<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_09_0126234</id>
	<title>Jobs Says No Tethering iPad To iPhone</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1268152260000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>tugfoigel writes <i>"Anyone who currently owns an iPhone and was hoping they would be able to use it as a mobile Web access point for a Wi-Fi iPad just got some bad news. Reportedly, <a href="http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/10/03/05/reader\_steve\_jobs\_says\_no\_tethering\_between\_ipad\_and\_iphone.html">Steve Jobs has said this will not happen</a>. Swedish blog Slashat.se claims they e-mailed Jobs directly to ask him whether or not you'd be able to tether your iPad and iPhone and received a terse 'No' in reply. According to the report, the email headers made it plausible that the reply had come from Jobs's iPhone."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>tugfoigel writes " Anyone who currently owns an iPhone and was hoping they would be able to use it as a mobile Web access point for a Wi-Fi iPad just got some bad news .
Reportedly , Steve Jobs has said this will not happen .
Swedish blog Slashat.se claims they e-mailed Jobs directly to ask him whether or not you 'd be able to tether your iPad and iPhone and received a terse 'No ' in reply .
According to the report , the email headers made it plausible that the reply had come from Jobs 's iPhone .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>tugfoigel writes "Anyone who currently owns an iPhone and was hoping they would be able to use it as a mobile Web access point for a Wi-Fi iPad just got some bad news.
Reportedly, Steve Jobs has said this will not happen.
Swedish blog Slashat.se claims they e-mailed Jobs directly to ask him whether or not you'd be able to tether your iPad and iPhone and received a terse 'No' in reply.
According to the report, the email headers made it plausible that the reply had come from Jobs's iPhone.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410938</id>
	<title>The email is reprinted in the article</title>
	<author>commodoresloat</author>
	<datestamp>1268167920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They know it's real because of the signature -- "Sent from my iPhone."</p><p>The email from the Swedish bloggers is real too.  It's all "Bork, Bork, Bork"....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They know it 's real because of the signature -- " Sent from my iPhone .
" The email from the Swedish bloggers is real too .
It 's all " Bork , Bork , Bork " ... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They know it's real because of the signature -- "Sent from my iPhone.
"The email from the Swedish bloggers is real too.
It's all "Bork, Bork, Bork"....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409968</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31417346</id>
	<title>This just in</title>
	<author>jackspenn</author>
	<datestamp>1268164980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is nothing Steve can do to prevent you from using the iPad to Android wifi tether.  Well accept for the fact that the iPad is retarded and most people who multitask will find it lacking.  Oh and you cannot upgrade storage or swap batteries, or use flash or java.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is nothing Steve can do to prevent you from using the iPad to Android wifi tether .
Well accept for the fact that the iPad is retarded and most people who multitask will find it lacking .
Oh and you can not upgrade storage or swap batteries , or use flash or java .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is nothing Steve can do to prevent you from using the iPad to Android wifi tether.
Well accept for the fact that the iPad is retarded and most people who multitask will find it lacking.
Oh and you cannot upgrade storage or swap batteries, or use flash or java.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31411814</id>
	<title>Just Tether from iPhone using Wi-fi instead of USB</title>
	<author>maitas</author>
	<datestamp>1268138400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> With JaiBrake iPhones you can export the 3G data plan through Wi-Fi. Theres no way they can stop this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With JaiBrake iPhones you can export the 3G data plan through Wi-Fi .
Theres no way they can stop this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> With JaiBrake iPhones you can export the 3G data plan through Wi-Fi.
Theres no way they can stop this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409938</id>
	<title>Now I feel stupid...</title>
	<author>zoid.com</author>
	<datestamp>1268070300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He said it 3 days ago..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He said it 3 days ago. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He said it 3 days ago..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409922</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410714</id>
	<title>Re:It's getting ridiculous</title>
	<author>badasscat</author>
	<datestamp>1268164920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Are we supposed to keep paying up per device? It's highly unreasonable, specially since most people don't use two devices at the same time.</p></div><p>We're going through the same thing right now with wireless telcos that we did with ISP's about 10-15 years ago.  Some people probably don't remember it, others may have actually been too young to really know about it, but there was a time when the cable and phone companies considered having a router on their service as a terms of use violation.  They would cut you off if they discovered it.  People would actually hide their routers whenever they'd have to make a service call (I remember doing this!).  They charged for internet use <i>per connection</i>, so to them using a router was "theft" because you could use one router for many different computers.</p><p>Of course, today that sounds ridiculous, and ISP's even give away wireless routers.  Verizon's standard DSL and FiOS modems <i>are</i> wireless routers.</p><p>So hopefully in 10 years (or less), we'll be at that same point with the wireless telcos, where they realize they'll actually get more business by simplifying and letting people do what they want with their connections.  And they actually will sell their service per household or subscriber, and not per device connection.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are we supposed to keep paying up per device ?
It 's highly unreasonable , specially since most people do n't use two devices at the same time.We 're going through the same thing right now with wireless telcos that we did with ISP 's about 10-15 years ago .
Some people probably do n't remember it , others may have actually been too young to really know about it , but there was a time when the cable and phone companies considered having a router on their service as a terms of use violation .
They would cut you off if they discovered it .
People would actually hide their routers whenever they 'd have to make a service call ( I remember doing this ! ) .
They charged for internet use per connection , so to them using a router was " theft " because you could use one router for many different computers.Of course , today that sounds ridiculous , and ISP 's even give away wireless routers .
Verizon 's standard DSL and FiOS modems are wireless routers.So hopefully in 10 years ( or less ) , we 'll be at that same point with the wireless telcos , where they realize they 'll actually get more business by simplifying and letting people do what they want with their connections .
And they actually will sell their service per household or subscriber , and not per device connection .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Are we supposed to keep paying up per device?
It's highly unreasonable, specially since most people don't use two devices at the same time.We're going through the same thing right now with wireless telcos that we did with ISP's about 10-15 years ago.
Some people probably don't remember it, others may have actually been too young to really know about it, but there was a time when the cable and phone companies considered having a router on their service as a terms of use violation.
They would cut you off if they discovered it.
People would actually hide their routers whenever they'd have to make a service call (I remember doing this!).
They charged for internet use per connection, so to them using a router was "theft" because you could use one router for many different computers.Of course, today that sounds ridiculous, and ISP's even give away wireless routers.
Verizon's standard DSL and FiOS modems are wireless routers.So hopefully in 10 years (or less), we'll be at that same point with the wireless telcos, where they realize they'll actually get more business by simplifying and letting people do what they want with their connections.
And they actually will sell their service per household or subscriber, and not per device connection.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410022</id>
	<title>yet another bad iPad-related choice...</title>
	<author>Ruvim</author>
	<datestamp>1268071020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Starting with the name, following with the luck of functionality, awkward ports and now that... Am I the only one who thinks that this paticular Apple product is going the way of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton\_(platform)" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Newtons</a> [wikipedia.org]?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Starting with the name , following with the luck of functionality , awkward ports and now that... Am I the only one who thinks that this paticular Apple product is going the way of Newtons [ wikipedia.org ] ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Starting with the name, following with the luck of functionality, awkward ports and now that... Am I the only one who thinks that this paticular Apple product is going the way of Newtons [wikipedia.org]?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410380</id>
	<title>Why so much Apple hate?</title>
	<author>Trolan</author>
	<datestamp>1268074620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So we have a simple question: Can I tether an iPad to the iPhone?  Let's break this down.</p><p>Within US:<br>Non-issue, you can't tether anything to your iPhone.  Who's fault?  AT&amp;T.</p><p>Outside US:<br>If you've got a provider which permits tethering of devices to your iPhone, you can start to have a case to be miffed at Apple.  However... iPhone tethering is available over USB (isn't one on the iPad), and BlueTooth.  While you can tether your devices to your iPhone over BT, you've never been able to do it the other way.  So why are people surprised that the iPad is the same?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So we have a simple question : Can I tether an iPad to the iPhone ?
Let 's break this down.Within US : Non-issue , you ca n't tether anything to your iPhone .
Who 's fault ?
AT&amp;T.Outside US : If you 've got a provider which permits tethering of devices to your iPhone , you can start to have a case to be miffed at Apple .
However... iPhone tethering is available over USB ( is n't one on the iPad ) , and BlueTooth .
While you can tether your devices to your iPhone over BT , you 've never been able to do it the other way .
So why are people surprised that the iPad is the same ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So we have a simple question: Can I tether an iPad to the iPhone?
Let's break this down.Within US:Non-issue, you can't tether anything to your iPhone.
Who's fault?
AT&amp;T.Outside US:If you've got a provider which permits tethering of devices to your iPhone, you can start to have a case to be miffed at Apple.
