wonders for update times when a dependent library gets upgraded...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , because static linking is so easy on hard disk space , and does wonders for update times when a dependent library gets upgraded.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, because static linking is so easy on hard disk space, and does wonders for update times when a dependent library gets upgraded...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31290868</id>
	<title>Re:Wait</title>
	<author>Elektroschock</author>
	<datestamp>1267179960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh yeah, why not use GNUSTEP...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh yeah , why not use GNUSTEP.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh yeah, why not use GNUSTEP...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287876</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31289416</id>
	<title>Re:Been testing it</title>
	<author>WinterSolstice</author>
	<datestamp>1267216140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, the synaptic analogy is for the Linux guys<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D</p><p>I couldn't agree more with the 'getting to a desktop' part. There are some gotchas and some non-intuitive steps to getting KDE or Gnome running on a BSD box (like installing X11, configuring<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/etc/ttys and whatnot). So PC-BSD is very good at being a clicky-clicky come back later to a desktop kind of thing.</p><p>I still prefer the FreeBSD vanilla, just because I don't care for KDE, but I very much respect what they've done.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , the synaptic analogy is for the Linux guys : DI could n't agree more with the 'getting to a desktop ' part .
There are some gotchas and some non-intuitive steps to getting KDE or Gnome running on a BSD box ( like installing X11 , configuring /etc/ttys and whatnot ) .
So PC-BSD is very good at being a clicky-clicky come back later to a desktop kind of thing.I still prefer the FreeBSD vanilla , just because I do n't care for KDE , but I very much respect what they 've done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, the synaptic analogy is for the Linux guys :DI couldn't agree more with the 'getting to a desktop' part.
There are some gotchas and some non-intuitive steps to getting KDE or Gnome running on a BSD box (like installing X11, configuring /etc/ttys and whatnot).
So PC-BSD is very good at being a clicky-clicky come back later to a desktop kind of thing.I still prefer the FreeBSD vanilla, just because I don't care for KDE, but I very much respect what they've done.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287818</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286414</id>
	<title>Linux Binary Compatible</title>
	<author>CSHARP123</author>
	<datestamp>1267205940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Using Linux Binary compatible layer does all the Linux drivers work too or just applications? Does anybody know?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Using Linux Binary compatible layer does all the Linux drivers work too or just applications ?
Does anybody know ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Using Linux Binary compatible layer does all the Linux drivers work too or just applications?
Does anybody know?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31289488</id>
	<title>Re:PBI files</title>
	<author>ducomputergeek</author>
	<datestamp>1267216560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We've had this for well over a decade in FreeBSD, it's called Ports.  It may not be GUI, but going cd<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/ports/whatever/i/want make install clean isn't that hard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We 've had this for well over a decade in FreeBSD , it 's called Ports .
It may not be GUI , but going cd /usr/ports/whatever/i/want make install clean is n't that hard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We've had this for well over a decade in FreeBSD, it's called Ports.
It may not be GUI, but going cd /usr/ports/whatever/i/want make install clean isn't that hard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287818</id>
	<title>Re:Been testing it</title>
	<author>aztracker1</author>
	<datestamp>1267210440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually PBI isn't much like synaptic at all... it's more like sandboxing, where each application has all of its' dependancies.  The hard part is there wasn't much in place for dependence on packaged frameworks like Java, Mono, Python, Ruby etc, in order to have some things centralized for applications that run under these environments.  This may have changed, to be honest the last time I really looked into it was around PC-BSD 5-6.  I had it as part of my tagline/summary for a while.  I honestly like PC-BSD a lot, and wish it all the continued success.  It's a much nicer experience to a working BSD desktop than the FreeBSD installer.  And once you get it installed, and get ports/packages up and running, you don't even need to use the PBI system if you don't want to.  It's a great jumpstart to a FreeBSD desktop even, and shares the same target platform.

If the hardware support were just a tad bit better, I'd probably be using it as my main OS.  I'd have to convert all my VMWare images' drives to fixed size, single file and adjust the in-vm drivers but it could work out well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually PBI is n't much like synaptic at all... it 's more like sandboxing , where each application has all of its ' dependancies .
The hard part is there was n't much in place for dependence on packaged frameworks like Java , Mono , Python , Ruby etc , in order to have some things centralized for applications that run under these environments .
