<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_09_1326217</id>
	<title>Apple's iPhone Developer License Agreement Revealed</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1268145600000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>nigham writes <i>"The EFF is publicly disclosing a version of Apple's <a href="http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/03/iphone-developer-program-license-agreement-all">iPhone developer program license agreement</a>. The highlights: you can't disclose the agreement itself (the EFF managed to get it via the Freedom of Information Act thanks to <a href="http://science.slashdot.org/story/09/10/24/1446252/NASA-Releases-Cool-Free-iPhone-App">NASA's recent app</a>), Apple reserves the right to kill your app at any time with no reason, and Apple's liability in any circumstance is limited to 50 bucks. There's also this gem: 'You will not, through use of the Apple Software, services or otherwise create any Application or other program that would disable, hack, or otherwise interfere with the Security Solution, or any security, digital signing, digital rights management, verification or authentication mechanisms implemented in or by the iPhone operating system software, iPod Touch operating system software, this Apple Software, any services or other Apple software or technology, or enable others to do so.' The <a href="http://www.eff.org/files/20100302\_iphone\_dev\_agr.pdf">entire agreement</a> (PDF) is up at the EFF's site."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>nigham writes " The EFF is publicly disclosing a version of Apple 's iPhone developer program license agreement .
The highlights : you ca n't disclose the agreement itself ( the EFF managed to get it via the Freedom of Information Act thanks to NASA 's recent app ) , Apple reserves the right to kill your app at any time with no reason , and Apple 's liability in any circumstance is limited to 50 bucks .
There 's also this gem : 'You will not , through use of the Apple Software , services or otherwise create any Application or other program that would disable , hack , or otherwise interfere with the Security Solution , or any security , digital signing , digital rights management , verification or authentication mechanisms implemented in or by the iPhone operating system software , iPod Touch operating system software , this Apple Software , any services or other Apple software or technology , or enable others to do so .
' The entire agreement ( PDF ) is up at the EFF 's site .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>nigham writes "The EFF is publicly disclosing a version of Apple's iPhone developer program license agreement.
The highlights: you can't disclose the agreement itself (the EFF managed to get it via the Freedom of Information Act thanks to NASA's recent app), Apple reserves the right to kill your app at any time with no reason, and Apple's liability in any circumstance is limited to 50 bucks.
There's also this gem: 'You will not, through use of the Apple Software, services or otherwise create any Application or other program that would disable, hack, or otherwise interfere with the Security Solution, or any security, digital signing, digital rights management, verification or authentication mechanisms implemented in or by the iPhone operating system software, iPod Touch operating system software, this Apple Software, any services or other Apple software or technology, or enable others to do so.
' The entire agreement (PDF) is up at the EFF's site.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414248</id>
	<title>Yawn</title>
	<author>BlueBoxSW.com</author>
	<datestamp>1268152620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm seeing nothing that any other company wouldn't do to protect their intellectual rights.</p><p>Apple is not an open source company.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm seeing nothing that any other company would n't do to protect their intellectual rights.Apple is not an open source company .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm seeing nothing that any other company wouldn't do to protect their intellectual rights.Apple is not an open source company.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31434108</id>
	<title>Boy, there's a lot of bloggers who can't read...</title>
	<author>danwesnor</author>
	<datestamp>1268237700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The agreement bans making "public statements regarding" the agreement.  It does not ban disclosing the agreement itself.  In other words, you can't say "this agreement sucks" in public (or ""this agreement sucks in public", for that matter.</p><p>Anyone can get a copy of the agreement by going through the sign-up process until the agreement pops up, making a copy, and then clicking "Disagree".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The agreement bans making " public statements regarding " the agreement .
It does not ban disclosing the agreement itself .
In other words , you ca n't say " this agreement sucks " in public ( or " " this agreement sucks in public " , for that matter.Anyone can get a copy of the agreement by going through the sign-up process until the agreement pops up , making a copy , and then clicking " Disagree " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The agreement bans making "public statements regarding" the agreement.
It does not ban disclosing the agreement itself.
In other words, you can't say "this agreement sucks" in public (or ""this agreement sucks in public", for that matter.Anyone can get a copy of the agreement by going through the sign-up process until the agreement pops up, making a copy, and then clicking "Disagree".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414188</id>
	<title>The Point</title>
	<author>e2d2</author>
	<datestamp>1268152440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everyone always asks what's the point what's the point. Here's the point in a nut shell:</p><p>Don't develop applications for apple unless you want to sell out to a company that will fuck you over if they even get a whiff of competition, see a potential revenue stream in the same space, or simply don't like you. There will be no recourse if they fuck you. So if you want to make money with complete disregard for software freedom and the future of the industry as a whole then so be it. But don't pretend for a second there are no repercussions to such choices.</p><p>Apple will lose to others eventually unless they change their ways. Do you know why? Steve Ballmer knows. He did a 2 minute rant on it once. Something about developers..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone always asks what 's the point what 's the point .
Here 's the point in a nut shell : Do n't develop applications for apple unless you want to sell out to a company that will fuck you over if they even get a whiff of competition , see a potential revenue stream in the same space , or simply do n't like you .
There will be no recourse if they fuck you .
So if you want to make money with complete disregard for software freedom and the future of the industry as a whole then so be it .
But do n't pretend for a second there are no repercussions to such choices.Apple will lose to others eventually unless they change their ways .
Do you know why ?
Steve Ballmer knows .
He did a 2 minute rant on it once .
Something about developers. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone always asks what's the point what's the point.
Here's the point in a nut shell:Don't develop applications for apple unless you want to sell out to a company that will fuck you over if they even get a whiff of competition, see a potential revenue stream in the same space, or simply don't like you.
There will be no recourse if they fuck you.
So if you want to make money with complete disregard for software freedom and the future of the industry as a whole then so be it.
But don't pretend for a second there are no repercussions to such choices.Apple will lose to others eventually unless they change their ways.
Do you know why?
Steve Ballmer knows.
He did a 2 minute rant on it once.
Something about developers..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31420886</id>
	<title>Re:Another nail in their coffin (for me).</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268137500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is an obvious troll.</p><p>It's an iPod Touch, not an iTouch.  3rd party cables work fine.  Some 3rd party cables are just shitty.  As another poster pointed out, there are ways to make it work with Linux.  Any Linux user would have researched this BEFORE buying the device anyway.</p><p>modded down</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is an obvious troll.It 's an iPod Touch , not an iTouch .
3rd party cables work fine .
Some 3rd party cables are just shitty .
As another poster pointed out , there are ways to make it work with Linux .
Any Linux user would have researched this BEFORE buying the device anyway.modded down</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is an obvious troll.It's an iPod Touch, not an iTouch.
3rd party cables work fine.
Some 3rd party cables are just shitty.
As another poster pointed out, there are ways to make it work with Linux.
Any Linux user would have researched this BEFORE buying the device anyway.modded down</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415368</id>
	<title>Re:Another nail in their coffin (for me).</title>
	<author>517714</author>
	<datestamp>1268156640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You state that a recorder could do something that you had no reasonable expectation that it should, but you are upset that an iPod Touch could not do the same when you had no legitimate reason to expect it to.  I don't understand the sense of entitlement people have that these types of devices should be general purpose devices when they are not sold as such.  The designers may have taken out the ability to handle random file types for legitimate reasons such as avoiding becoming a vector for PC viruses.  I am sure that had you received a virus via an iPod you would be most unhappy and questioning Apple's decision to allow any file type.  In the same vein, the user agreement tries to assure that the iPhone is not compromised.  Designers have to make choices and those choices won't satisfy all consumers or developers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You state that a recorder could do something that you had no reasonable expectation that it should , but you are upset that an iPod Touch could not do the same when you had no legitimate reason to expect it to .
I do n't understand the sense of entitlement people have that these types of devices should be general purpose devices when they are not sold as such .
The designers may have taken out the ability to handle random file types for legitimate reasons such as avoiding becoming a vector for PC viruses .
I am sure that had you received a virus via an iPod you would be most unhappy and questioning Apple 's decision to allow any file type .
In the same vein , the user agreement tries to assure that the iPhone is not compromised .
Designers have to make choices and those choices wo n't satisfy all consumers or developers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You state that a recorder could do something that you had no reasonable expectation that it should, but you are upset that an iPod Touch could not do the same when you had no legitimate reason to expect it to.
I don't understand the sense of entitlement people have that these types of devices should be general purpose devices when they are not sold as such.
The designers may have taken out the ability to handle random file types for legitimate reasons such as avoiding becoming a vector for PC viruses.
I am sure that had you received a virus via an iPod you would be most unhappy and questioning Apple's decision to allow any file type.
In the same vein, the user agreement tries to assure that the iPhone is not compromised.