However... iPhone tethering is available over USB (isn't one on the iPad), and BlueTooth.
While you can tether your devices to your iPhone over BT, you've never been able to do it the other way.
So why are people surprised that the iPad is the same?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31412224</id>
	<title>I tether my apple to my peach...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268142840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>: - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>:-)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409988</id>
	<title>"Slashat.se claims they e-mailed Job"</title>
	<author>myocardialinfarction</author>
	<datestamp>1268070600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>He won't have been able to get it, since God is testing his faith.</htmltext>
<tokenext>He wo n't have been able to get it , since God is testing his faith .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He won't have been able to get it, since God is testing his faith.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410334</id>
	<title>iPad limitation?</title>
	<author>Grizzley9</author>
	<datestamp>1268074140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cant you just turn your JB'd iPhone into a WiFi hotspot using one of the many apps out there?<br>Connect iPad to iPhone wifi network,<br>done.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cant you just turn your JB 'd iPhone into a WiFi hotspot using one of the many apps out there ? Connect iPad to iPhone wifi network,done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cant you just turn your JB'd iPhone into a WiFi hotspot using one of the many apps out there?Connect iPad to iPhone wifi network,done.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410068</id>
	<title>Re:Forged Headers?</title>
	<author>yuhong</author>
	<datestamp>1268071440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>it's not like his email was signed with a cert?</p></div><p>Yea, I was thinking that CEOs like Steve Jobs and other famous people should sign their emails and USENET postings with a cert or a PGP signature, so that the authenticity of their emails can be verified. Anyone know of any CEOs or other famous people that does that?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>it 's not like his email was signed with a cert ? Yea , I was thinking that CEOs like Steve Jobs and other famous people should sign their emails and USENET postings with a cert or a PGP signature , so that the authenticity of their emails can be verified .
Anyone know of any CEOs or other famous people that does that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it's not like his email was signed with a cert?Yea, I was thinking that CEOs like Steve Jobs and other famous people should sign their emails and USENET postings with a cert or a PGP signature, so that the authenticity of their emails can be verified.
Anyone know of any CEOs or other famous people that does that?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409968</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410958</id>
	<title>'Tersely worded'</title>
	<author>FooRat</author>
	<datestamp>1268168220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know Apple has a reputation for sometimes seeming a bit on the benevolent side, but I think they're making just a bit much of the "tone" being read into the message from its "terseness", and making too much of the message itself; I know a few people who run software companies and they're generally extremely busy people who deal with large volumes of e-mail and other queries continuously for years<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... this leads to the habit, out of necessity, of cutting to the chase quickly and replying to things quickly and briefly. Add to that they "identified themselves as" a random Apple customer and not anyone particularly important, and it was just a short question, what did they expect? Also they didn't ask "officially, are you stating it will never support this" --- they just, having identified themselves as an 'Apple customer', asked "Will the wifi-only version somehow support tethering thru my iPhone?", which any reasonable person would've concluded was a customer asking not "Will the wifi-only<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..." but "<b>Does</b> the wifi-only<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know Apple has a reputation for sometimes seeming a bit on the benevolent side , but I think they 're making just a bit much of the " tone " being read into the message from its " terseness " , and making too much of the message itself ; I know a few people who run software companies and they 're generally extremely busy people who deal with large volumes of e-mail and other queries continuously for years ... this leads to the habit , out of necessity , of cutting to the chase quickly and replying to things quickly and briefly .
Add to that they " identified themselves as " a random Apple customer and not anyone particularly important , and it was just a short question , what did they expect ?
Also they did n't ask " officially , are you stating it will never support this " --- they just , having identified themselves as an 'Apple customer ' , asked " Will the wifi-only version somehow support tethering thru my iPhone ?
" , which any reasonable person would 've concluded was a customer asking not " Will the wifi-only ... " but " Does the wifi-only ... " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know Apple has a reputation for sometimes seeming a bit on the benevolent side, but I think they're making just a bit much of the "tone" being read into the message from its "terseness", and making too much of the message itself; I know a few people who run software companies and they're generally extremely busy people who deal with large volumes of e-mail and other queries continuously for years ... this leads to the habit, out of necessity, of cutting to the chase quickly and replying to things quickly and briefly.
Add to that they "identified themselves as" a random Apple customer and not anyone particularly important, and it was just a short question, what did they expect?
Also they didn't ask "officially, are you stating it will never support this" --- they just, having identified themselves as an 'Apple customer', asked "Will the wifi-only version somehow support tethering thru my iPhone?
", which any reasonable person would've concluded was a customer asking not "Will the wifi-only ..." but "Does the wifi-only ...".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31413404</id>
	<title>Allowed AFTER the initial suckers buy the 3G model</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268149080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I suspect at some point soon Apple will allow it, but they aren't going to come out and say it now. It's reasonable to assume that most iPad owners will have an iPhone. Steve is not going to advertise that tethering works because then it will could kill sales of the 3G model right off the bat. What I suspect will happen is that he will wait until the early adopter suckers stop buying the 3G model, and then they will announce tethering for the non-3G model with the iPad in a few months or with the new iPhone 4.0 OS update this summer.</p><p>Similar to how the initial iPhone was $600, and they waited for the true fanboys to buy them up at that price, and then 2 months later they lowered the price to $400.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I suspect at some point soon Apple will allow it , but they are n't going to come out and say it now .
It 's reasonable to assume that most iPad owners will have an iPhone .
Steve is not going to advertise that tethering works because then it will could kill sales of the 3G model right off the bat .
What I suspect will happen is that he will wait until the early adopter suckers stop buying the 3G model , and then they will announce tethering for the non-3G model with the iPad in a few months or with the new iPhone 4.0 OS update this summer.Similar to how the initial iPhone was $ 600 , and they waited for the true fanboys to buy them up at that price , and then 2 months later they lowered the price to $ 400 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I suspect at some point soon Apple will allow it, but they aren't going to come out and say it now.
It's reasonable to assume that most iPad owners will have an iPhone.
Steve is not going to advertise that tethering works because then it will could kill sales of the 3G model right off the bat.
What I suspect will happen is that he will wait until the early adopter suckers stop buying the 3G model, and then they will announce tethering for the non-3G model with the iPad in a few months or with the new iPhone 4.0 OS update this summer.Similar to how the initial iPhone was $600, and they waited for the true fanboys to buy them up at that price, and then 2 months later they lowered the price to $400.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409936</id>
	<title>It's getting ridiculous</title>
	<author>linumax</author>
	<datestamp>1268070300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm expected to pay the service provider 30$ for home Internet, 30$ for phone and now 30$ for tablet?! Very soon our cars will be connected devices and not long after that glasses, watches, etc. Are we supposed to keep paying up per device? It's highly unreasonable, specially since most people don't use two devices at the same time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm expected to pay the service provider 30 $ for home Internet , 30 $ for phone and now 30 $ for tablet ? !
Very soon our cars will be connected devices and not long after that glasses , watches , etc .
Are we supposed to keep paying up per device ?
It 's highly unreasonable , specially since most people do n't use two devices at the same time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm expected to pay the service provider 30$ for home Internet, 30$ for phone and now 30$ for tablet?!
Very soon our cars will be connected devices and not long after that glasses, watches, etc.
Are we supposed to keep paying up per device?
It's highly unreasonable, specially since most people don't use two devices at the same time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410648</id>
	<title>Re:Didn't he say this..</title>
	<author>Kirijini</author>
	<datestamp>1268077680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I used to come here to get the lates tech news.</p></div><p>Yeah, okay, grandpa.  Did you have to trudge uphill through the snow to get here too?</p><p>I bet you liked it then.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I used to come here to get the lates tech news.Yeah , okay , grandpa .
Did you have to trudge uphill through the snow to get here too ? I bet you liked it then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used to come here to get the lates tech news.Yeah, okay, grandpa.
Did you have to trudge uphill through the snow to get here too?I bet you liked it then.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409922</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410262</id>
	<title>Email Headers?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268073540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>According to the report, the email headers made it plausible that the reply had come from Jobs's iPhone.</p></div><p>Perhaps his <a href="http://slashat.se/2010/03/06/steve-jobs-exklusivt-till-slashat-se-ipad-wifi-kommer-inte-stodja-tethering-via-iphone/" title="slashat.se" rel="nofollow">reply</a> [slashat.se] gave it away:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>    No.</p><p>Sent from my iPhone</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>According to the report , the email headers made it plausible that the reply had come from Jobs 's iPhone.Perhaps his reply [ slashat.se ] gave it away : No.Sent from my iPhone</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to the report, the email headers made it plausible that the reply had come from Jobs's iPhone.Perhaps his reply [slashat.se] gave it away:    No.Sent from my iPhone
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31415338</id>
	<title>In Releated News</title>
	<author>konohitowa</author>
	<datestamp>1268156520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Damn. I was planning on getting an iPad with GSM so that I could tether my iPod Touch to it. I'm betting I'm not gonna be able to do that either. Well -- there goes my iPad purchase. And tell Steve J. I said so!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Damn .