This may have changed , to be honest the last time I really looked into it was around PC-BSD 5-6 .
I had it as part of my tagline/summary for a while .
I honestly like PC-BSD a lot , and wish it all the continued success .
It 's a much nicer experience to a working BSD desktop than the FreeBSD installer .
And once you get it installed , and get ports/packages up and running , you do n't even need to use the PBI system if you do n't want to .
It 's a great jumpstart to a FreeBSD desktop even , and shares the same target platform .
If the hardware support were just a tad bit better , I 'd probably be using it as my main OS .
I 'd have to convert all my VMWare images ' drives to fixed size , single file and adjust the in-vm drivers but it could work out well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually PBI isn't much like synaptic at all... it's more like sandboxing, where each application has all of its' dependancies.
The hard part is there wasn't much in place for dependence on packaged frameworks like Java, Mono, Python, Ruby etc, in order to have some things centralized for applications that run under these environments.
This may have changed, to be honest the last time I really looked into it was around PC-BSD 5-6.
I had it as part of my tagline/summary for a while.
I honestly like PC-BSD a lot, and wish it all the continued success.
It's a much nicer experience to a working BSD desktop than the FreeBSD installer.
And once you get it installed, and get ports/packages up and running, you don't even need to use the PBI system if you don't want to.
It's a great jumpstart to a FreeBSD desktop even, and shares the same target platform.
If the hardware support were just a tad bit better, I'd probably be using it as my main OS.
I'd have to convert all my VMWare images' drives to fixed size, single file and adjust the in-vm drivers but it could work out well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286780</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287766</id>
	<title>Re:Linux Binary Compatible</title>
	<author>V!NCENT</author>
	<datestamp>1267210260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The layer is for the ABI, in other words the Application Binary Interface (it's like the API of a Kernel for applications). This is because FreeBSD is not Linux. With Linux the drivers are from within the kernel, or somewhat outside of it with modules.</p><p>However... If you want open source graphics drivers (I am sorry... I do not know your level of knowledge/expertice so just ignore what I am about to say if it makes you go like *whoooosh*<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;) ) than these are tied into X.org (the graphical foundation upon which the Linux GUI's works) and the Linux KMS (kernel mode setting) (as the UMS, user mode setting, is disabled in most current drivers) and if FreeBSD already has the KMS feature (was planned) then these drivers work out of the box on FreeBSD<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The layer is for the ABI , in other words the Application Binary Interface ( it 's like the API of a Kernel for applications ) .
This is because FreeBSD is not Linux .
With Linux the drivers are from within the kernel , or somewhat outside of it with modules.However... If you want open source graphics drivers ( I am sorry... I do not know your level of knowledge/expertice so just ignore what I am about to say if it makes you go like * whoooosh * ; ) ) than these are tied into X.org ( the graphical foundation upon which the Linux GUI 's works ) and the Linux KMS ( kernel mode setting ) ( as the UMS , user mode setting , is disabled in most current drivers ) and if FreeBSD already has the KMS feature ( was planned ) then these drivers work out of the box on FreeBSD ; ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The layer is for the ABI, in other words the Application Binary Interface (it's like the API of a Kernel for applications).
This is because FreeBSD is not Linux.
With Linux the drivers are from within the kernel, or somewhat outside of it with modules.However... If you want open source graphics drivers (I am sorry... I do not know your level of knowledge/expertice so just ignore what I am about to say if it makes you go like *whoooosh* ;) ) than these are tied into X.org (the graphical foundation upon which the Linux GUI's works) and the Linux KMS (kernel mode setting) (as the UMS, user mode setting, is disabled in most current drivers) and if FreeBSD already has the KMS feature (was planned) then these drivers work out of the box on FreeBSD ;).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286414</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288964</id>
	<title>Re:Bad Headline</title>
	<author>Trepidity</author>
	<datestamp>1267214460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I read it as essentially, "PC-BSD 8.0 Released: Tagline about wtf PC-BSD is", or perhaps even "PC-BSD 8.0 Released: Why not just use FreeBSD?"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I read it as essentially , " PC-BSD 8.0 Released : Tagline about wtf PC-BSD is " , or perhaps even " PC-BSD 8.0 Released : Why not just use FreeBSD ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I read it as essentially, "PC-BSD 8.0 Released: Tagline about wtf PC-BSD is", or perhaps even "PC-BSD 8.0 Released: Why not just use FreeBSD?