Designers have to make choices and those choices won't satisfy all consumers or developers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31416976</id>
	<title>And you'll see why 2010 won't be like 1984</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268163360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And you'll see why 2010 won't be like 1984</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And you 'll see why 2010 wo n't be like 1984</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And you'll see why 2010 won't be like 1984</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31430830</id>
	<title>which side are you on?</title>
	<author>sixsixtysix</author>
	<datestamp>1268215020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>i don't see how you can be for licensed development(like consoles, iphones, etc) and open development(like windows, linux, etc) at the same time.<br>
one or the other people! or, what, i am just licensing the hardware now, too? then, maybe kill off all secondary markets? slippery slope! slippery slope!</htmltext>
<tokenext>i do n't see how you can be for licensed development ( like consoles , iphones , etc ) and open development ( like windows , linux , etc ) at the same time .
one or the other people !
or , what , i am just licensing the hardware now , too ?
then , maybe kill off all secondary markets ?
slippery slope !
slippery slope !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i don't see how you can be for licensed development(like consoles, iphones, etc) and open development(like windows, linux, etc) at the same time.
one or the other people!
or, what, i am just licensing the hardware now, too?
then, maybe kill off all secondary markets?
slippery slope!
slippery slope!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31417230</id>
	<title>Simple truth is this ...</title>
	<author>jackspenn</author>
	<datestamp>1268164440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Steve Jobs is an fascist authoritarian and you love him despite it.  You people bow at the alter of Apple and agree to all of these insane contractual obligations and BS.  While you would balk at similar (sometimes lesser) offenses from Microsoft.  Things Apple has done and continues to do in many cases are worse then MS offenses (not excuse MS), yet, Steve Jobs is revered and excused.  Personally, I use an Android phone so that I can run background apps, use it as a wireless tether for my laptop(s), and use carriers that have better networks then AT&amp;T.  Apple survives because people are lemmings and all Jobs has lead the way and point them to the iCliff.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Steve Jobs is an fascist authoritarian and you love him despite it .
You people bow at the alter of Apple and agree to all of these insane contractual obligations and BS .
While you would balk at similar ( sometimes lesser ) offenses from Microsoft .
Things Apple has done and continues to do in many cases are worse then MS offenses ( not excuse MS ) , yet , Steve Jobs is revered and excused .
Personally , I use an Android phone so that I can run background apps , use it as a wireless tether for my laptop ( s ) , and use carriers that have better networks then AT&amp;T .
Apple survives because people are lemmings and all Jobs has lead the way and point them to the iCliff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Steve Jobs is an fascist authoritarian and you love him despite it.
You people bow at the alter of Apple and agree to all of these insane contractual obligations and BS.
While you would balk at similar (sometimes lesser) offenses from Microsoft.
Things Apple has done and continues to do in many cases are worse then MS offenses (not excuse MS), yet, Steve Jobs is revered and excused.
Personally, I use an Android phone so that I can run background apps, use it as a wireless tether for my laptop(s), and use carriers that have better networks then AT&amp;T.
Apple survives because people are lemmings and all Jobs has lead the way and point them to the iCliff.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31416784</id>
	<title>Apple is 100\% correct</title>
	<author>rclandrum</author>
	<datestamp>1268162520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...for wanting to absolutely control the apps that are sold through their store, and their developer license simply reflects that reality.</p><p>If you were running a grocery store, wouldn't YOU want to have the final say on what products YOU stock in the store?  Wouldn't you want to be able to decide not to stock a product if they do something you don't like? (genetically altered produce is a no-no here, etc).  They set the entry bar high so they don't have to wade through a ton of crap when deciding what to sell.</p><p>Apple's claim to fame is that they sell products that are easy to use, stylish, aren't prone to infectuous diseases, and have nice snob appeal.  Grandma can feel nice and safe buying one.  She doesn't need to worry about hard drives, drivers, which graphics board she needs and how to install it - she pays her money and shit just works like its suppose to, and THAT experience is precisely why Apple is enjoying such success in the consumer electronics marketplace.  The idea that Grandma would ever buy ANYTHING from some 19-year old DRM-busting, open source Linux jockey is completely ludicrous.</p><p>I agree that it's tons of fun to poke sticks at market leaders, but that doesn't mean it's a productive activity.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...for wanting to absolutely control the apps that are sold through their store , and their developer license simply reflects that reality.If you were running a grocery store , would n't YOU want to have the final say on what products YOU stock in the store ?
Would n't you want to be able to decide not to stock a product if they do something you do n't like ?
( genetically altered produce is a no-no here , etc ) .
They set the entry bar high so they do n't have to wade through a ton of crap when deciding what to sell.Apple 's claim to fame is that they sell products that are easy to use , stylish , are n't prone to infectuous diseases , and have nice snob appeal .
Grandma can feel nice and safe buying one .
She does n't need to worry about hard drives , drivers , which graphics board she needs and how to install it - she pays her money and shit just works like its suppose to , and THAT experience is precisely why Apple is enjoying such success in the consumer electronics marketplace .
The idea that Grandma would ever buy ANYTHING from some 19-year old DRM-busting , open source Linux jockey is completely ludicrous.I agree that it 's tons of fun to poke sticks at market leaders , but that does n't mean it 's a productive activity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...for wanting to absolutely control the apps that are sold through their store, and their developer license simply reflects that reality.If you were running a grocery store, wouldn't YOU want to have the final say on what products YOU stock in the store?
Wouldn't you want to be able to decide not to stock a product if they do something you don't like?
(genetically altered produce is a no-no here, etc).
They set the entry bar high so they don't have to wade through a ton of crap when deciding what to sell.Apple's claim to fame is that they sell products that are easy to use, stylish, aren't prone to infectuous diseases, and have nice snob appeal.
Grandma can feel nice and safe buying one.
She doesn't need to worry about hard drives, drivers, which graphics board she needs and how to install it - she pays her money and shit just works like its suppose to, and THAT experience is precisely why Apple is enjoying such success in the consumer electronics marketplace.
The idea that Grandma would ever buy ANYTHING from some 19-year old DRM-busting, open source Linux jockey is completely ludicrous.I agree that it's tons of fun to poke sticks at market leaders, but that doesn't mean it's a productive activity.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31416584</id>
	<title>Microsoft Shared Source</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268161500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think the FIA thing was a clever move...I wonder if any Goverment Agencies have Microsoft Shared Source agreements, maybe we can finally get Window's Source Code.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the FIA thing was a clever move...I wonder if any Goverment Agencies have Microsoft Shared Source agreements , maybe we can finally get Window 's Source Code .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the FIA thing was a clever move...I wonder if any Goverment Agencies have Microsoft Shared Source agreements, maybe we can finally get Window's Source Code.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31423828</id>
	<title>Re:Another nail in their coffin (for me).</title>
	<author>adolf</author>
	<datestamp>1268254680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lithium batteries don't suffer from "the memory effect."</p><p>They perform best (as in:  most usefully, and most economically in terms of useful lifespan) if you follow a "charge early, charge often" method.  They've got enough smarts to keep you from hurting them by charging them too long, or draining them too dry, or whatever.  But purposefully discharging them all the way, only to purposefully charge them all the way back up again does far more damage to the battery than, you know, just <i>using</i> it in a convenient fashion and forgetting all of that nonsense.</p><p>Besides, they only last a handful of years anyway, no matter how you treat them -- even if you leave them on a shelf, never used, they're <i>still</i> slowly failing.</p><p>So, in synopsis:  Charging lithium batteries shortens their lifespan.  Discharging lithium batteries shortens their lifespan.  Doing either of these in any extreme shortens the lifespan even more.  And leaving then alone in a shoebox shortens their lifespan.</p><p>Get your head out of the 80's.  Memory effect (if it ever really was a problem) only existed with NiCd batteries, and you won't find these in any phone made in at least the last decade or so.</p><p>So if you think she'll like a N900, then just buy her the damned phone.  The battery will only last a few years no matter what, so when it's tired, just <i>buy a new battery</i>, you cheap bastard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lithium batteries do n't suffer from " the memory effect .
" They perform best ( as in : most usefully , and most economically in terms of useful lifespan ) if you follow a " charge early , charge often " method .
They 've got enough smarts to keep you from hurting them by charging them too long , or draining them too dry , or whatever .
But purposefully discharging them all the way , only to purposefully charge them all the way back up again does far more damage to the battery than , you know , just using it in a convenient fashion and forgetting all of that nonsense.Besides , they only last a handful of years anyway , no matter how you treat them -- even if you leave them on a shelf , never used , they 're still slowly failing.So , in synopsis : Charging lithium batteries shortens their lifespan .
Discharging lithium batteries shortens their lifespan .
Doing either of these in any extreme shortens the lifespan even more .
And leaving then alone in a shoebox shortens their lifespan.Get your head out of the 80 's .