I was planning on getting an iPad with GSM so that I could tether my iPod Touch to it .
I 'm betting I 'm not gon na be able to do that either .
Well -- there goes my iPad purchase .
And tell Steve J. I said so ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Damn.
I was planning on getting an iPad with GSM so that I could tether my iPod Touch to it.
I'm betting I'm not gonna be able to do that either.
Well -- there goes my iPad purchase.
And tell Steve J. I said so!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410818</id>
	<title>Anybody really wonder?</title>
	<author>garry\_g</author>
	<datestamp>1268166480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>a) Apple wants all its fan-boys and -girls to run out and get their WLAN iTampon once it's out<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... then after the 3G version is released, they want the same people to go out and buy the new one (along with the version 2 that will be released a year from then as well as the "S" version that comes along a year later, which then contains half of the features hoped for or desired during the first releases)</p><p>b) seeing the revenue Apple is getting from mobile carriers for their exclusive contracts, of course they'll make sure to build the devices exactly the way the carriers want them, so you better make sure to pick up half a dozen mobile data cards for your phone, GPS, iTampon, mobile data stick etc.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... can't really expect the carriers to make a deficit due to the "unlimited data" transfer they already sold you on your phone, can you?</p><p>I reckon we won't see a Squid app for the iPhone on the app store any time soon...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>a ) Apple wants all its fan-boys and -girls to run out and get their WLAN iTampon once it 's out ... then after the 3G version is released , they want the same people to go out and buy the new one ( along with the version 2 that will be released a year from then as well as the " S " version that comes along a year later , which then contains half of the features hoped for or desired during the first releases ) b ) seeing the revenue Apple is getting from mobile carriers for their exclusive contracts , of course they 'll make sure to build the devices exactly the way the carriers want them , so you better make sure to pick up half a dozen mobile data cards for your phone , GPS , iTampon , mobile data stick etc .
... ca n't really expect the carriers to make a deficit due to the " unlimited data " transfer they already sold you on your phone , can you ? I reckon we wo n't see a Squid app for the iPhone on the app store any time soon.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>a) Apple wants all its fan-boys and -girls to run out and get their WLAN iTampon once it's out ... then after the 3G version is released, they want the same people to go out and buy the new one (along with the version 2 that will be released a year from then as well as the "S" version that comes along a year later, which then contains half of the features hoped for or desired during the first releases)b) seeing the revenue Apple is getting from mobile carriers for their exclusive contracts, of course they'll make sure to build the devices exactly the way the carriers want them, so you better make sure to pick up half a dozen mobile data cards for your phone, GPS, iTampon, mobile data stick etc.
... can't really expect the carriers to make a deficit due to the "unlimited data" transfer they already sold you on your phone, can you?I reckon we won't see a Squid app for the iPhone on the app store any time soon...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410052</id>
	<title>Not just 'No' ...</title>
	<author>PPH</author>
	<datestamp>1268071320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><nobr> <wbr></nobr>... but iNo!</htmltext>
<tokenext>... but iNo !</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ... but iNo!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31416218</id>
	<title>Re:It's getting ridiculous</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268159880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Heck, the PHONE company (the only one at the time!) used to do this, back in the day... If a phone tech came to your house and saw that you had spliced in a second phone- not a second line, mind you, another phone on the SAME line- you'd have to hope he wouldn't tell on you. Most techs were cool about it, though; bribes were not usually not needed. Usually.</p><p>Now get off my lawn...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Heck , the PHONE company ( the only one at the time !
) used to do this , back in the day... If a phone tech came to your house and saw that you had spliced in a second phone- not a second line , mind you , another phone on the SAME line- you 'd have to hope he would n't tell on you .
Most techs were cool about it , though ; bribes were not usually not needed .
Usually.Now get off my lawn.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Heck, the PHONE company (the only one at the time!
) used to do this, back in the day... If a phone tech came to your house and saw that you had spliced in a second phone- not a second line, mind you, another phone on the SAME line- you'd have to hope he wouldn't tell on you.
Most techs were cool about it, though; bribes were not usually not needed.
Usually.Now get off my lawn...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410714</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410112</id>
	<title>Re:Forged Headers?</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1268071860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Had it been the real Steve Jobs, he would have bricked the iPhone of the guy who asked the question, just to remind him whose house they are in....</htmltext>
<tokenext>Had it been the real Steve Jobs , he would have bricked the iPhone of the guy who asked the question , just to remind him whose house they are in... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Had it been the real Steve Jobs, he would have bricked the iPhone of the guy who asked the question, just to remind him whose house they are in....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409968</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31415872</id>
	<title>You say no to tether</title>
	<author>Karem Lore</author>
	<datestamp>1268158620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I say no to iPad and iPhone...</p><p>who lost?</p><p>not me...I have an alternative...</p><p>Sorry, but you "nice" interface and flat sleek look are not enough...I need something that fits the way I work, not the way you want me to work...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I say no to iPad and iPhone...who lost ? not me...I have an alternative...Sorry , but you " nice " interface and flat sleek look are not enough...I need something that fits the way I work , not the way you want me to work.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I say no to iPad and iPhone...who lost?not me...I have an alternative...Sorry, but you "nice" interface and flat sleek look are not enough...I need something that fits the way I work, not the way you want me to work...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31413260</id>
	<title>This is a deal breaker.</title>
	<author>Fastfwd</author>
	<datestamp>1268148480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It just makes sense to get your bandwidth from the phone since this is the device you always have with you. I can understand a 3G tablet for someone who does not have a phone but expecting people to pay service on both the phone and the tablet is ridiculous.</p><p>My Nokia E71 with joikuspot allows me to turn the phone into a wifi access point. It eats at the battery but when plugged into the car it means I have wifi in the car to be used on other smartphones, laptops, tablets, gamepads, etc. Tethering by bluetooth is better but was less reliable and not all devices can do it.</p><p>I would not bother me as much if they would at least make some kind of special deal where you pay for the bandwidth once and get to receive it on all your phones/devices independently. In Canada right now you CAN tether the iphone but bandwidth is not unlimited; I think this is the way to do it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It just makes sense to get your bandwidth from the phone since this is the device you always have with you .
I can understand a 3G tablet for someone who does not have a phone but expecting people to pay service on both the phone and the tablet is ridiculous.My Nokia E71 with joikuspot allows me to turn the phone into a wifi access point .
It eats at the battery but when plugged into the car it means I have wifi in the car to be used on other smartphones , laptops , tablets , gamepads , etc .
Tethering by bluetooth is better but was less reliable and not all devices can do it.I would not bother me as much if they would at least make some kind of special deal where you pay for the bandwidth once and get to receive it on all your phones/devices independently .
In Canada right now you CAN tether the iphone but bandwidth is not unlimited ; I think this is the way to do it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It just makes sense to get your bandwidth from the phone since this is the device you always have with you.
I can understand a 3G tablet for someone who does not have a phone but expecting people to pay service on both the phone and the tablet is ridiculous.My Nokia E71 with joikuspot allows me to turn the phone into a wifi access point.
It eats at the battery but when plugged into the car it means I have wifi in the car to be used on other smartphones, laptops, tablets, gamepads, etc.
Tethering by bluetooth is better but was less reliable and not all devices can do it.I would not bother me as much if they would at least make some kind of special deal where you pay for the bandwidth once and get to receive it on all your phones/devices independently.
In Canada right now you CAN tether the iphone but bandwidth is not unlimited; I think this is the way to do it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31412118</id>
	<title>I now balk at Apple products.</title>
	<author>philcolbourn</author>
	<datestamp>1268142120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It is artificial (AKA marketing) limitations like this that cause me to balk when considering Apple products.

I have several.
And I like them.
And they work well.

But I have not purchased an iPhone and instead I will probably get an Android phone and one for my wife as well.

I like the iPad, but these limitations, no camera and the high cost of the extra GB's will cause me to look for something else.

And while I am on the topic, iTunes is also a great system - as is iPhoto. But I am feeling locked-in and I will move to something like Picasa for photos and ??? for music, videos and podcasts.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is artificial ( AKA marketing ) limitations like this that cause me to balk when considering Apple products .
I have several .
And I like them .
And they work well .