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286676</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288800</id>
	<title>Re:PBI files</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1267213800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds like you get a lot of redundant libraries that way.  Why not just go back to statically linking everything if you're going to do that?  The proper solution is to support multiple versions of a library in your package manager. I don't know why package managers don't do that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like you get a lot of redundant libraries that way .
Why not just go back to statically linking everything if you 're going to do that ?
The proper solution is to support multiple versions of a library in your package manager .
I do n't know why package managers do n't do that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like you get a lot of redundant libraries that way.
Why not just go back to statically linking everything if you're going to do that?
The proper solution is to support multiple versions of a library in your package manager.
I don't know why package managers don't do that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31295266</id>
	<title>Re:Sweet!</title>
	<author>strabo</author>
	<datestamp>1267301280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wait...

Does that mean it's official?  The desktop is dying?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait.. . Does that mean it 's official ?
The desktop is dying ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait...

Does that mean it's official?
The desktop is dying?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287360</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31296728</id>
	<title>Great Install Process, Why Can't FreeBSD do this??</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267286880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hello FreeBSD project, your text-based install is a dinosaur - evolve!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)   I'm glad that someone took the time to put this together, it's much nicer; I think FreeBSD should adopt a GUI based installation -- for that matter, the OpenBSD folk should, too.  Think modern.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hello FreeBSD project , your text-based install is a dinosaur - evolve !
: - ) I 'm glad that someone took the time to put this together , it 's much nicer ; I think FreeBSD should adopt a GUI based installation -- for that matter , the OpenBSD folk should , too .
Think modern .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hello FreeBSD project, your text-based install is a dinosaur - evolve!
:-)   I'm glad that someone took the time to put this together, it's much nicer; I think FreeBSD should adopt a GUI based installation -- for that matter, the OpenBSD folk should, too.
Think modern.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286504</id>
	<title>Wait</title>
	<author>eclectro</author>
	<datestamp>1267206180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The BSD community is no longer beleaguered??</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The BSD community is no longer beleaguered ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The BSD community is no longer beleaguered?
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287876</id>
	<title>Re:Wait</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267210620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mac OS X is based on NeXT.</p><p>What Apple does is that they recycle open source bits for their own use, and they happened to use some BSD stuff, but Mac OS X is by <i>far</i> not based on BSD! Let's start with the fact that Mac OS X has two kernels instead of one... So there you go...</p><p>And also, Apple does occaisionally contribute some stuff back to FreeBSD, so in some sense BSD's marketshare is also a bit of Apple's by your definition...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mac OS X is based on NeXT.What Apple does is that they recycle open source bits for their own use , and they happened to use some BSD stuff , but Mac OS X is by far not based on BSD !
Let 's start with the fact that Mac OS X has two kernels instead of one... So there you go...And also , Apple does occaisionally contribute some stuff back to FreeBSD , so in some sense BSD 's marketshare is also a bit of Apple 's by your definition.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mac OS X is based on NeXT.What Apple does is that they recycle open source bits for their own use, and they happened to use some BSD stuff, but Mac OS X is by far not based on BSD!
Let's start with the fact that Mac OS X has two kernels instead of one... So there you go...And also, Apple does occaisionally contribute some stuff back to FreeBSD, so in some sense BSD's marketshare is also a bit of Apple's by your definition...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287118</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286358</id>
	<title>Am I the only ignorant one to think...</title>
	<author>afc\_wimbledon</author>
	<datestamp>1267205700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Do we need a new version of the Blue Screen of Death for PCs?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do we need a new version of the Blue Screen of Death for PCs ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do we need a new version of the Blue Screen of Death for PCs?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288164</id>
	<title>+1 PBIs rock.</title>
	<author>WiiVault</author>
	<datestamp>1267211520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As a mostly Mac and Windows user I adore PBI's. Don't get me wrong a package manager is good stuff too, but PBI's are very farmiliar to those of us tied to non-free OS's. Free-BSD really is a great OS frankly, if only it had games!</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a mostly Mac and Windows user I adore PBI 's .