Memory effect ( if it ever really was a problem ) only existed with NiCd batteries , and you wo n't find these in any phone made in at least the last decade or so.So if you think she 'll like a N900 , then just buy her the damned phone .
The battery will only last a few years no matter what , so when it 's tired , just buy a new battery , you cheap bastard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lithium batteries don't suffer from "the memory effect.
"They perform best (as in:  most usefully, and most economically in terms of useful lifespan) if you follow a "charge early, charge often" method.
They've got enough smarts to keep you from hurting them by charging them too long, or draining them too dry, or whatever.
But purposefully discharging them all the way, only to purposefully charge them all the way back up again does far more damage to the battery than, you know, just using it in a convenient fashion and forgetting all of that nonsense.Besides, they only last a handful of years anyway, no matter how you treat them -- even if you leave them on a shelf, never used, they're still slowly failing.So, in synopsis:  Charging lithium batteries shortens their lifespan.
Discharging lithium batteries shortens their lifespan.
Doing either of these in any extreme shortens the lifespan even more.
And leaving then alone in a shoebox shortens their lifespan.Get your head out of the 80's.
Memory effect (if it ever really was a problem) only existed with NiCd batteries, and you won't find these in any phone made in at least the last decade or so.So if you think she'll like a N900, then just buy her the damned phone.
The battery will only last a few years no matter what, so when it's tired, just buy a new battery, you cheap bastard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415902</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414222</id>
	<title>YUO FAqIL IT?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268152500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>your own towel in Apple too. No, already aware, *BSD Were compounded Give other people user. 'Now that all know we want. Lube is wiped off thaT support states that there *BSD but FreeBSD OS I do, because First, You have to USENET POSTS. that the project I read the latest long term survival to predict *BSD's not going home Become an unwanted DOG THAT IT IS. IT core team. They hand...don't a BSD box (a PIII About a project bring your own to place a paper Mistake of electing OpenBSD, as the your own towel in bleak future. In disturbing.  If you when done playing world-spanning minutes now while consider that right</htmltext>
<tokenext>your own towel in Apple too .
No , already aware , * BSD Were compounded Give other people user .
'Now that all know we want .
Lube is wiped off thaT support states that there * BSD but FreeBSD OS I do , because First , You have to USENET POSTS .
that the project I read the latest long term survival to predict * BSD 's not going home Become an unwanted DOG THAT IT IS .
IT core team .
They hand...do n't a BSD box ( a PIII About a project bring your own to place a paper Mistake of electing OpenBSD , as the your own towel in bleak future .
In disturbing .
If you when done playing world-spanning minutes now while consider that right</tokentext>
<sentencetext>your own towel in Apple too.
No, already aware, *BSD Were compounded Give other people user.
'Now that all know we want.
Lube is wiped off thaT support states that there *BSD but FreeBSD OS I do, because First, You have to USENET POSTS.
that the project I read the latest long term survival to predict *BSD's not going home Become an unwanted DOG THAT IT IS.
IT core team.
They hand...don't a BSD box (a PIII About a project bring your own to place a paper Mistake of electing OpenBSD, as the your own towel in bleak future.
In disturbing.
If you when done playing world-spanning minutes now while consider that right</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413640</id>
	<title>sopssa isn't trolling... He's trying to be funny.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268150100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>sopssa isn't trolling. He's just trying to be funny and sarcastic. But he's not funny, so I see why so many of you, including at least one moderator, misinterpreted his pathetic attempt at humor.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>sopssa is n't trolling .
He 's just trying to be funny and sarcastic .
But he 's not funny , so I see why so many of you , including at least one moderator , misinterpreted his pathetic attempt at humor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>sopssa isn't trolling.
He's just trying to be funny and sarcastic.
But he's not funny, so I see why so many of you, including at least one moderator, misinterpreted his pathetic attempt at humor.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413848</id>
	<title>Same old Apple</title>
	<author>Improv</author>
	<datestamp>1268151060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think this is part of Apple's corporate culture - they never signed on to the OS as an "open(ish) platform" thing that PC users (and unix geeks to an even greater extent) came to expect. I don't know what we can do but not buy their products - it's a pity because I'd generally like to suggest that non-tech people go with OSX (and tech folk should go with Linux or OpenBSD), but I don't like supporting companies that do this kind of thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think this is part of Apple 's corporate culture - they never signed on to the OS as an " open ( ish ) platform " thing that PC users ( and unix geeks to an even greater extent ) came to expect .
I do n't know what we can do but not buy their products - it 's a pity because I 'd generally like to suggest that non-tech people go with OSX ( and tech folk should go with Linux or OpenBSD ) , but I do n't like supporting companies that do this kind of thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think this is part of Apple's corporate culture - they never signed on to the OS as an "open(ish) platform" thing that PC users (and unix geeks to an even greater extent) came to expect.
I don't know what we can do but not buy their products - it's a pity because I'd generally like to suggest that non-tech people go with OSX (and tech folk should go with Linux or OpenBSD), but I don't like supporting companies that do this kind of thing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413436</id>
	<title>Google's apps</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268149200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Soulskill's "you-agree-not-to-be-google" from the dept. line is actually interesting. Google is clearly violating the "enable others to do so" policy by linking to that information, and with a few links to <i>http://www.eff.org/files/20100302\_iphone\_dev\_agr.pdf</i> would most likely be distributing the html copy of that pdf file.</p><p>As a person who <i>loves</i> Mac OS X, iPhone and will absolutely buy the upcoming iPad and hump it in bed when I'm sad, I don't want to see Apple having to battle with a giant like Google about this license. It's just not fair for the good and awesome guys like Apple.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Soulskill 's " you-agree-not-to-be-google " from the dept .
line is actually interesting .
Google is clearly violating the " enable others to do so " policy by linking to that information , and with a few links to http : //www.eff.org/files/20100302 \ _iphone \ _dev \ _agr.pdf would most likely be distributing the html copy of that pdf file.As a person who loves Mac OS X , iPhone and will absolutely buy the upcoming iPad and hump it in bed when I 'm sad , I do n't want to see Apple having to battle with a giant like Google about this license .
It 's just not fair for the good and awesome guys like Apple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Soulskill's "you-agree-not-to-be-google" from the dept.
line is actually interesting.
Google is clearly violating the "enable others to do so" policy by linking to that information, and with a few links to http://www.eff.org/files/20100302\_iphone\_dev\_agr.pdf would most likely be distributing the html copy of that pdf file.As a person who loves Mac OS X, iPhone and will absolutely buy the upcoming iPad and hump it in bed when I'm sad, I don't want to see Apple having to battle with a giant like Google about this license.
It's just not fair for the good and awesome guys like Apple.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31416476</id>
	<title>Re:Another nail in their coffin (for me).</title>
	<author>Omroth</author>
	<datestamp>1268160840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The n900 is a beautiful thing - given what you've written, I totally recommend you get one at any cost.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The n900 is a beautiful thing - given what you 've written , I totally recommend you get one at any cost .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The n900 is a beautiful thing - given what you've written, I totally recommend you get one at any cost.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31416036</id>
	<title>Re:Another nail in their coffin (for me).</title>
	<author>radish</author>
	<datestamp>1268159220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have an ssh client on my iPhone, I can't remember if it was free but it certainly wasn't $10. All my $1 from ebay cables work just fine, and there's this "network" thing which I find works well for moving files. Fact is this - when you buy something you get what it says on the box. If you want something which can double as a usb drive, don't buy something which doesn't do that. O believe the Zune does, so maybe MS are your friend after all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have an ssh client on my iPhone , I ca n't remember if it was free but it certainly was n't $ 10 .
All my $ 1 from ebay cables work just fine , and there 's this " network " thing which I find works well for moving files .
Fact is this - when you buy something you get what it says on the box .
If you want something which can double as a usb drive , do n't buy something which does n't do that .
O believe the Zune does , so maybe MS are your friend after all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have an ssh client on my iPhone, I can't remember if it was free but it certainly wasn't $10.
All my $1 from ebay cables work just fine, and there's this "network" thing which I find works well for moving files.
Fact is this - when you buy something you get what it says on the box.
If you want something which can double as a usb drive, don't buy something which doesn't do that.
O believe the Zune does, so maybe MS are your friend after all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31417496</id>
	<title>One Step Closer to Trusted Computing</title>
	<author>cowtamer</author>
	<datestamp>1268165580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While Apple, as a corporation, has a legal right to impose whatever terms it wants on its developers, I think this is a "Bad Thing".  As someone else observed, these terms are very similar to game console development terms, and is leading us towards trusted computing as the dominant paradigm.</p><p>If we're not careful, we are on the path to "state of the art" devices always being draconian game-console-like things where a corporation or government always has the kill switch.  Do not be fooled into thinking that your open source software will always run on these things, or that there will be acceptable hardware alternatives.</p><p>Five to ten years from now, you might be tinkering with getting a Linux kernel to boot on the latest 32 Mhz Arduino board while everyone runs around with $50 14 Ghz multi-core handhelds that run either SecureWindows or MacOS 13, whose development keys are off-limits to you on account of your having failed the Patriot Act 3.0 mandated trusted developer polygraph test<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While Apple , as a corporation , has a legal right to impose whatever terms it wants on its developers , I think this is a " Bad Thing " .