But I have not purchased an iPhone and instead I will probably get an Android phone and one for my wife as well .
I like the iPad , but these limitations , no camera and the high cost of the extra GB 's will cause me to look for something else .
And while I am on the topic , iTunes is also a great system - as is iPhoto .
But I am feeling locked-in and I will move to something like Picasa for photos and ? ? ?
for music , videos and podcasts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is artificial (AKA marketing) limitations like this that cause me to balk when considering Apple products.
I have several.
And I like them.
And they work well.
But I have not purchased an iPhone and instead I will probably get an Android phone and one for my wife as well.
I like the iPad, but these limitations, no camera and the high cost of the extra GB's will cause me to look for something else.
And while I am on the topic, iTunes is also a great system - as is iPhoto.
But I am feeling locked-in and I will move to something like Picasa for photos and ???
for music, videos and podcasts.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31431162</id>
	<title>Re:It's getting ridiculous</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268216580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We don't pay $20+/month for the vacuum's electricity, $20+/month for the toaster's electricity, etc. We do for 3G wireless devices. Tethering is a sensible way to manage data use, the only reason for not allowing tethering is to make more money by selling loads of minimum plans, which are more profitable than one maximum plan. However, as Apple never comment on products before release, I reckon the claim is "unconfirmed" if not "totally bogus."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We do n't pay $ 20 + /month for the vacuum 's electricity , $ 20 + /month for the toaster 's electricity , etc .
We do for 3G wireless devices .
Tethering is a sensible way to manage data use , the only reason for not allowing tethering is to make more money by selling loads of minimum plans , which are more profitable than one maximum plan .
However , as Apple never comment on products before release , I reckon the claim is " unconfirmed " if not " totally bogus .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We don't pay $20+/month for the vacuum's electricity, $20+/month for the toaster's electricity, etc.
We do for 3G wireless devices.
Tethering is a sensible way to manage data use, the only reason for not allowing tethering is to make more money by selling loads of minimum plans, which are more profitable than one maximum plan.
However, as Apple never comment on products before release, I reckon the claim is "unconfirmed" if not "totally bogus.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31420130</id>
	<title>Bah.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268133840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dear Apple.  Fuck you.  Dear AT&amp;T.  Fuck you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dear Apple .
Fuck you .
Dear AT&amp;T .
Fuck you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dear Apple.
Fuck you.
Dear AT&amp;T.
Fuck you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31413578</id>
	<title>Because WE let them</title>
	<author>gearloos</author>
	<datestamp>1268149800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why do asshats like this (OMG ! he just called Steve "god" Jobs an asshat!!)get to choose what I do with a device, or if I decide to upgrade, change, modify etc.. Simple--&gt;because WE let them. This world has gone crazy. We need to just stop buying from anyone who implements any kind of DRM or makes any restrictions on how you use a device. This is like saying I can't repaint my car blue because Chevy doesn't have a partner program with the paint shop I want to use.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do asshats like this ( OMG !
he just called Steve " god " Jobs an asshat ! !
) get to choose what I do with a device , or if I decide to upgrade , change , modify etc.. Simple-- &gt; because WE let them .
This world has gone crazy .
We need to just stop buying from anyone who implements any kind of DRM or makes any restrictions on how you use a device .
This is like saying I ca n't repaint my car blue because Chevy does n't have a partner program with the paint shop I want to use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why do asshats like this (OMG !
he just called Steve "god" Jobs an asshat!!
)get to choose what I do with a device, or if I decide to upgrade, change, modify etc.. Simple--&gt;because WE let them.
This world has gone crazy.
We need to just stop buying from anyone who implements any kind of DRM or makes any restrictions on how you use a device.
This is like saying I can't repaint my car blue because Chevy doesn't have a partner program with the paint shop I want to use.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409998</id>
	<title>Re:It's getting ridiculous</title>
	<author>NiteRiderXP</author>
	<datestamp>1268070780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well eventually it will probably be narrowed down to two pipes.<br>You will have a fixed wired connection and a wireless connection, two simply due to bandwidth differences.<br>You will probably carry something like a MiFi that intelligently acts as a gateway for all of your gadgets.<br>That's the hope anyway...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well eventually it will probably be narrowed down to two pipes.You will have a fixed wired connection and a wireless connection , two simply due to bandwidth differences.You will probably carry something like a MiFi that intelligently acts as a gateway for all of your gadgets.That 's the hope anyway.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well eventually it will probably be narrowed down to two pipes.You will have a fixed wired connection and a wireless connection, two simply due to bandwidth differences.You will probably carry something like a MiFi that intelligently acts as a gateway for all of your gadgets.That's the hope anyway...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409960</id>
	<title>Another reason not to buy an Ipad</title>
	<author>thinktech</author>
	<datestamp>1268070480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just another in a long and growing list of reasons not to buy a larger Iphone screen with less functionality than your phone and not even close to the functionality of a laptop, but more expensive.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just another in a long and growing list of reasons not to buy a larger Iphone screen with less functionality than your phone and not even close to the functionality of a laptop , but more expensive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just another in a long and growing list of reasons not to buy a larger Iphone screen with less functionality than your phone and not even close to the functionality of a laptop, but more expensive.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410050</id>
	<title>This is 90\% likely to be FUD...</title>
	<author>MrCrassic</author>
	<datestamp>1268071320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...because it will most likely get hacked just like the Kindle and iPhone were. Unless by some miracle the iPad becomes un-'jailbreakable.'</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...because it will most likely get hacked just like the Kindle and iPhone were .
Unless by some miracle the iPad becomes un-'jailbreakable .
'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...because it will most likely get hacked just like the Kindle and iPhone were.
Unless by some miracle the iPad becomes un-'jailbreakable.
'</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410134</id>
	<title>Apple flipping the bird to users?!</title>
	<author>SlappyBastard</author>
	<datestamp>1268072160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm outraged.  Absolutely outraged.  This is unprecedented.  Unheard of.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm outraged .
Absolutely outraged .
This is unprecedented .
Unheard of .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm outraged.
Absolutely outraged.
This is unprecedented.
Unheard of.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410064</id>
	<title>Ouch.</title>
	<author>Chonnawonga</author>
	<datestamp>1268071380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At the risk of being moderated "Troll"...</p><p>What a jerk.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At the risk of being moderated " Troll " ...What a jerk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At the risk of being moderated "Troll"...What a jerk.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410246</id>
	<title>It's a shame</title>
	<author>toastliscio</author>
	<datestamp>1268073300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's a shame that in the 21st century you buy a device like that and then you have to ask permission to the company that made it for doing something obvious.
The iPad can do that, but they prevent you from doing it via software, just because if you want to do something like that, they want you to spend even more money on another of their devices. So actually they don't make money on what they give you, but on what they take away from you.
The EU has much more articulated antitrust laws than US (see MS Windows browser case), let's hope they'll do something, sooner or later.

BTW, I'm a Linux and GNU and FLOSS supporter, so from my point of view Microsoft is nothing more than a company that tries to do its business, but before MS came along all kinds of computers where closed like Apples. Microsoft opened up the market and spurred strong competition between hardware producers so that now we have better tecnology at lower prices, now with Apple we can see again what the closed world was like.

Will the apple hype ever deflate in front of such things?</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a shame that in the 21st century you buy a device like that and then you have to ask permission to the company that made it for doing something obvious .
The iPad can do that , but they prevent you from doing it via software , just because if you want to do something like that , they want you to spend even more money on another of their devices .
So actually they do n't make money on what they give you , but on what they take away from you .
The EU has much more articulated antitrust laws than US ( see MS Windows browser case ) , let 's hope they 'll do something , sooner or later .
BTW , I 'm a Linux and GNU and FLOSS supporter , so from my point of view Microsoft is nothing more than a company that tries to do its business , but before MS came along all kinds of computers where closed like Apples .
Microsoft opened up the market and spurred strong competition between hardware producers so that now we have better tecnology at lower prices , now with Apple we can see again what the closed world was like .
Will the apple hype ever deflate in front of such things ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a shame that in the 21st century you buy a device like that and then you have to ask permission to the company that made it for doing something obvious.
The iPad can do that, but they prevent you from doing it via software, just because if you want to do something like that, they want you to spend even more money on another of their devices.
So actually they don't make money on what they give you, but on what they take away from you.
The EU has much more articulated antitrust laws than US (see MS Windows browser case), let's hope they'll do something, sooner or later.
BTW, I'm a Linux and GNU and FLOSS supporter, so from my point of view Microsoft is nothing more than a company that tries to do its business, but before MS came along all kinds of computers where closed like Apples.