Do n't get me wrong a package manager is good stuff too , but PBI 's are very farmiliar to those of us tied to non-free OS 's .
Free-BSD really is a great OS frankly , if only it had games !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a mostly Mac and Windows user I adore PBI's.
Don't get me wrong a package manager is good stuff too, but PBI's are very farmiliar to those of us tied to non-free OS's.
Free-BSD really is a great OS frankly, if only it had games!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31295000</id>
	<title>Re:Limited selection of PBIs</title>
	<author>flydpnkrtn</author>
	<datestamp>1267211220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There isn't a PBI for Mozilla Thunderbird or KNews? PC-BSD uses KDE as its desktop environment, right?</p><p>Those two are pretty decent Usenet clients IMO...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is n't a PBI for Mozilla Thunderbird or KNews ?
PC-BSD uses KDE as its desktop environment , right ? Those two are pretty decent Usenet clients IMO.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There isn't a PBI for Mozilla Thunderbird or KNews?
PC-BSD uses KDE as its desktop environment, right?Those two are pretty decent Usenet clients IMO...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286676</id>
	<title>Bad Headline</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267206720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Every</i> PC-BSD release focuses on desktop use. It's a desktop distribution.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Every PC-BSD release focuses on desktop use .
It 's a desktop distribution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Every PC-BSD release focuses on desktop use.
It's a desktop distribution.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31289828</id>
	<title>Re:UNIX vs. Linux?</title>
	<author>Bigjeff5</author>
	<datestamp>1267175040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Go for it if you want, OpenSolaris is well developed.  It isn't going to be nearly as flexible, and there isn't nearly the community development behind it, but there's nothing stopping you.</p><p>Linux isn't 100\% Unix compliant, so a lot of the goodies probably don't work, but it is certainly a powerful system.</p><p>I wouldn't really recommend it for desktop purposes though, much less so than I recommend Linux (which is not at all).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Go for it if you want , OpenSolaris is well developed .
It is n't going to be nearly as flexible , and there is n't nearly the community development behind it , but there 's nothing stopping you.Linux is n't 100 \ % Unix compliant , so a lot of the goodies probably do n't work , but it is certainly a powerful system.I would n't really recommend it for desktop purposes though , much less so than I recommend Linux ( which is not at all ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Go for it if you want, OpenSolaris is well developed.
It isn't going to be nearly as flexible, and there isn't nearly the community development behind it, but there's nothing stopping you.Linux isn't 100\% Unix compliant, so a lot of the goodies probably don't work, but it is certainly a powerful system.I wouldn't really recommend it for desktop purposes though, much less so than I recommend Linux (which is not at all).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288382</id>
	<title>Re:Why BSD?</title>
	<author>KlaymenDK</author>
	<datestamp>1267212300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>True, the linux wins in mind share, and to some extent therefore also in market share. But the BSDs do provide superior performance, which is very evident in the server market share.</p><p>But hey, why not offer server performance for desktops, too?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>True , the linux wins in mind share , and to some extent therefore also in market share .
But the BSDs do provide superior performance , which is very evident in the server market share.But hey , why not offer server performance for desktops , too ?
: - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>True, the linux wins in mind share, and to some extent therefore also in market share.
But the BSDs do provide superior performance, which is very evident in the server market share.But hey, why not offer server performance for desktops, too?
:-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288754</id>
	<title>Re:PBI files</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267213620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hurray for 1000 copies of zlib that all have to be updated separately!   So convenient!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hurray for 1000 copies of zlib that all have to be updated separately !
So convenient !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hurray for 1000 copies of zlib that all have to be updated separately!
So convenient!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31289366</id>
	<title>Re:UVC Webcam?</title>
	<author>Neil Hodges</author>
	<datestamp>1267215960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>According to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB\_video\_device\_class#FreeBSD" title="wikipedia.org">Wikipedia</a> [wikipedia.org], both NetBSD and OpenBSD have UVC kernel drivers, while FreeBSD is able to make use of Linux's UVC drivers by running them in userspace.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>According to Wikipedia [ wikipedia.org ] , both NetBSD and OpenBSD have UVC kernel drivers , while FreeBSD is able to make use of Linux 's UVC drivers by running them in userspace .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to Wikipedia [wikipedia.org], both NetBSD and OpenBSD have UVC kernel drivers, while FreeBSD is able to make use of Linux's UVC drivers by running them in userspace.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287118</id>
	<title>Re:Wait</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267208040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you want to nitpick BSD has a higher market share on the Desktop then Linux does.  Based on the fact that OS X is based on BSD.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want to nitpick BSD has a higher market share on the Desktop then Linux does .