As someone else observed , these terms are very similar to game console development terms , and is leading us towards trusted computing as the dominant paradigm.If we 're not careful , we are on the path to " state of the art " devices always being draconian game-console-like things where a corporation or government always has the kill switch .
Do not be fooled into thinking that your open source software will always run on these things , or that there will be acceptable hardware alternatives.Five to ten years from now , you might be tinkering with getting a Linux kernel to boot on the latest 32 Mhz Arduino board while everyone runs around with $ 50 14 Ghz multi-core handhelds that run either SecureWindows or MacOS 13 , whose development keys are off-limits to you on account of your having failed the Patriot Act 3.0 mandated trusted developer polygraph test .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While Apple, as a corporation, has a legal right to impose whatever terms it wants on its developers, I think this is a "Bad Thing".
As someone else observed, these terms are very similar to game console development terms, and is leading us towards trusted computing as the dominant paradigm.If we're not careful, we are on the path to "state of the art" devices always being draconian game-console-like things where a corporation or government always has the kill switch.
Do not be fooled into thinking that your open source software will always run on these things, or that there will be acceptable hardware alternatives.Five to ten years from now, you might be tinkering with getting a Linux kernel to boot on the latest 32 Mhz Arduino board while everyone runs around with $50 14 Ghz multi-core handhelds that run either SecureWindows or MacOS 13, whose development keys are off-limits to you on account of your having failed the Patriot Act 3.0 mandated trusted developer polygraph test ...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413552</id>
	<title>ASS POS is my name</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268149680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I clicked on this story knowing you had the fr0sty p1ss, you fucking cheater.  I can only imagine how it breaks your heart to know Appel has M$ beat hands down in the march to fascism.</p><p>Sieg Hail!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I clicked on this story knowing you had the fr0sty p1ss , you fucking cheater .
I can only imagine how it breaks your heart to know Appel has M $ beat hands down in the march to fascism.Sieg Hail !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I clicked on this story knowing you had the fr0sty p1ss, you fucking cheater.
I can only imagine how it breaks your heart to know Appel has M$ beat hands down in the march to fascism.Sieg Hail!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413566</id>
	<title>Re:Google's apps</title>
	<author>SOdhner</author>
	<datestamp>1268149740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The only actual reference to Google in the PDF is where it says that you have to abide by Google's rules when using their Mobile Maps thing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The only actual reference to Google in the PDF is where it says that you have to abide by Google 's rules when using their Mobile Maps thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only actual reference to Google in the PDF is where it says that you have to abide by Google's rules when using their Mobile Maps thing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413538</id>
	<title>Jeez man get a grip</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268149560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"As a person who loves Mac OS X, iPhone and will absolutely buy the upcoming iPad and hump it in bed when I'm sad"<br>First post not first scare, come to think of it you are not allowed to grip anything.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" As a person who loves Mac OS X , iPhone and will absolutely buy the upcoming iPad and hump it in bed when I 'm sad " First post not first scare , come to think of it you are not allowed to grip anything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"As a person who loves Mac OS X, iPhone and will absolutely buy the upcoming iPad and hump it in bed when I'm sad"First post not first scare, come to think of it you are not allowed to grip anything.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415234</id>
	<title>No surprises</title>
	<author>NicknamesAreStupid</author>
	<datestamp>1268156160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I agreed to this when we did our app.  It is their show, and they make their rules.  I expected nothing less from a company that has always tried to control their products to the greatest extent.  Sometimes it works (e.g., iPhone), and other times it doesn't (e.g., Lisa, A/UX, Pippin, AppleTV). Regarding their treatment of developers, I must say that this is one area where Microsoft has always been better.  They had better tools in the 1980s, and they have better tools now.  I believe this is mostly due to the competition that Apple lacked. Remember Borland?  Even IBM in the late 1980s and early 1990s competed with Microsoft for developers with very good tools.  Apple's tools are better than they were, and they are free (a smart move).  Microsoft's tools are simple more evolved.  For example Apple's Interface Builder, a GUI tool, still requires a lot of code around every drag-'n-drop, and it is hard to see where the controls are coded because they hide some.  Visual Studio automatically creates event handler shells and leads you to them.  You can view everything as code, and they warn you about the code they generated with their tools.  Microsoft also has a variety of languages, and the dichotomy between managed and unmanaged code is much better documented.<br> <br>
The downside for Microsoft is that they carry an enormous legacy which has now come to haunt them.  Apple has been consistent about leaving the past behind and some of their customers and developers with it.  Two different business models with one thing in common -- they have beaten the crap out of everyone else.  It is very hard to argue their successes as measured in billions of dollars in profits.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agreed to this when we did our app .
It is their show , and they make their rules .
I expected nothing less from a company that has always tried to control their products to the greatest extent .
Sometimes it works ( e.g. , iPhone ) , and other times it does n't ( e.g. , Lisa , A/UX , Pippin , AppleTV ) .
Regarding their treatment of developers , I must say that this is one area where Microsoft has always been better .
They had better tools in the 1980s , and they have better tools now .
I believe this is mostly due to the competition that Apple lacked .
Remember Borland ?
Even IBM in the late 1980s and early 1990s competed with Microsoft for developers with very good tools .
Apple 's tools are better than they were , and they are free ( a smart move ) .
Microsoft 's tools are simple more evolved .
For example Apple 's Interface Builder , a GUI tool , still requires a lot of code around every drag-'n-drop , and it is hard to see where the controls are coded because they hide some .
Visual Studio automatically creates event handler shells and leads you to them .
You can view everything as code , and they warn you about the code they generated with their tools .
Microsoft also has a variety of languages , and the dichotomy between managed and unmanaged code is much better documented .
The downside for Microsoft is that they carry an enormous legacy which has now come to haunt them .
Apple has been consistent about leaving the past behind and some of their customers and developers with it .
Two different business models with one thing in common -- they have beaten the crap out of everyone else .
It is very hard to argue their successes as measured in billions of dollars in profits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agreed to this when we did our app.
It is their show, and they make their rules.
I expected nothing less from a company that has always tried to control their products to the greatest extent.
Sometimes it works (e.g., iPhone), and other times it doesn't (e.g., Lisa, A/UX, Pippin, AppleTV).
Regarding their treatment of developers, I must say that this is one area where Microsoft has always been better.
They had better tools in the 1980s, and they have better tools now.
I believe this is mostly due to the competition that Apple lacked.
Remember Borland?
Even IBM in the late 1980s and early 1990s competed with Microsoft for developers with very good tools.
Apple's tools are better than they were, and they are free (a smart move).
Microsoft's tools are simple more evolved.
For example Apple's Interface Builder, a GUI tool, still requires a lot of code around every drag-'n-drop, and it is hard to see where the controls are coded because they hide some.
Visual Studio automatically creates event handler shells and leads you to them.
You can view everything as code, and they warn you about the code they generated with their tools.
Microsoft also has a variety of languages, and the dichotomy between managed and unmanaged code is much better documented.
The downside for Microsoft is that they carry an enormous legacy which has now come to haunt them.
Apple has been consistent about leaving the past behind and some of their customers and developers with it.
Two different business models with one thing in common -- they have beaten the crap out of everyone else.
It is very hard to argue their successes as measured in billions of dollars in profits.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414518</id>
	<title>What if</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268153700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What if a company that used their monopoly to force all hardware manufacturers to ship their hardware with that company's software? There is an interesting suspension of legal reckoning in the arguments that go "If you don't like it, don't develop for the iphone" -- the suspension of logic is pretty basic if you understand history and the law: THESE AREN'T FEUDAL TIMES, WE LIVE UNDER THE RULE OF LAW.</p><p>If you don't know what the rule of law is, you should.</p><p>The scenario above did happen -- and Microsoft was prosecuted for monopolistic practices.</p><p>You might be tempted to think that Apple can just make up ANY rules it wants and apply them unilaterally. The truth is -- they can try -- but Apple is not above the law. "A contract that does not obey the will of the people cannot be recognized by a court of law."</p><p>What if this contract said that Apple has the right to take your first born child if you submit an app that violates any rules? What if the contract said Apple could take your first born child just for submitting an app at all?  Well, slavery is illegal -- as is kidnapping -- and this contract would be invalid because it violates the will of the people.</p><p>Obviously my extreme example is to prove a point: No, we don't just have to "accept" whatever Apple decrees -- we can make laws to regulate and define the industry.</p><p>Once a upon a time in America you could produce milk without a license. Diseases spread. Then came laws that formed the Food &amp; Drug Administration, and said you can't make milk unless you pasteurize it.</p><p>Call me a big-government lefty (go ahead), but if left unregulated green will always try to screw over the little guy. Read some history.</p><p>I don't fault Apple for a single provision in the contract -- I'm a member of the developer program myself and I've read the whole thing. In fact, by writing this response right here I'm breaking the rules aren't I? Because I'm not supposed to make public statements about the contract. But I don't believe that provision (ban on public statements) is legal -- it violates the concept of freedom of speech -- therefore I'm going to choose to hold the law of the land in higher esteem than Apple itself.</p><p>Apple can and should protect its interests. But the contract should also be public -- and thankfully we have FOIA and a NASA app that has made it so. Apple is not above the law nor is it above public scrutiny. When they come for my first born child, I ain't turning him over -- no matter what the contract says.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What if a company that used their monopoly to force all hardware manufacturers to ship their hardware with that company 's software ?