Microsoft opened up the market and spurred strong competition between hardware producers so that now we have better tecnology at lower prices, now with Apple we can see again what the closed world was like.
Will the apple hype ever deflate in front of such things?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410158</id>
	<title>Re:It's getting ridiculous</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268072460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Stop buying apple products.</p><p>Problem solved.  (mostly)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Stop buying apple products.Problem solved .
( mostly )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stop buying apple products.Problem solved.
(mostly)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31416052</id>
	<title>iPad same OS as Touch and iPhone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268159220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My understanding is that the iPad runs the same OS as the iPod Touch and the iPhone. Given that you cannot tether (wire or blue tooth) a Touch or an iPhone to another device that does tethering why would I expect the iPad to do it. The new OS being talked about sounds like a point release not a major functionality change so initially it should not be a big surprise. Sure it is disappointing but one of the key reasons I like my iPhone is that Apple continues to stand behind it and provide updates. I fully expect to have OS updates from Apple for my iPhone for a couple more years. All of previous phones had no hope of any software updates after 6 months and even then it was tough trying to find them (and get them installed). The manufacturers pretty much prefer I just get a new one. Now if Apple continues to provide hardware improvements, I will upgrade to get that functionality, but I expect the software to pretty much work the same way.</p><p>Now if you consider a wi-fi connection as tethering, then all of the devices can do that to a device that does the wi-fi to cell data routing. I believe you can get jail broken apps that allow iPhones to act as wi-fi stations and that other smart phones like some Android based ones, Palm WebOS, and even Windows Mobile had apps that could allow that functionality. I hear that even cars are looking at that functionality in the near future if not already available as a 3rd party option. In all I think this is of those technology transition points, fun and frustrating where you want to be attached to some company that is willing to travel down the path and take you with them in a reasonable fashion. So far Apple is the one that is delivering on this for me.</p><p>So Jobs saying that the currently planned  iPad cannot tether to an iPhone should be no surprise,</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My understanding is that the iPad runs the same OS as the iPod Touch and the iPhone .
Given that you can not tether ( wire or blue tooth ) a Touch or an iPhone to another device that does tethering why would I expect the iPad to do it .
The new OS being talked about sounds like a point release not a major functionality change so initially it should not be a big surprise .
Sure it is disappointing but one of the key reasons I like my iPhone is that Apple continues to stand behind it and provide updates .
I fully expect to have OS updates from Apple for my iPhone for a couple more years .
All of previous phones had no hope of any software updates after 6 months and even then it was tough trying to find them ( and get them installed ) .
The manufacturers pretty much prefer I just get a new one .
Now if Apple continues to provide hardware improvements , I will upgrade to get that functionality , but I expect the software to pretty much work the same way.Now if you consider a wi-fi connection as tethering , then all of the devices can do that to a device that does the wi-fi to cell data routing .
I believe you can get jail broken apps that allow iPhones to act as wi-fi stations and that other smart phones like some Android based ones , Palm WebOS , and even Windows Mobile had apps that could allow that functionality .
I hear that even cars are looking at that functionality in the near future if not already available as a 3rd party option .
In all I think this is of those technology transition points , fun and frustrating where you want to be attached to some company that is willing to travel down the path and take you with them in a reasonable fashion .
So far Apple is the one that is delivering on this for me.So Jobs saying that the currently planned iPad can not tether to an iPhone should be no surprise,</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My understanding is that the iPad runs the same OS as the iPod Touch and the iPhone.
Given that you cannot tether (wire or blue tooth) a Touch or an iPhone to another device that does tethering why would I expect the iPad to do it.
The new OS being talked about sounds like a point release not a major functionality change so initially it should not be a big surprise.
Sure it is disappointing but one of the key reasons I like my iPhone is that Apple continues to stand behind it and provide updates.
I fully expect to have OS updates from Apple for my iPhone for a couple more years.
All of previous phones had no hope of any software updates after 6 months and even then it was tough trying to find them (and get them installed).
The manufacturers pretty much prefer I just get a new one.
Now if Apple continues to provide hardware improvements, I will upgrade to get that functionality, but I expect the software to pretty much work the same way.Now if you consider a wi-fi connection as tethering, then all of the devices can do that to a device that does the wi-fi to cell data routing.
I believe you can get jail broken apps that allow iPhones to act as wi-fi stations and that other smart phones like some Android based ones, Palm WebOS, and even Windows Mobile had apps that could allow that functionality.
I hear that even cars are looking at that functionality in the near future if not already available as a 3rd party option.
In all I think this is of those technology transition points, fun and frustrating where you want to be attached to some company that is willing to travel down the path and take you with them in a reasonable fashion.
So far Apple is the one that is delivering on this for me.So Jobs saying that the currently planned  iPad cannot tether to an iPhone should be no surprise,</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410142</id>
	<title>Re:yet another bad iPad-related choice...</title>
	<author>EastCoastSurfer</author>
	<datestamp>1268072280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I keep wondering the same thing, but you can't ignore the Apple marketing machine and the people who love all their shiny toys (even I enjoy my MBP and iPhone).  The problem is if someone already has an iPhone and a MB/MBP I don't see what the iPad brings to the equation.  I guess it could simply take the e-reader market?</p><p>I've read a lot of people saying that the iPad will replace their laptop of some sort.  That might work if they only consume content, but even my non-techie friends seem to do a lot of typing on IM, email, FB, etc.. and the iPad seems horrible for any sort of typing (and awkward when typing then touching the screen and typing again).  I'm sure someone will point me to the keyboard accessory, but if you're going to carry around an iPad and the attachable keyboard why not just get a proper laptop to begin with?</p><p>It'll be interesting to see how it plays out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I keep wondering the same thing , but you ca n't ignore the Apple marketing machine and the people who love all their shiny toys ( even I enjoy my MBP and iPhone ) .
The problem is if someone already has an iPhone and a MB/MBP I do n't see what the iPad brings to the equation .
I guess it could simply take the e-reader market ? I 've read a lot of people saying that the iPad will replace their laptop of some sort .
That might work if they only consume content , but even my non-techie friends seem to do a lot of typing on IM , email , FB , etc.. and the iPad seems horrible for any sort of typing ( and awkward when typing then touching the screen and typing again ) .
I 'm sure someone will point me to the keyboard accessory , but if you 're going to carry around an iPad and the attachable keyboard why not just get a proper laptop to begin with ? It 'll be interesting to see how it plays out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I keep wondering the same thing, but you can't ignore the Apple marketing machine and the people who love all their shiny toys (even I enjoy my MBP and iPhone).
The problem is if someone already has an iPhone and a MB/MBP I don't see what the iPad brings to the equation.
I guess it could simply take the e-reader market?I've read a lot of people saying that the iPad will replace their laptop of some sort.
That might work if they only consume content, but even my non-techie friends seem to do a lot of typing on IM, email, FB, etc.. and the iPad seems horrible for any sort of typing (and awkward when typing then touching the screen and typing again).
I'm sure someone will point me to the keyboard accessory, but if you're going to carry around an iPad and the attachable keyboard why not just get a proper laptop to begin with?It'll be interesting to see how it plays out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410022</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31411074</id>
	<title>No need to tether iPad, its 3G cheap as tethering</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268126880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Tethering is always at least $30 per month, and usually has a 5GB cap. The iPad has unlimited 3G for $30 per month. If you could tether iPad to iPhone for $30 a month that would just wear out your iPhone battery unnecessarily. If you want 3G in your iPad, it has a SIM slot and $30 per month unlimited. Solved. It's wireless tethering without the incredible battery drain of Bluetooth.</p><p>Also, this question is backwards. From a 3G perspective, the iPad is another iPhone. In iPhone OS, there is a simple tethering switch, a big ON/OFF slider that shares the device's 3G connection with the Mac/PC it is attached to via USB or Bluetooth. So the question should be, "can I tether my Mac/PC to my iPad?" We haven't heard about that yet.</p><p>And the other question should be, "WTF is wrong with AT&amp;T that they still don't offer iPhone tethering? It's available everywhere else!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Tethering is always at least $ 30 per month , and usually has a 5GB cap .
The iPad has unlimited 3G for $ 30 per month .
If you could tether iPad to iPhone for $ 30 a month that would just wear out your iPhone battery unnecessarily .
If you want 3G in your iPad , it has a SIM slot and $ 30 per month unlimited .
Solved. It 's wireless tethering without the incredible battery drain of Bluetooth.Also , this question is backwards .
From a 3G perspective , the iPad is another iPhone .
In iPhone OS , there is a simple tethering switch , a big ON/OFF slider that shares the device 's 3G connection with the Mac/PC it is attached to via USB or Bluetooth .