Based on the fact that OS X is based on BSD .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want to nitpick BSD has a higher market share on the Desktop then Linux does.
Based on the fact that OS X is based on BSD.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286504</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288490</id>
	<title>UNIX vs. Linux?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267212600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Question - and I'm hoping for an honest answer.<br><br>I've been using Linux now (SUSE &gt; openSUSE &gt; Ubuntu) for several years now in both a desktop and server environments. My office still has a few HP 3000 (MPE) servers lying around running applications.<br><br>In speaking to other analysts and whatnot, while advocating Linux, the question comes up - why not UNIX?<br><br>I honestly can't answer. Can someone tell me why one would choose UNIX over Linux or the other way around? Is there an advantage to one over the other?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Question - and I 'm hoping for an honest answer.I 've been using Linux now ( SUSE &gt; openSUSE &gt; Ubuntu ) for several years now in both a desktop and server environments .
My office still has a few HP 3000 ( MPE ) servers lying around running applications.In speaking to other analysts and whatnot , while advocating Linux , the question comes up - why not UNIX ? I honestly ca n't answer .
Can someone tell me why one would choose UNIX over Linux or the other way around ?
Is there an advantage to one over the other ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Question - and I'm hoping for an honest answer.I've been using Linux now (SUSE &gt; openSUSE &gt; Ubuntu) for several years now in both a desktop and server environments.
My office still has a few HP 3000 (MPE) servers lying around running applications.In speaking to other analysts and whatnot, while advocating Linux, the question comes up - why not UNIX?I honestly can't answer.
Can someone tell me why one would choose UNIX over Linux or the other way around?
Is there an advantage to one over the other?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286356</id>
	<title>Still freeze with ZFS and moderate load?</title>
	<author>TerminaMorte</author>
	<datestamp>1267205700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I tried the last version of PC-BSD. Was excited to have some ZFS support.

Unfortunately it would freeze under moderate (read: 1 VirtualBox VM running) load.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I tried the last version of PC-BSD .
Was excited to have some ZFS support .
Unfortunately it would freeze under moderate ( read : 1 VirtualBox VM running ) load .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tried the last version of PC-BSD.
Was excited to have some ZFS support.
Unfortunately it would freeze under moderate (read: 1 VirtualBox VM running) load.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287466</id>
	<title>that link is wrong</title>
	<author>tresstatus</author>
	<datestamp>1267209300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>not to point out the obvious, but when you go to the change log link from the summary, you actually wind up going to <a href="http://www.unixmen.com/content/view/151/11/" title="unixmen.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.unixmen.com/content/view/151/11/</a> [unixmen.com] which tells you how to install nagios.  here is a link to the pcbsd 8.0 changelog... <a href="http://www.pcbsd.org/content/view/151/11/" title="pcbsd.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.pcbsd.org/content/view/151/11/</a> [pcbsd.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>not to point out the obvious , but when you go to the change log link from the summary , you actually wind up going to http : //www.unixmen.com/content/view/151/11/ [ unixmen.com ] which tells you how to install nagios .
here is a link to the pcbsd 8.0 changelog... http : //www.pcbsd.org/content/view/151/11/ [ pcbsd.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>not to point out the obvious, but when you go to the change log link from the summary, you actually wind up going to http://www.unixmen.com/content/view/151/11/ [unixmen.com] which tells you how to install nagios.
here is a link to the pcbsd 8.0 changelog... http://www.pcbsd.org/content/view/151/11/ [pcbsd.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31289538</id>
	<title>Re:Still freeze with ZFS and moderate load?</title>
	<author>ducomputergeek</author>
	<datestamp>1267216740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I believe the last version was based on FreeBSD 7 and ZFS support was still experimental.  The first production ready build of ZFS on BSD is version 8.  So I would imagine that it would be less buggy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe the last version was based on FreeBSD 7 and ZFS support was still experimental .