There is an interesting suspension of legal reckoning in the arguments that go " If you do n't like it , do n't develop for the iphone " -- the suspension of logic is pretty basic if you understand history and the law : THESE ARE N'T FEUDAL TIMES , WE LIVE UNDER THE RULE OF LAW.If you do n't know what the rule of law is , you should.The scenario above did happen -- and Microsoft was prosecuted for monopolistic practices.You might be tempted to think that Apple can just make up ANY rules it wants and apply them unilaterally .
The truth is -- they can try -- but Apple is not above the law .
" A contract that does not obey the will of the people can not be recognized by a court of law .
" What if this contract said that Apple has the right to take your first born child if you submit an app that violates any rules ?
What if the contract said Apple could take your first born child just for submitting an app at all ?
Well , slavery is illegal -- as is kidnapping -- and this contract would be invalid because it violates the will of the people.Obviously my extreme example is to prove a point : No , we do n't just have to " accept " whatever Apple decrees -- we can make laws to regulate and define the industry.Once a upon a time in America you could produce milk without a license .
Diseases spread .
Then came laws that formed the Food &amp; Drug Administration , and said you ca n't make milk unless you pasteurize it.Call me a big-government lefty ( go ahead ) , but if left unregulated green will always try to screw over the little guy .
Read some history.I do n't fault Apple for a single provision in the contract -- I 'm a member of the developer program myself and I 've read the whole thing .
In fact , by writing this response right here I 'm breaking the rules are n't I ?
Because I 'm not supposed to make public statements about the contract .
But I do n't believe that provision ( ban on public statements ) is legal -- it violates the concept of freedom of speech -- therefore I 'm going to choose to hold the law of the land in higher esteem than Apple itself.Apple can and should protect its interests .
But the contract should also be public -- and thankfully we have FOIA and a NASA app that has made it so .
Apple is not above the law nor is it above public scrutiny .
When they come for my first born child , I ai n't turning him over -- no matter what the contract says .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What if a company that used their monopoly to force all hardware manufacturers to ship their hardware with that company's software?
There is an interesting suspension of legal reckoning in the arguments that go "If you don't like it, don't develop for the iphone" -- the suspension of logic is pretty basic if you understand history and the law: THESE AREN'T FEUDAL TIMES, WE LIVE UNDER THE RULE OF LAW.If you don't know what the rule of law is, you should.The scenario above did happen -- and Microsoft was prosecuted for monopolistic practices.You might be tempted to think that Apple can just make up ANY rules it wants and apply them unilaterally.
The truth is -- they can try -- but Apple is not above the law.
"A contract that does not obey the will of the people cannot be recognized by a court of law.
"What if this contract said that Apple has the right to take your first born child if you submit an app that violates any rules?
What if the contract said Apple could take your first born child just for submitting an app at all?
Well, slavery is illegal -- as is kidnapping -- and this contract would be invalid because it violates the will of the people.Obviously my extreme example is to prove a point: No, we don't just have to "accept" whatever Apple decrees -- we can make laws to regulate and define the industry.Once a upon a time in America you could produce milk without a license.
Diseases spread.
Then came laws that formed the Food &amp; Drug Administration, and said you can't make milk unless you pasteurize it.Call me a big-government lefty (go ahead), but if left unregulated green will always try to screw over the little guy.
Read some history.I don't fault Apple for a single provision in the contract -- I'm a member of the developer program myself and I've read the whole thing.
In fact, by writing this response right here I'm breaking the rules aren't I?
Because I'm not supposed to make public statements about the contract.
But I don't believe that provision (ban on public statements) is legal -- it violates the concept of freedom of speech -- therefore I'm going to choose to hold the law of the land in higher esteem than Apple itself.Apple can and should protect its interests.
But the contract should also be public -- and thankfully we have FOIA and a NASA app that has made it so.
Apple is not above the law nor is it above public scrutiny.
When they come for my first born child, I ain't turning him over -- no matter what the contract says.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415902</id>
	<title>Re:Another nail in their coffin (for me).</title>
	<author>isolationism</author>
	<datestamp>1268158680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Exactly what kind of cable is this, and which device?</p></div><p>The other reply already nailed it; it's a video out cable, and a Gen2 iTouch. Apparently the cable would work fine if I downgrade to the "v2" OS -- but then many of my apps would stop working. It's a firmware restriction. You are correct in that the cable still allows me to connect for data and charging -- for now. I would not be the slightest bit surprised if that changed at some point in the future.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>As for the N900... I have a Milestone (motorola), which is essentially in the same basket for 3G since it only supports the European frequences and thus is edge-only here</p></div><p>Really? I thought the whole point of the Milestone was that it was "Droid for Canada", which presumably meant you'd get 3G on it. If iPhone is the only 3G contender in the Canadian market right now then I guess I will be settling for Edge for the foreseeable future, unless this new Wind company starts doing data within Ottawa anytime soon.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The iPhone now does well as a fancy Mp3 player with wifi for downloads, but then it always somewhat sucked as a phone anyhow.</p></div><p>I wouldn't know about the phone part having never tried it, but I confess my wife said she would feel stupid holding it up to her head, and I can't really disagree. She is willing to spend less time on the phone and just do the occasional text instead if we had a halfway decent phone and a plan to go with it, which is why the N900 seems appealing; it's still pretty much just an internet tablet with a phone attached. But it's not made/cockblocked by Apple.</p><p>Frankly at this point I'd probably have already bought the N900 but it seems like battery life is a pretty big issue; from what I've read you can expect to charge it daily or even twice daily (!) which seems ridiculous; I know my wife will always forget to charge it and will end up charging it on and off in the car when she goes somewhere, which will kill the battery's life expectancy because of the memory effect. Maybe I can buy a bigger battery for it, but the device already seems a bit on the chubby side as-is.</p><p>At any rate, I'm with you; Apple's iTouch/iPhone hardware has its annoyances but it does work and most of what it does, it executes well. But when you say "With wifi for downloads", I wonder what/how you're downloading, because the last time I tried to download a file via Safari it refused to do it; the functionality just isn't there.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Perhaps what we really need are phones that all allow tethering on data</p></div><p>I -- and I'm sure, just about everyone else reading this -- strongly agree(s); and this one is a complete clustercuss shared between the phone companies and the hardware vendors. I can't for the life of me understand why the hell it matters where the data goes when it's downloaded if I'm paying for the service, but I confess I've never understood (nor particularly cared for) the insane politics surrounding wireless telecommunications.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly what kind of cable is this , and which device ? The other reply already nailed it ; it 's a video out cable , and a Gen2 iTouch .
Apparently the cable would work fine if I downgrade to the " v2 " OS -- but then many of my apps would stop working .
It 's a firmware restriction .
You are correct in that the cable still allows me to connect for data and charging -- for now .
I would not be the slightest bit surprised if that changed at some point in the future.As for the N900... I have a Milestone ( motorola ) , which is essentially in the same basket for 3G since it only supports the European frequences and thus is edge-only hereReally ?
I thought the whole point of the Milestone was that it was " Droid for Canada " , which presumably meant you 'd get 3G on it .
If iPhone is the only 3G contender in the Canadian market right now then I guess I will be settling for Edge for the foreseeable future , unless this new Wind company starts doing data within Ottawa anytime soon.The iPhone now does well as a fancy Mp3 player with wifi for downloads , but then it always somewhat sucked as a phone anyhow.I would n't know about the phone part having never tried it , but I confess my wife said she would feel stupid holding it up to her head , and I ca n't really disagree .
She is willing to spend less time on the phone and just do the occasional text instead if we had a halfway decent phone and a plan to go with it , which is why the N900 seems appealing ; it 's still pretty much just an internet tablet with a phone attached .
But it 's not made/cockblocked by Apple.Frankly at this point I 'd probably have already bought the N900 but it seems like battery life is a pretty big issue ; from what I 've read you can expect to charge it daily or even twice daily ( !