So the question should be , " can I tether my Mac/PC to my iPad ?
" We have n't heard about that yet.And the other question should be , " WTF is wrong with AT&amp;T that they still do n't offer iPhone tethering ?
It 's available everywhere else !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tethering is always at least $30 per month, and usually has a 5GB cap.
The iPad has unlimited 3G for $30 per month.
If you could tether iPad to iPhone for $30 a month that would just wear out your iPhone battery unnecessarily.
If you want 3G in your iPad, it has a SIM slot and $30 per month unlimited.
Solved. It's wireless tethering without the incredible battery drain of Bluetooth.Also, this question is backwards.
From a 3G perspective, the iPad is another iPhone.
In iPhone OS, there is a simple tethering switch, a big ON/OFF slider that shares the device's 3G connection with the Mac/PC it is attached to via USB or Bluetooth.
So the question should be, "can I tether my Mac/PC to my iPad?
" We haven't heard about that yet.And the other question should be, "WTF is wrong with AT&amp;T that they still don't offer iPhone tethering?
It's available everywhere else!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409950</id>
	<title>do what you want with an apple product?</title>
	<author>Reed Solomon</author>
	<datestamp>1268070360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>good heavens! That's crazy talk.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>good heavens !
That 's crazy talk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>good heavens!
That's crazy talk.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410282</id>
	<title>Re:yet another bad iPad-related choice...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268073660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Am I the only one who thinks that this paticular Apple product is going the way of Newtons [wikipedia.org]?</p></div><p>If you mean a product that launches a whole new paradigm of computing devices, then yes.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Am I the only one who thinks that this paticular Apple product is going the way of Newtons [ wikipedia.org ] ? If you mean a product that launches a whole new paradigm of computing devices , then yes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Am I the only one who thinks that this paticular Apple product is going the way of Newtons [wikipedia.org]?If you mean a product that launches a whole new paradigm of computing devices, then yes.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410022</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31411220</id>
	<title>Re:Didn't he say this..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268129340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So don't come here, it's that simple. Of course, you still will.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So do n't come here , it 's that simple .
Of course , you still will .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So don't come here, it's that simple.
Of course, you still will.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409922</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31430976</id>
	<title>Re:It's getting ridiculous</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268215680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But here the issue is tethering, not metering. When I pay for a connection I just want to be charged for the *ability* to send and receive packets. Where I terminate the packets I receive, and where the ones I send are generated, should not be any of the ISP's business, metered service or not. I'm not even offered a choice to switch to metered service to get that unfettered ability so your point is moot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But here the issue is tethering , not metering .
When I pay for a connection I just want to be charged for the * ability * to send and receive packets .
Where I terminate the packets I receive , and where the ones I send are generated , should not be any of the ISP 's business , metered service or not .
I 'm not even offered a choice to switch to metered service to get that unfettered ability so your point is moot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But here the issue is tethering, not metering.
When I pay for a connection I just want to be charged for the *ability* to send and receive packets.
Where I terminate the packets I receive, and where the ones I send are generated, should not be any of the ISP's business, metered service or not.
I'm not even offered a choice to switch to metered service to get that unfettered ability so your point is moot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31412082</id>
	<title>DKIM: signing headers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268141880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is Slashdot, wake up people.<br>How hard is it to forge headers, it's not like his email was signed with a cert?<br>Maybe I should send a story in with fake headers and see if it gets posted...</p></div><p>The headers would be signed if Apple is using DKIM.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is Slashdot , wake up people.How hard is it to forge headers , it 's not like his email was signed with a cert ? Maybe I should send a story in with fake headers and see if it gets posted...The headers would be signed if Apple is using DKIM .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is Slashdot, wake up people.How hard is it to forge headers, it's not like his email was signed with a cert?Maybe I should send a story in with fake headers and see if it gets posted...The headers would be signed if Apple is using DKIM.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409968</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410398</id>
	<title>Re:It's getting ridiculous</title>
	<author>Totenglocke</author>
	<datestamp>1268074860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>30$?  I'm assuming that you've never even traveled to the US then........</htmltext>
<tokenext>30 $ ?
I 'm assuming that you 've never even traveled to the US then....... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>30$?
I'm assuming that you've never even traveled to the US then........</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31412062</id>
	<title>Re:It's getting ridiculous</title>
	<author>chazzf</author>
	<datestamp>1268141640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>All too well, all too well. I had a home-built gateway/firewall running Slackware which I kept under my desk. As far as Charter was concerned *that* was the computer connected to the Internet. What a joke.</htmltext>
<tokenext>All too well , all too well .
I had a home-built gateway/firewall running Slackware which I kept under my desk .
As far as Charter was concerned * that * was the computer connected to the Internet .
What a joke .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All too well, all too well.
I had a home-built gateway/firewall running Slackware which I kept under my desk.
As far as Charter was concerned *that* was the computer connected to the Internet.
What a joke.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410714</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410496</id>
	<title>Re:Didn't he say this..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268075880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; I used to come here to get the lates tech news.</p><p>Then you came here for the wrong reason.  Slashdot is for discussion.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; I used to come here to get the lates tech news.Then you came here for the wrong reason .
Slashdot is for discussion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; I used to come here to get the lates tech news.Then you came here for the wrong reason.
Slashdot is for discussion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409922</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409922</id>
	<title>Didn't he say this..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268070180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm pretty sure he said this two days ago.  Yep... here it is:</p><p><a href="http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2361029,00.asp" title="pcmag.com">http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2361029,00.asp</a> [pcmag.com]</p><p>2 days ago...</p><p>I used to come here to get the lates tech news.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm pretty sure he said this two days ago .
Yep... here it is : http : //www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2361029,00.asp [ pcmag.com ] 2 days ago...I used to come here to get the lates tech news .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm pretty sure he said this two days ago.
Yep... here it is:http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2361029,00.asp [pcmag.com]2 days ago...I used to come here to get the lates tech news.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409968</id>
	<title>Forged Headers?</title>
	<author>NiteRiderXP</author>
	<datestamp>1268070540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is Slashdot, wake up people.<br>How hard is it to forge headers, it's not like his email was signed with a cert?<br>Maybe I should send a story in with fake headers and see if it gets posted...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is Slashdot , wake up people.How hard is it to forge headers , it 's not like his email was signed with a cert ? Maybe I should send a story in with fake headers and see if it gets posted.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is Slashdot, wake up people.How hard is it to forge headers, it's not like his email was signed with a cert?Maybe I should send a story in with fake headers and see if it gets posted...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410572</id>
	<title>Re:It's getting ridiculous</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268076840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You use electricity in your vacuum cleaner, your blender, and your hair dryer, and you pay for each, even though you don't use them at the same time.  Nobody complains about that.</p><p>The difference is the unlimited plans.  If consumers would consent to paying straight metered rates for bandwidth, like we do for electricity and gas/oil, we could be free of all these stupid packages and deals and calling circles and contracts.</p><p>Cell phone service and broadband internet are commodity utilities, yet they're marketed as "lifestyle" services -- which means, expensive advertising that appeals to emotions.</p><p>I hope that, before every device in our lives gets connected, that bandwidth becomes as boring and predictable as electricity or heating oil.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You use electricity in your vacuum cleaner , your blender , and your hair dryer , and you pay for each , even though you do n't use them at the same time .
Nobody complains about that.The difference is the unlimited plans .
If consumers would consent to paying straight metered rates for bandwidth , like we do for electricity and gas/oil , we could be free of all these stupid packages and deals and calling circles and contracts.Cell phone service and broadband internet are commodity utilities , yet they 're marketed as " lifestyle " services -- which means , expensive advertising that appeals to emotions.I hope that , before every device in our lives gets connected , that bandwidth becomes as boring and predictable as electricity or heating oil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You use electricity in your vacuum cleaner, your blender, and your hair dryer, and you pay for each, even though you don't use them at the same time.
Nobody complains about that.The difference is the unlimited plans.
If consumers would consent to paying straight metered rates for bandwidth, like we do for electricity and gas/oil, we could be free of all these stupid packages and deals and calling circles and contracts.Cell phone service and broadband internet are commodity utilities, yet they're marketed as "lifestyle" services -- which means, expensive advertising that appeals to emotions.I hope that, before every device in our lives gets connected, that bandwidth becomes as boring and predictable as electricity or heating oil.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410080</id>
	<title>Tosh.0</title>
	<author>BUL2294</author>
	<datestamp>1268071560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>The more I read about the iPad's failings, the more I'd love
<a href="http://www.comedycentral.com/tosh.0/2010/02/09/daniel-tosh-destroys-an-ipad/" title="comedycentral.com">to do this</a> [comedycentral.com] to a (free) one...<br> <br>
<i>"We never even turned it on!"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>The more I read about the iPad 's failings , the more I 'd love to do this [ comedycentral.com ] to a ( free ) one.. . " We never even turned it on !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The more I read about the iPad's failings, the more I'd love
to do this [comedycentral.com] to a (free) one... 