The first production ready build of ZFS on BSD is version 8 .
So I would imagine that it would be less buggy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe the last version was based on FreeBSD 7 and ZFS support was still experimental.
The first production ready build of ZFS on BSD is version 8.
So I would imagine that it would be less buggy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287846</id>
	<title>Why BSD?</title>
	<author>ivanwyc</author>
	<datestamp>1267210500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why we need the BSD kernel for desktop? While the Linux kernel has the best hardware support coverage among all open source kernels, I am curious what's the reasons behind to pick BSD for a desktop oriented distro.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why we need the BSD kernel for desktop ?
While the Linux kernel has the best hardware support coverage among all open source kernels , I am curious what 's the reasons behind to pick BSD for a desktop oriented distro .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why we need the BSD kernel for desktop?
While the Linux kernel has the best hardware support coverage among all open source kernels, I am curious what's the reasons behind to pick BSD for a desktop oriented distro.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31289044</id>
	<title>Re:Linux Binary Compatible</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1267214760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, binary emulation is for userland, not kernel objects.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , binary emulation is for userland , not kernel objects .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, binary emulation is for userland, not kernel objects.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286414</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31291312</id>
	<title>Re:Still freeze with ZFS and moderate load?</title>
	<author>phantomcircuit</author>
	<datestamp>1267182360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most people will say you need more RAM; they are wrong.  What you need is more ram reserved for the kernel.  The basic problem is that the ARC (file system cache) has no upper limit, but kernel addressable memory does.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most people will say you need more RAM ; they are wrong .
What you need is more ram reserved for the kernel .
The basic problem is that the ARC ( file system cache ) has no upper limit , but kernel addressable memory does .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most people will say you need more RAM; they are wrong.
What you need is more ram reserved for the kernel.
The basic problem is that the ARC (file system cache) has no upper limit, but kernel addressable memory does.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31289192</id>
	<title>I love it</title>
	<author>not already in use</author>
	<datestamp>1267215240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I would love nothing more than to see a BSD licensed solution succeed on the desktop, if nothing more, than to prove to FSF folks the definition of irony when it comes to being "free and open."</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would love nothing more than to see a BSD licensed solution succeed on the desktop , if nothing more , than to prove to FSF folks the definition of irony when it comes to being " free and open .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would love nothing more than to see a BSD licensed solution succeed on the desktop, if nothing more, than to prove to FSF folks the definition of irony when it comes to being "free and open.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287696</id>
	<title>Re:Wait</title>
	<author>aztracker1</author>
	<datestamp>1267210020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Except the OSX GUI really isn't an open standard, though there's been some work in that direction by third parties working on an API compatible UI layer.  I'm actually hoping to see it gain some steam in the next few years, as remote X11 really isn't such a good thing at today's higher resolutions, and disconnected networks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Except the OSX GUI really is n't an open standard , though there 's been some work in that direction by third parties working on an API compatible UI layer .
I 'm actually hoping to see it gain some steam in the next few years , as remote X11 really is n't such a good thing at today 's higher resolutions , and disconnected networks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except the OSX GUI really isn't an open standard, though there's been some work in that direction by third parties working on an API compatible UI layer.
I'm actually hoping to see it gain some steam in the next few years, as remote X11 really isn't such a good thing at today's higher resolutions, and disconnected networks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287118</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288394</id>
	<title>No, I think you wanted to nitpick</title>
	<author>Colin Smith</author>
	<datestamp>1267212360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And the original poster just wanted to make a joke.</p><p>HTH.</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And the original poster just wanted to make a joke.HTH .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>And the original poster just wanted to make a joke.HTH.
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287118</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288842</id>
	<title>Re:Why BSD?</title>
	<author>crazybilly</author>
	<datestamp>1267213980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://xkcd.com/619/" title="xkcd.com">obligatory, snarky xkcd response</a> [xkcd.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>obligatory , snarky xkcd response [ xkcd.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>obligatory, snarky xkcd response [xkcd.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288382</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287360</id>
	<title>Sweet!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267208880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's finally the year of the BSD desktop! I knew this day would come.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's finally the year of the BSD desktop !
I knew this day would come .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's finally the year of the BSD desktop!