) which seems ridiculous ; I know my wife will always forget to charge it and will end up charging it on and off in the car when she goes somewhere , which will kill the battery 's life expectancy because of the memory effect .
Maybe I can buy a bigger battery for it , but the device already seems a bit on the chubby side as-is.At any rate , I 'm with you ; Apple 's iTouch/iPhone hardware has its annoyances but it does work and most of what it does , it executes well .
But when you say " With wifi for downloads " , I wonder what/how you 're downloading , because the last time I tried to download a file via Safari it refused to do it ; the functionality just is n't there.Perhaps what we really need are phones that all allow tethering on dataI -- and I 'm sure , just about everyone else reading this -- strongly agree ( s ) ; and this one is a complete clustercuss shared between the phone companies and the hardware vendors .
I ca n't for the life of me understand why the hell it matters where the data goes when it 's downloaded if I 'm paying for the service , but I confess I 've never understood ( nor particularly cared for ) the insane politics surrounding wireless telecommunications .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly what kind of cable is this, and which device?The other reply already nailed it; it's a video out cable, and a Gen2 iTouch.
Apparently the cable would work fine if I downgrade to the "v2" OS -- but then many of my apps would stop working.
It's a firmware restriction.
You are correct in that the cable still allows me to connect for data and charging -- for now.
I would not be the slightest bit surprised if that changed at some point in the future.As for the N900... I have a Milestone (motorola), which is essentially in the same basket for 3G since it only supports the European frequences and thus is edge-only hereReally?
I thought the whole point of the Milestone was that it was "Droid for Canada", which presumably meant you'd get 3G on it.
If iPhone is the only 3G contender in the Canadian market right now then I guess I will be settling for Edge for the foreseeable future, unless this new Wind company starts doing data within Ottawa anytime soon.The iPhone now does well as a fancy Mp3 player with wifi for downloads, but then it always somewhat sucked as a phone anyhow.I wouldn't know about the phone part having never tried it, but I confess my wife said she would feel stupid holding it up to her head, and I can't really disagree.
She is willing to spend less time on the phone and just do the occasional text instead if we had a halfway decent phone and a plan to go with it, which is why the N900 seems appealing; it's still pretty much just an internet tablet with a phone attached.
But it's not made/cockblocked by Apple.Frankly at this point I'd probably have already bought the N900 but it seems like battery life is a pretty big issue; from what I've read you can expect to charge it daily or even twice daily (!
) which seems ridiculous; I know my wife will always forget to charge it and will end up charging it on and off in the car when she goes somewhere, which will kill the battery's life expectancy because of the memory effect.
Maybe I can buy a bigger battery for it, but the device already seems a bit on the chubby side as-is.At any rate, I'm with you; Apple's iTouch/iPhone hardware has its annoyances but it does work and most of what it does, it executes well.
But when you say "With wifi for downloads", I wonder what/how you're downloading, because the last time I tried to download a file via Safari it refused to do it; the functionality just isn't there.Perhaps what we really need are phones that all allow tethering on dataI -- and I'm sure, just about everyone else reading this -- strongly agree(s); and this one is a complete clustercuss shared between the phone companies and the hardware vendors.
I can't for the life of me understand why the hell it matters where the data goes when it's downloaded if I'm paying for the service, but I confess I've never understood (nor particularly cared for) the insane politics surrounding wireless telecommunications.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31419446</id>
	<title>your all idiots</title>
	<author>TRRosen</author>
	<datestamp>1268130540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You folks do realize that the EULA for Office says you cant use Word to write anything bad about Microsoft and you bitching because Apple puts in the standard don't use this to hack our stuff clause.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You folks do realize that the EULA for Office says you cant use Word to write anything bad about Microsoft and you bitching because Apple puts in the standard do n't use this to hack our stuff clause .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You folks do realize that the EULA for Office says you cant use Word to write anything bad about Microsoft and you bitching because Apple puts in the standard don't use this to hack our stuff clause.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415856</id>
	<title>Apples grand plan...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268158560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple is trying to create a system where everything you do revolves around Apples products and they get a piece of the pie.  Building a system like this to maintain the perpetual buying of Apple products and services and Apple getting the recurring monthly and up front fees REQUIRES a delicate balance of control and features.  Every new product they release, every patch the release, every feature they DO NOT INCLUDE, the blocking and rejecting of things that could could potentially vector out of the Apple realm, and everything they license is related to this concept of maintaining "it" within Apples revenue stream.  Ask your self this question with every new product or version or dission they make, "How is this tied to Apples grand plan of keeping my in the Apple family?"  It could be a firmware update that blocks Palm or blocks jailborken phones, it could be lack of tehtering, lack of Flash, usb id's, DMCA warnings with plugs and jacks, ability to export or use a device on a non Apple system, applications being controlled form one store etc..  You may think this is for you the users benefit but the benefit to you is secondary thought because you the user would benefit from a more open platform whether you believe that or not.  It is to keep total control and build on the Apple system.  Once you have a few product invested in the chain, you WILL buy more.  As the "system" grows and more devices are under the Apple revenue umbrella, the "system" will grow faster and faster because the more people that use it, the more effect new things will have but the down side is the more control and power Apple will have and the more they will be able to control even more.  At first you can be flexible to bring people in, as time goes on and you have people captured, you can get away with a lot more.  Like i said, it is a delicate balance of control and freedom.  The more power you have, the more control they have and the less freedom you have.  Oddly, MS did this exact build up years ago but no one seems to remember that.  Apple is doing it differently.  They are doing it with monthly, weekly, per download, per application etc fees and less actually physical products SKUs and release cycles.  This way, they can still make profits between new product cycles and manage the growth of the Apple "system".   I bet Steve has a graph and a timeline showing describing this exact concept and measures the progress of each new product and each new feature.  If they start losing grip or are not gaining like they think they should, they loosen up on some restrictions to bring more people in, once we get the people in, tighten it back up again.</p><p>Again.  think of this concept with every single product or serivce they introduce comparing the features it has and does not have and 90\% of the time, it will fit this model of thinking.  The other 10\% is probably a temporary attempt to jump start more people into the system.</p><p>I did not proof read this and I am in a conference call right now so sorry for the run ons and speling errors.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple is trying to create a system where everything you do revolves around Apples products and they get a piece of the pie .
Building a system like this to maintain the perpetual buying of Apple products and services and Apple getting the recurring monthly and up front fees REQUIRES a delicate balance of control and features .
Every new product they release , every patch the release , every feature they DO NOT INCLUDE , the blocking and rejecting of things that could could potentially vector out of the Apple realm , and everything they license is related to this concept of maintaining " it " within Apples revenue stream .
Ask your self this question with every new product or version or dission they make , " How is this tied to Apples grand plan of keeping my in the Apple family ?
" It could be a firmware update that blocks Palm or blocks jailborken phones , it could be lack of tehtering , lack of Flash , usb id 's , DMCA warnings with plugs and jacks , ability to export or use a device on a non Apple system , applications being controlled form one store etc.. You may think this is for you the users benefit but the benefit to you is secondary thought because you the user would benefit from a more open platform whether you believe that or not .
It is to keep total control and build on the Apple system .
Once you have a few product invested in the chain , you WILL buy more .
As the " system " grows and more devices are under the Apple revenue umbrella , the " system " will grow faster and faster because the more people that use it , the more effect new things will have but the down side is the more control and power Apple will have and the more they will be able to control even more .
At first you can be flexible to bring people in , as time goes on and you have people captured , you can get away with a lot more .
Like i said , it is a delicate balance of control and freedom .
The more power you have , the more control they have and the less freedom you have .
Oddly , MS did this exact build up years ago but no one seems to remember that .
Apple is doing it differently .
They are doing it with monthly , weekly , per download , per application etc fees and less actually physical products SKUs and release cycles .
This way , they can still make profits between new product cycles and manage the growth of the Apple " system " .
I bet Steve has a graph and a timeline showing describing this exact concept and measures the progress of each new product and each new feature .
If they start losing grip or are not gaining like they think they should , they loosen up on some restrictions to bring more people in , once we get the people in , tighten it back up again.Again .
think of this concept with every single product or serivce they introduce comparing the features it has and does not have and 90 \ % of the time , it will fit this model of thinking .
The other 10 \ % is probably a temporary attempt to jump start more people into the system.I did not proof read this and I am in a conference call right now so sorry for the run ons and speling errors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple is trying to create a system where everything you do revolves around Apples products and they get a piece of the pie.
Building a system like this to maintain the perpetual buying of Apple products and services and Apple getting the recurring monthly and up front fees REQUIRES a delicate balance of control and features.
Every new product they release, every patch the release, every feature they DO NOT INCLUDE, the blocking and rejecting of things that could could potentially vector out of the Apple realm, and everything they license is related to this concept of maintaining "it" within Apples revenue stream.