"We never even turned it on!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410140</id>
	<title>Re:It's getting ridiculous</title>
	<author>jgreco</author>
	<datestamp>1268072220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's all about that growth number.  As cell phone penetration is slowly reaching the saturation point, the choices for pushing growth are decreasing.</p><p>Since the number of potential subscribers in the country is growing fairly slowly, and since corporations cannot (yet?) manufacture new consumers on a production line, the only real option is to find a way to increase the revenue per subscriber.</p><p>That used to mean selling minutes.  Then it was texting.  Then data.  Then additional wireless devices.  There always has to be a new gimmick, and of course many people will pay up.</p><p>The problem is that eventually the charges become outrageous and people stop buying.  Growth will hit this wall eventually.</p><p>I don't see it as viable to pay for a $60 data plan for the laptop, a $30 data plan for the iPhone, and then another $30 for iPad.  As you say, most people don't use two devices at the same time, and in fact the availability of more devices tends to mean each individual device gets used somewhat less than it would otherwise.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's all about that growth number .
As cell phone penetration is slowly reaching the saturation point , the choices for pushing growth are decreasing.Since the number of potential subscribers in the country is growing fairly slowly , and since corporations can not ( yet ?
) manufacture new consumers on a production line , the only real option is to find a way to increase the revenue per subscriber.That used to mean selling minutes .
Then it was texting .
Then data .
Then additional wireless devices .
There always has to be a new gimmick , and of course many people will pay up.The problem is that eventually the charges become outrageous and people stop buying .
Growth will hit this wall eventually.I do n't see it as viable to pay for a $ 60 data plan for the laptop , a $ 30 data plan for the iPhone , and then another $ 30 for iPad .
As you say , most people do n't use two devices at the same time , and in fact the availability of more devices tends to mean each individual device gets used somewhat less than it would otherwise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's all about that growth number.
As cell phone penetration is slowly reaching the saturation point, the choices for pushing growth are decreasing.Since the number of potential subscribers in the country is growing fairly slowly, and since corporations cannot (yet?
) manufacture new consumers on a production line, the only real option is to find a way to increase the revenue per subscriber.That used to mean selling minutes.
Then it was texting.
Then data.
Then additional wireless devices.
There always has to be a new gimmick, and of course many people will pay up.The problem is that eventually the charges become outrageous and people stop buying.
Growth will hit this wall eventually.I don't see it as viable to pay for a $60 data plan for the laptop, a $30 data plan for the iPhone, and then another $30 for iPad.
As you say, most people don't use two devices at the same time, and in fact the availability of more devices tends to mean each individual device gets used somewhat less than it would otherwise.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31413014</id>
	<title>Translation</title>
	<author>fulldecent</author>
	<datestamp>1268147460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When Steve Jobs says "no", all I hear is "not until you jailbreak it".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When Steve Jobs says " no " , all I hear is " not until you jailbreak it " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When Steve Jobs says "no", all I hear is "not until you jailbreak it".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410276</id>
	<title>Re:It's getting ridiculous</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268073600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>*Very soon our cars will be connected devices*</i> </p><p>Umm, yeah. See OnStar and XM radio.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>* Very soon our cars will be connected devices * Umm , yeah .
See OnStar and XM radio .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> *Very soon our cars will be connected devices* Umm, yeah.
See OnStar and XM radio.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31411802</id>
	<title>Jobs Says No Tethering iPad To iPhone!</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1268138220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>L4t3r4lu5 says no buying of IPad and IPhone!<br> <br>BTW, my winmob 6.5 device can emulate a wireless access point. I've had Linux and Windows clients use it, and I've had Linux and Windows clients share the data connection over USB. I've also had an iPod Touch use data over wireless, so no reason for the iPad not to either.<br> <br>Chew on them apples you poloneck-wearing, goatee-sporting, Kool-Aid-drinking Apple apologists!</htmltext>
<tokenext>L4t3r4lu5 says no buying of IPad and IPhone !
BTW , my winmob 6.5 device can emulate a wireless access point .
I 've had Linux and Windows clients use it , and I 've had Linux and Windows clients share the data connection over USB .
I 've also had an iPod Touch use data over wireless , so no reason for the iPad not to either .
Chew on them apples you poloneck-wearing , goatee-sporting , Kool-Aid-drinking Apple apologists !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>L4t3r4lu5 says no buying of IPad and IPhone!
BTW, my winmob 6.5 device can emulate a wireless access point.
I've had Linux and Windows clients use it, and I've had Linux and Windows clients share the data connection over USB.
I've also had an iPod Touch use data over wireless, so no reason for the iPad not to either.
Chew on them apples you poloneck-wearing, goatee-sporting, Kool-Aid-drinking Apple apologists!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31412768</id>
	<title>Re:It's getting ridiculous</title>
	<author>MistrBlank</author>
	<datestamp>1268146440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most ISPs actually still believe you should only have one device connected to the connection.  It's just hard to enforce it though by kicking everyone off of their network and still maintain profitability.</p><p>I checked my agreement a few months ago and it still has parts of that policy in it that refer to a single device.</p><p>I think these days they have pulled back so that the reality is such that you're not trying to connect multiple modems to their services.  Technically your modem is a computer, as would be your router.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most ISPs actually still believe you should only have one device connected to the connection .
It 's just hard to enforce it though by kicking everyone off of their network and still maintain profitability.I checked my agreement a few months ago and it still has parts of that policy in it that refer to a single device.I think these days they have pulled back so that the reality is such that you 're not trying to connect multiple modems to their services .
Technically your modem is a computer , as would be your router .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most ISPs actually still believe you should only have one device connected to the connection.
It's just hard to enforce it though by kicking everyone off of their network and still maintain profitability.I checked my agreement a few months ago and it still has parts of that policy in it that refer to a single device.I think these days they have pulled back so that the reality is such that you're not trying to connect multiple modems to their services.
Technically your modem is a computer, as would be your router.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410714</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31421970</id>
	<title>Is this really a surprise?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268145480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Uhh... Why would anyone expect Apple to allow tethering to a device that they would want you to purchase the upgraded version?  You know, the one that comes with 3G...?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Uhh... Why would anyone expect Apple to allow tethering to a device that they would want you to purchase the upgraded version ?
You know , the one that comes with 3G... ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uhh... Why would anyone expect Apple to allow tethering to a device that they would want you to purchase the upgraded version?
You know, the one that comes with 3G...?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31413408</id>
	<title>You mean like copying stuff off your PVR?</title>
	<author>Fastfwd</author>
	<datestamp>1268149080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are all kinds of things that CAN do something but won't just to try to extract more money out of view. This is a clear failure of free markets since nobody is stepping in to fill the gap with something that does it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are all kinds of things that CAN do something but wo n't just to try to extract more money out of view .
This is a clear failure of free markets since nobody is stepping in to fill the gap with something that does it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are all kinds of things that CAN do something but won't just to try to extract more money out of view.
This is a clear failure of free markets since nobody is stepping in to fill the gap with something that does it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410246</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410300</id>
	<title>Re:It's getting ridiculous</title>
	<author>Animats</author>
	<datestamp>1268073780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
<i>Very soon our cars will be connected devices</i>
</p><p>
Very soon?  More like since 2005 or so. OnStar is $19 to $30 per month.  It's tied in to the vehicle's systems: "We automatically run hundreds of diagnostic and maintenance checks on your vehicle's key operating systems and deliver a summary report right to your inbox every month."  And, of course, they can stop your car remotely.
</p><p>
With the Chevy Volt, OnStar will allow remote phone access to some car functions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Very soon our cars will be connected devices Very soon ?
More like since 2005 or so .
OnStar is $ 19 to $ 30 per month .
It 's tied in to the vehicle 's systems : " We automatically run hundreds of diagnostic and maintenance checks on your vehicle 's key operating systems and deliver a summary report right to your inbox every month .
" And , of course , they can stop your car remotely .
With the Chevy Volt , OnStar will allow remote phone access to some car functions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Very soon our cars will be connected devices

Very soon?
More like since 2005 or so.
OnStar is $19 to $30 per month.
It's tied in to the vehicle's systems: "We automatically run hundreds of diagnostic and maintenance checks on your vehicle's key operating systems and deliver a summary report right to your inbox every month.
"  And, of course, they can stop your car remotely.