I knew this day would come.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31291346</id>
	<title>Re:Wait</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267182660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's this kind of braindead idiocy that makes me despise you Mac Fags.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's this kind of braindead idiocy that makes me despise you Mac Fags .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's this kind of braindead idiocy that makes me despise you Mac Fags.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287118</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31291224</id>
	<title>Bah!</title>
	<author>OverZealous.com</author>
	<datestamp>1267181940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>BSD will <i>never</i> work on the desktop!  It's far too Unixy.</p><p>Now, excuse me as I get back to work on my user-friendly Mac.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>BSD will never work on the desktop !
It 's far too Unixy.Now , excuse me as I get back to work on my user-friendly Mac .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>BSD will never work on the desktop!
It's far too Unixy.Now, excuse me as I get back to work on my user-friendly Mac.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286530</id>
	<title>Re:Linux Binary Compatible</title>
	<author>bsDaemon</author>
	<datestamp>1267206240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I used to use XiG Acclerated X Linux binaries on top of the linux abi on FreeBSD 3.3 back in the day, because the Voodoo3 drivers were better than the 'native' ones for XFree86 where at the time.  I wouldn't try sticking network drivers or anything in, but I'm not really a kernel expert.  There is an ndiswrapper-type thing for FreeBSD/PC-BSD if you need that for wifi, though.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I used to use XiG Acclerated X Linux binaries on top of the linux abi on FreeBSD 3.3 back in the day , because the Voodoo3 drivers were better than the 'native ' ones for XFree86 where at the time .
I would n't try sticking network drivers or anything in , but I 'm not really a kernel expert .
There is an ndiswrapper-type thing for FreeBSD/PC-BSD if you need that for wifi , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used to use XiG Acclerated X Linux binaries on top of the linux abi on FreeBSD 3.3 back in the day, because the Voodoo3 drivers were better than the 'native' ones for XFree86 where at the time.
I wouldn't try sticking network drivers or anything in, but I'm not really a kernel expert.
There is an ndiswrapper-type thing for FreeBSD/PC-BSD if you need that for wifi, though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286414</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31290936</id>
	<title>Re:UNIX vs. Linux?</title>
	<author>cbhacking</author>
	<datestamp>1267180320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The best answer I've seen is basically that *BSD is a much more cohesive experience, with a smaller number of contributors and a project that is under tighter control. This has some real downsides - progress is slower in some areas - but things also feel more unified, like they came from one source rather than many.</p><p>Mind you, a good Linux distribution will do its best to give you that same impression, and there are always going to be programs that don't look or act quite like anything else on the system, but the core components had a more cohesive feel to me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The best answer I 've seen is basically that * BSD is a much more cohesive experience , with a smaller number of contributors and a project that is under tighter control .
This has some real downsides - progress is slower in some areas - but things also feel more unified , like they came from one source rather than many.Mind you , a good Linux distribution will do its best to give you that same impression , and there are always going to be programs that do n't look or act quite like anything else on the system , but the core components had a more cohesive feel to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The best answer I've seen is basically that *BSD is a much more cohesive experience, with a smaller number of contributors and a project that is under tighter control.
This has some real downsides - progress is slower in some areas - but things also feel more unified, like they came from one source rather than many.Mind you, a good Linux distribution will do its best to give you that same impression, and there are always going to be programs that don't look or act quite like anything else on the system, but the core components had a more cohesive feel to me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288278</id>
	<title>Re:Still freeze with ZFS and moderate load?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267211940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, it's still a problem.  The freebsd-stable mailing list during January and February of this year has been affluent with discussions amongst administrators regarding how to solve the performance problems ZFS on FreeBSD creates.  There are some worthwhile answers but nothing concrete.  It has nothing to do with the amount of RAM you have.</p><p>Solaris 10 and OpenSolaris do not have these problems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , it 's still a problem .
The freebsd-stable mailing list during January and February of this year has been affluent with discussions amongst administrators regarding how to solve the performance problems ZFS on FreeBSD creates .
There are some worthwhile answers but nothing concrete .
It has nothing to do with the amount of RAM you have.Solaris 10 and OpenSolaris do not have these problems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, it's still a problem.