Ask your self this question with every new product or version or dission they make, "How is this tied to Apples grand plan of keeping my in the Apple family?
"  It could be a firmware update that blocks Palm or blocks jailborken phones, it could be lack of tehtering, lack of Flash, usb id's, DMCA warnings with plugs and jacks, ability to export or use a device on a non Apple system, applications being controlled form one store etc..  You may think this is for you the users benefit but the benefit to you is secondary thought because you the user would benefit from a more open platform whether you believe that or not.
It is to keep total control and build on the Apple system.
Once you have a few product invested in the chain, you WILL buy more.
As the "system" grows and more devices are under the Apple revenue umbrella, the "system" will grow faster and faster because the more people that use it, the more effect new things will have but the down side is the more control and power Apple will have and the more they will be able to control even more.
At first you can be flexible to bring people in, as time goes on and you have people captured, you can get away with a lot more.
Like i said, it is a delicate balance of control and freedom.
The more power you have, the more control they have and the less freedom you have.
Oddly, MS did this exact build up years ago but no one seems to remember that.
Apple is doing it differently.
They are doing it with monthly, weekly, per download, per application etc fees and less actually physical products SKUs and release cycles.
This way, they can still make profits between new product cycles and manage the growth of the Apple "system".
I bet Steve has a graph and a timeline showing describing this exact concept and measures the progress of each new product and each new feature.
If they start losing grip or are not gaining like they think they should, they loosen up on some restrictions to bring more people in, once we get the people in, tighten it back up again.Again.
think of this concept with every single product or serivce they introduce comparing the features it has and does not have and 90\% of the time, it will fit this model of thinking.
The other 10\% is probably a temporary attempt to jump start more people into the system.I did not proof read this and I am in a conference call right now so sorry for the run ons and speling errors.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414148</id>
	<title>I'm surprised they found it so difficult to get...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268152320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>After all, you can also just go over and click through the signup to become a developer, and.. big shock here, you're presented with the agreement.</p><p>And as others have said, if you don't like it, then you just don't agree to it.  You can -still- develop for jailbroken phones without agreeing to this contract.  What you can't do is get into the App Store.  Which Apple, like any business is welcome to decide what products they would, or would not like to carry.</p><p>What the EFF needs to spend their time doing instead of this stupid waste of time, is be getting whoever needs to (FCC I guess, probably Congress themselves) to pass a rule or law requiring "smartphones" to be considered what they are, small computers connected to the celular data network, and that because they are -our- property we -must- be allowed to install whatever we desire on them.  The idea that any company can decide how their product is used -after- it's been sold is the issue.<br>Instead they're wasting taxpayer dollars with FOIA requests to get license agreements that are posted on Apple's bloody website.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>After all , you can also just go over and click through the signup to become a developer , and.. big shock here , you 're presented with the agreement.And as others have said , if you do n't like it , then you just do n't agree to it .
You can -still- develop for jailbroken phones without agreeing to this contract .
What you ca n't do is get into the App Store .
Which Apple , like any business is welcome to decide what products they would , or would not like to carry.What the EFF needs to spend their time doing instead of this stupid waste of time , is be getting whoever needs to ( FCC I guess , probably Congress themselves ) to pass a rule or law requiring " smartphones " to be considered what they are , small computers connected to the celular data network , and that because they are -our- property we -must- be allowed to install whatever we desire on them .
The idea that any company can decide how their product is used -after- it 's been sold is the issue.Instead they 're wasting taxpayer dollars with FOIA requests to get license agreements that are posted on Apple 's bloody website .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After all, you can also just go over and click through the signup to become a developer, and.. big shock here, you're presented with the agreement.And as others have said, if you don't like it, then you just don't agree to it.
You can -still- develop for jailbroken phones without agreeing to this contract.
What you can't do is get into the App Store.
Which Apple, like any business is welcome to decide what products they would, or would not like to carry.What the EFF needs to spend their time doing instead of this stupid waste of time, is be getting whoever needs to (FCC I guess, probably Congress themselves) to pass a rule or law requiring "smartphones" to be considered what they are, small computers connected to the celular data network, and that because they are -our- property we -must- be allowed to install whatever we desire on them.
The idea that any company can decide how their product is used -after- it's been sold is the issue.Instead they're wasting taxpayer dollars with FOIA requests to get license agreements that are posted on Apple's bloody website.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414824</id>
	<title>Re:Another nail in their coffin (for me).</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268154780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>-- and I've already invested in an iTouch,</p></div><p>Cool, a new Apple product. Or are you just retarded? I think it's the latter.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>-- and I 've already invested in an iTouch,Cool , a new Apple product .
Or are you just retarded ?
I think it 's the latter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>-- and I've already invested in an iTouch,Cool, a new Apple product.
Or are you just retarded?
I think it's the latter.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414306</id>
	<title>Nintendo?</title>
	<author>Akido37</author>
	<datestamp>1268152860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why all the Apple hate, but not Nintendo?  Nintendo's policies are far more restrictive, from what I've read, and the developer kit is expensive and difficult to impossible to get for newbies.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why all the Apple hate , but not Nintendo ?
Nintendo 's policies are far more restrictive , from what I 've read , and the developer kit is expensive and difficult to impossible to get for newbies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why all the Apple hate, but not Nintendo?
Nintendo's policies are far more restrictive, from what I've read, and the developer kit is expensive and difficult to impossible to get for newbies.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415108</id>
	<title>So if NASA is unable to accept license agreement</title>
	<author>goffster</author>
	<datestamp>1268155740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>then it can be sued by Apple, no ?<br>They entered into an agreement they could not keep.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>then it can be sued by Apple , no ? They entered into an agreement they could not keep .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>then it can be sued by Apple, no ?They entered into an agreement they could not keep.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415934</id>
	<title>Why is it called a "gem"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268158800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What is the twisted mindset that it is a "gem" to be prohibited from interfering with security systems etc.?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What is the twisted mindset that it is a " gem " to be prohibited from interfering with security systems etc .
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is the twisted mindset that it is a "gem" to be prohibited from interfering with security systems etc.
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415864</id>
	<title>Developer-friendly v. customer-friendly</title>
	<author>Infonaut</author>
	<datestamp>1268158560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Apple has always been about tightly controlling the user experience and the overall brand for their products. Developers are not their customers. Developers are useful to Apple only if they advance Apple's goals. Those developers who have been successful in the iPhone OS and Mac markets understand this and have adapted accordingly.

One could make the case that developers were Microsoft's primary market for years. Look where that led Microsoft. Their products gave developers and users all kinds of options, but the end result was bloat and annoyance. Customers are voting with their wallets and embracing products that just work.

The tightly controlled Apple brand and user experience gives developers less freedom, and that annoys the hell out of developers. But until someone else can find a way to give developers the independence they desire while still delivering a tightly focused, elegant user experience, the choices seem to be: Take the constrained Apple route with its flaws, or take the more flexible Microsoft/Nokia/et. al. route with its flaws.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple has always been about tightly controlling the user experience and the overall brand for their products .
Developers are not their customers .
Developers are useful to Apple only if they advance Apple 's goals .
Those developers who have been successful in the iPhone OS and Mac markets understand this and have adapted accordingly .
One could make the case that developers were Microsoft 's primary market for years .
Look where that led Microsoft .
Their products gave developers and users all kinds of options , but the end result was bloat and annoyance .
Customers are voting with their wallets and embracing products that just work .
The tightly controlled Apple brand and user experience gives developers less freedom , and that annoys the hell out of developers .
But until someone else can find a way to give developers the independence they desire while still delivering a tightly focused , elegant user experience , the choices seem to be : Take the constrained Apple route with its flaws , or take the more flexible Microsoft/Nokia/et .
al. route with its flaws .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple has always been about tightly controlling the user experience and the overall brand for their products.
Developers are not their customers.
Developers are useful to Apple only if they advance Apple's goals.
Those developers who have been successful in the iPhone OS and Mac markets understand this and have adapted accordingly.
One could make the case that developers were Microsoft's primary market for years.
Look where that led Microsoft.
Their products gave developers and users all kinds of options, but the end result was bloat and annoyance.
Customers are voting with their wallets and embracing products that just work.
The tightly controlled Apple brand and user experience gives developers less freedom, and that annoys the hell out of developers.
But until someone else can find a way to give developers the independence they desire while still delivering a tightly focused, elegant user experience, the choices seem to be: Take the constrained Apple route with its flaws, or take the more flexible Microsoft/Nokia/et.
al. route with its flaws.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31426524</id>
	<title>Re:Nintendo?</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1268238240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, when was the last time you saw a Nintendo story, and how often do they appear?</p><p>The daily Apple free coverage works both ways - there's stories even about rumours, whilst actual products from other companies are ignored. So like any other Apple site, the bad news is more likely to be covered also<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , when was the last time you saw a Nintendo story , and how often do they appear ? The daily Apple free coverage works both ways - there 's stories even about rumours , whilst actual products from other companies are ignored .