With the Chevy Volt, OnStar will allow remote phone access to some car functions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410922</id>
	<title>FTFA</title>
	<author>commodoresloat</author>
	<datestamp>1268167680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Jobs's reply--"No. Sent from my iPhone"</p></div><p>The big news here is that even Steve Jobs himself can't figure out how to turn off that annoying sig line.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Jobs 's reply-- " No .
Sent from my iPhone " The big news here is that even Steve Jobs himself ca n't figure out how to turn off that annoying sig line .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jobs's reply--"No.
Sent from my iPhone"The big news here is that even Steve Jobs himself can't figure out how to turn off that annoying sig line.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410744</id>
	<title>No Tethering on dA iPhone</title>
	<author>mysidia</author>
	<datestamp>1268165220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <em>The great and powerful Jobs has spoken!</em> </p><p>
<em>Go away and come back next year.</em>
</p><p>
Next year? Oh? But I want my tethering now.
Can we at least tether the iPad to the iPhone?
</p><p> <em>Do not arouse the wrath of the great and powerful Jobs! I said, 'Come back next year.'</em> </p><p> <em>
Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain....the...Great......Jobs has spoken.</em> </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The great and powerful Jobs has spoken !
Go away and come back next year .
Next year ?
Oh ? But I want my tethering now .
Can we at least tether the iPad to the iPhone ?
Do not arouse the wrath of the great and powerful Jobs !
I said , 'Come back next year .
' Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain....the...Great......Jobs has spoken .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> The great and powerful Jobs has spoken!
Go away and come back next year.
Next year?
Oh? But I want my tethering now.
Can we at least tether the iPad to the iPhone?
Do not arouse the wrath of the great and powerful Jobs!
I said, 'Come back next year.
'  
Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain....the...Great......Jobs has spoken. </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31411036</id>
	<title>Good news for everyone else</title>
	<author>obarthelemy</author>
	<datestamp>1268126280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>almost all WinMob and Android phones can do wifi -&gt; 3g routing, so your iPad will be able to tether without  even realizing it's tethering. Bluetooth -&gt; 3G and Bluetooth -&gt; Wifi would prolly not work, though, if the iPad's BT stack is anything like the iPhone's.</p><p>I'd be leery of buying from a company with such a customer unfriendly attitude though. Their goal is clearly to sell more 3G upgrades, on which they take 90\% margin.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>almost all WinMob and Android phones can do wifi - &gt; 3g routing , so your iPad will be able to tether without even realizing it 's tethering .
Bluetooth - &gt; 3G and Bluetooth - &gt; Wifi would prolly not work , though , if the iPad 's BT stack is anything like the iPhone 's.I 'd be leery of buying from a company with such a customer unfriendly attitude though .
Their goal is clearly to sell more 3G upgrades , on which they take 90 \ % margin .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>almost all WinMob and Android phones can do wifi -&gt; 3g routing, so your iPad will be able to tether without  even realizing it's tethering.
Bluetooth -&gt; 3G and Bluetooth -&gt; Wifi would prolly not work, though, if the iPad's BT stack is anything like the iPhone's.I'd be leery of buying from a company with such a customer unfriendly attitude though.
Their goal is clearly to sell more 3G upgrades, on which they take 90\% margin.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31411922</id>
	<title>Think shareware/crippleware</title>
	<author>freaker\_TuC</author>
	<datestamp>1268140140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><ul> <li>All those windows editions, mostly being the same build. Difference? Price. The software is virtually the same.</li><li>DVD players and region control; same software - different region.</li><li>Multiple expansion cards available with features enabled/disabled while the hardware is present.</li><li>Firmware crippling and missing connectors while being essentially the same hardware. One port extra could mean doubling the cost towards the customer.</li></ul><p>There is no law in Europe preventing this; only common sense and voting with your wallet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All those windows editions , mostly being the same build .
Difference ? Price .
The software is virtually the same.DVD players and region control ; same software - different region.Multiple expansion cards available with features enabled/disabled while the hardware is present.Firmware crippling and missing connectors while being essentially the same hardware .
One port extra could mean doubling the cost towards the customer.There is no law in Europe preventing this ; only common sense and voting with your wallet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> All those windows editions, mostly being the same build.
Difference? Price.
The software is virtually the same.DVD players and region control; same software - different region.Multiple expansion cards available with features enabled/disabled while the hardware is present.Firmware crippling and missing connectors while being essentially the same hardware.
One port extra could mean doubling the cost towards the customer.There is no law in Europe preventing this; only common sense and voting with your wallet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410246</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409868</id>
	<title>You get what you pay for?</title>
	<author>LostCluster</author>
	<datestamp>1268069520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why did anybody think that they'd allow users to tether the iPad to anything when it's 3G data plan only costs $30 a month? With its limited OS, you can only run official apps that can't have high-bandwidth uses (like streaming video) on 3G. That's the reason you get such a discount compared to a $60 a month 5 GB plan...</p><p>If you want to tether a computer and have iPad and iPhone and let them think they're on WiFi, you want a $60 a month plan and a MiFi device from either Verizon or Sprint.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why did anybody think that they 'd allow users to tether the iPad to anything when it 's 3G data plan only costs $ 30 a month ?
With its limited OS , you can only run official apps that ca n't have high-bandwidth uses ( like streaming video ) on 3G .
That 's the reason you get such a discount compared to a $ 60 a month 5 GB plan...If you want to tether a computer and have iPad and iPhone and let them think they 're on WiFi , you want a $ 60 a month plan and a MiFi device from either Verizon or Sprint .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why did anybody think that they'd allow users to tether the iPad to anything when it's 3G data plan only costs $30 a month?
With its limited OS, you can only run official apps that can't have high-bandwidth uses (like streaming video) on 3G.
That's the reason you get such a discount compared to a $60 a month 5 GB plan...If you want to tether a computer and have iPad and iPhone and let them think they're on WiFi, you want a $60 a month plan and a MiFi device from either Verizon or Sprint.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31411310</id>
	<title>Tether to the tether?</title>
	<author>chunkylimey</author>
	<datestamp>1268130780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So a device that, at a certain price, you can put a sim card into to connect it to the internet... and you want to bypass this by buying the cheaper one and tethering it to a phone (that costs more than the difference between the two versions of the device)....

Firstly clearly no grasp of business and pricing structures. Secondly pathetic complaint. Thirdly DUH!

Yeah it's over-priced, yeah it might be gimmicky, but since most of the critics are clearly dumber than the people fooled into buying one; it's probably looking at being a success.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So a device that , at a certain price , you can put a sim card into to connect it to the internet... and you want to bypass this by buying the cheaper one and tethering it to a phone ( that costs more than the difference between the two versions of the device ) ... . Firstly clearly no grasp of business and pricing structures .
Secondly pathetic complaint .
Thirdly DUH !
Yeah it 's over-priced , yeah it might be gimmicky , but since most of the critics are clearly dumber than the people fooled into buying one ; it 's probably looking at being a success .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So a device that, at a certain price, you can put a sim card into to connect it to the internet... and you want to bypass this by buying the cheaper one and tethering it to a phone (that costs more than the difference between the two versions of the device)....

Firstly clearly no grasp of business and pricing structures.
Secondly pathetic complaint.
Thirdly DUH!
Yeah it's over-priced, yeah it might be gimmicky, but since most of the critics are clearly dumber than the people fooled into buying one; it's probably looking at being a success.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_0126234_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410142
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410022
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_0126234_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410282
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410022
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_0126234_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410938
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409968
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_0126234_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410140
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_0126234_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410648
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409922
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_0126234_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31413408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410246
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_0126234_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31412082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409968
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_0126234_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31416218
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410714
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_0126234_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31411220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409922
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_0126234_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410112
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409968
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_0126234_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410158
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_0126234_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_0126234_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410068
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409968
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_0126234_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31411922
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410246
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_0126234_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31412768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410714
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_0126234_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409922
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_0126234_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31412062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410714
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_0126234_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410300
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_0126234_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31430976
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_0126234_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31431162
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_0126234_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_0126234_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410398
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_0126234_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409938
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409922
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_0126234.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409922
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409938
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410496
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31411220
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410648
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_0126234.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410022
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410282
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410142
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_0126234.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409936
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410300
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410714
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31412768
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31416218
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31412062
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410276
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410158
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410398
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410140
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410572
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31430976
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31431162
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409998
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_0126234.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410334
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_0126234.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410246
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31411922
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31413408
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_0126234.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410922
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_0126234.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410380
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_0126234.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409968
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31412082
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410068
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410112
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410938
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_0126234.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31410050
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_0126234.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31409868
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_0126234.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_0126234.31411074
</commentlist>
</conversation>