The freebsd-stable mailing list during January and February of this year has been affluent with discussions amongst administrators regarding how to solve the performance problems ZFS on FreeBSD creates.
There are some worthwhile answers but nothing concrete.
It has nothing to do with the amount of RAM you have.Solaris 10 and OpenSolaris do not have these problems.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287364</id>
	<title>UVC Webcam?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267208940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Still doesn't support UVC webcams</htmltext>
<tokenext>Still does n't support UVC webcams</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Still doesn't support UVC webcams</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31291298</id>
	<title>Re:Why BSD?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267182300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why we need the BSD kernel for desktop? While the Linux kernel has the best hardware support coverage among all open source kernels, I am curious what's the reasons behind to pick BSD for a desktop oriented distro.</p></div><p>The only thing worse than a loaded question is one that is loaded with an unsubstantiated claim. Even if your assumption were true, the number of hardware drivers a kernel has available for it is a very naive metric for its usefulness.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why we need the BSD kernel for desktop ?
While the Linux kernel has the best hardware support coverage among all open source kernels , I am curious what 's the reasons behind to pick BSD for a desktop oriented distro.The only thing worse than a loaded question is one that is loaded with an unsubstantiated claim .
Even if your assumption were true , the number of hardware drivers a kernel has available for it is a very naive metric for its usefulness .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why we need the BSD kernel for desktop?
While the Linux kernel has the best hardware support coverage among all open source kernels, I am curious what's the reasons behind to pick BSD for a desktop oriented distro.The only thing worse than a loaded question is one that is loaded with an unsubstantiated claim.
Even if your assumption were true, the number of hardware drivers a kernel has available for it is a very naive metric for its usefulness.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288828</id>
	<title>Re:Why BSD?</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1267213980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Audio for one.  BSD audio mixes everything in the kernel with no nasty incompatible user space audio servers.  Ever had a Linux app refuse to play audio because it was configured for ESD while you happen to be playing something through ALSA?  It should "just work" and on BSD it does.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Audio for one .
BSD audio mixes everything in the kernel with no nasty incompatible user space audio servers .
Ever had a Linux app refuse to play audio because it was configured for ESD while you happen to be playing something through ALSA ?
It should " just work " and on BSD it does .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Audio for one.
BSD audio mixes everything in the kernel with no nasty incompatible user space audio servers.
Ever had a Linux app refuse to play audio because it was configured for ESD while you happen to be playing something through ALSA?
It should "just work" and on BSD it does.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287846</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_26_1549215_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288394
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287118
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286504
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_26_1549215_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31289044
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286414
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_26_1549215_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286676
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_26_1549215_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31311418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_26_1549215_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287696
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287118
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286504
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_26_1549215_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31289538
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286356
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_26_1549215_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286356
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_26_1549215_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31291298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_26_1549215_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_26_1549215_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31289004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_26_1549215_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31295000
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_26_1549215_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286414
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_26_1549215_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31290868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287876
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287118
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286504
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_26_1549215_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31289488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_26_1549215_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288828
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_26_1549215_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31289828
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_26_1549215_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31289754
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_26_1549215_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31289366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_26_1549215_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31295266
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_26_1549215_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288754
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_26_1549215_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286530
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286414
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_26_1549215_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31290936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_26_1549215_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31291346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287118
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286504
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_26_1549215_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31291312
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286356
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_26_1549215_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286358
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_26_1549215_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_26_1549215_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288382
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_26_1549215_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31289416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_26_1549215.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286414
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286530
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31289044
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287766
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_26_1549215.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287364
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31289366
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_26_1549215.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286356
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288278
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31289538
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31291312
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_26_1549215.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288490
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31290936
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31289828
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_26_1549215.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286676
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288964
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_26_1549215.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288122
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_26_1549215.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287846
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288382
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288842
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31289004
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288828
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31291298
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_26_1549215.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287360
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31295266
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_26_1549215.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31296728
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_26_1549215.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286780
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287818
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31289416
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_26_1549215.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286504
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287118
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287696
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288394
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287876
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31290868
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31291346
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_26_1549215.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31287648
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288552
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31289754
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31295000
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31311418
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31289488
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288754
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288164
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31288800
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_26_1549215.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286358
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_26_1549215.31286658
</commentlist>
</conversation>