So like any other Apple site , the bad news is more likely to be covered also : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, when was the last time you saw a Nintendo story, and how often do they appear?The daily Apple free coverage works both ways - there's stories even about rumours, whilst actual products from other companies are ignored.
So like any other Apple site, the bad news is more likely to be covered also :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414098</id>
	<title>Well, I suppose that settles it...</title>
	<author>joedoc</author>
	<datestamp>1268152080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Apple is now Microsoft.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple is now Microsoft .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple is now Microsoft.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415878</id>
	<title>Re:Google's apps</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268158620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>actually the whole thing is a lot like "we can cancel your app at any time we want".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>actually the whole thing is a lot like " we can cancel your app at any time we want " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>actually the whole thing is a lot like "we can cancel your app at any time we want".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31421084</id>
	<title>Re:Nintendo?</title>
	<author>kuzb</author>
	<datestamp>1268138640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because the article is not about Nintendo, it's about Apple.  You're right though, Nintendo is more draconian than Apple ever was.  Then again, so was Pol Pot, but the article is not about him either.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because the article is not about Nintendo , it 's about Apple .
You 're right though , Nintendo is more draconian than Apple ever was .
Then again , so was Pol Pot , but the article is not about him either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because the article is not about Nintendo, it's about Apple.
You're right though, Nintendo is more draconian than Apple ever was.
Then again, so was Pol Pot, but the article is not about him either.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31416324</id>
	<title>Re:Another nail in their coffin (for me).</title>
	<author>93 Escort Wagon</author>
	<datestamp>1268160300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I recently needed to piggyback files from one windows computer to another and didn't have a USB key handy. But here was my iTouch. Done deal, right? This should be easy. Wrong. I couldn't put a zip file on it when mounted via USB, and I couldn't download the file directly from the web using Safari either.</p></div><p>There are free apps that do exactly this sort of thing - and do it wirelessly, to boot. I use Briefcase Lite, although it's ssh-based so it may not be the best choice for windows (ssh clients are allowed on the standard out-of-the-box iPod Touch and iPhone).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I recently needed to piggyback files from one windows computer to another and did n't have a USB key handy .
But here was my iTouch .
Done deal , right ?
This should be easy .
Wrong. I could n't put a zip file on it when mounted via USB , and I could n't download the file directly from the web using Safari either.There are free apps that do exactly this sort of thing - and do it wirelessly , to boot .
I use Briefcase Lite , although it 's ssh-based so it may not be the best choice for windows ( ssh clients are allowed on the standard out-of-the-box iPod Touch and iPhone ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I recently needed to piggyback files from one windows computer to another and didn't have a USB key handy.
But here was my iTouch.
Done deal, right?
This should be easy.
Wrong. I couldn't put a zip file on it when mounted via USB, and I couldn't download the file directly from the web using Safari either.There are free apps that do exactly this sort of thing - and do it wirelessly, to boot.
I use Briefcase Lite, although it's ssh-based so it may not be the best choice for windows (ssh clients are allowed on the standard out-of-the-box iPod Touch and iPhone).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414322</id>
	<title>Anti-Fanboi's Attack!</title>
	<author>Lifyre</author>
	<datestamp>1268152980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not an Apple fan and have never owned an Apple product, I prefer my Kool-Aid in different flavors.</p><p>But honestly this seems to be a pretty standard agreement, there is nothing horribly sneaky or underhanded going on.  The only thing I have an issue with is that Apple has tried to keep it from being public knowledge, which is their ultra-controlling usual self but nothing to get riled up over.</p><p>Perspective people...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not an Apple fan and have never owned an Apple product , I prefer my Kool-Aid in different flavors.But honestly this seems to be a pretty standard agreement , there is nothing horribly sneaky or underhanded going on .
The only thing I have an issue with is that Apple has tried to keep it from being public knowledge , which is their ultra-controlling usual self but nothing to get riled up over.Perspective people.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not an Apple fan and have never owned an Apple product, I prefer my Kool-Aid in different flavors.But honestly this seems to be a pretty standard agreement, there is nothing horribly sneaky or underhanded going on.
The only thing I have an issue with is that Apple has tried to keep it from being public knowledge, which is their ultra-controlling usual self but nothing to get riled up over.Perspective people...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414102</id>
	<title>Increased engine efficiency helps hybrids too</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268152080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hate when an article talks about some newfangled engine tech and says it's more efficient than hybrids. A perfect hybrid is going to be more efficient per mile than a perfect gas engine. Period.</p><p>Why? lots of reasons.<br>Regenerative breaking is a big one.<br>You can use a sterling engine or a turbine or diesel instead of a 4 stroke gasoline engine.<br>You can remove the transmission entirely and just have the engine connected to a generator, like the Volt is going to do.</p><p>And finally, any increase of efficiency you wring out of a gas engine can also be used in the gas engine of a hybrid.</p><p>(for naysayers, I'll admit that current batteries are heavy)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hate when an article talks about some newfangled engine tech and says it 's more efficient than hybrids .
A perfect hybrid is going to be more efficient per mile than a perfect gas engine .
Period.Why ? lots of reasons.Regenerative breaking is a big one.You can use a sterling engine or a turbine or diesel instead of a 4 stroke gasoline engine.You can remove the transmission entirely and just have the engine connected to a generator , like the Volt is going to do.And finally , any increase of efficiency you wring out of a gas engine can also be used in the gas engine of a hybrid .
( for naysayers , I 'll admit that current batteries are heavy )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hate when an article talks about some newfangled engine tech and says it's more efficient than hybrids.
A perfect hybrid is going to be more efficient per mile than a perfect gas engine.
Period.Why? lots of reasons.Regenerative breaking is a big one.You can use a sterling engine or a turbine or diesel instead of a 4 stroke gasoline engine.You can remove the transmission entirely and just have the engine connected to a generator, like the Volt is going to do.And finally, any increase of efficiency you wring out of a gas engine can also be used in the gas engine of a hybrid.
(for naysayers, I'll admit that current batteries are heavy)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415164</id>
	<title>Re:Another nail in their coffin (for me).</title>
	<author>caseih</author>
	<datestamp>1268155860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can use an iPhone or a Touch with Linux without jailbreaking it.  Apparently someone has reverse-engineered the usb protocol and produced a program called iFuse that lets you mount the filesystem.  As far as I know people are syncing their 3.0 devices with rhythmbox.</p><p><a href="http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=953381" title="ubuntuforums.org">http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=953381</a> [ubuntuforums.org]</p><p>Of course this is all a bunch of needless crap since Apple should have implemented usb mass storage support to begin with.</p><p>I'd love to have an iPod-Touch-like android device.  I don't want a phone.  Just a good media player that runs android.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can use an iPhone or a Touch with Linux without jailbreaking it .
Apparently someone has reverse-engineered the usb protocol and produced a program called iFuse that lets you mount the filesystem .
As far as I know people are syncing their 3.0 devices with rhythmbox.http : //ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php ? t = 953381 [ ubuntuforums.org ] Of course this is all a bunch of needless crap since Apple should have implemented usb mass storage support to begin with.I 'd love to have an iPod-Touch-like android device .
I do n't want a phone .
Just a good media player that runs android .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can use an iPhone or a Touch with Linux without jailbreaking it.
Apparently someone has reverse-engineered the usb protocol and produced a program called iFuse that lets you mount the filesystem.
As far as I know people are syncing their 3.0 devices with rhythmbox.http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=953381 [ubuntuforums.org]Of course this is all a bunch of needless crap since Apple should have implemented usb mass storage support to begin with.I'd love to have an iPod-Touch-like android device.
I don't want a phone.
Just a good media player that runs android.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414952</id>
	<title>The First Rule of iPhone Development</title>
	<author>arhhook</author>
	<datestamp>1268155200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The first rule of iPhone Development is you don't talk about iPhone Development.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The first rule of iPhone Development is you do n't talk about iPhone Development .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first rule of iPhone Development is you don't talk about iPhone Development.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31418696</id>
	<title>Re:Another nail in their coffin (for me).</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268127420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Under Linux, you can use VirtualBox + WinXP to interoperate with an ipod touch, it works perfectly well for my iphone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Under Linux , you can use VirtualBox + WinXP to interoperate with an ipod touch , it works perfectly well for my iphone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Under Linux, you can use VirtualBox + WinXP to interoperate with an ipod touch, it works perfectly well for my iphone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414808</id>
	<title>Re:Another nail in their coffin (for me).</title>
	<author>Joe Tie.</author>
	<datestamp>1268154720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think you might be surprised how many of us there are. It seemed so simple at first, jailbreak it and then you've got a nifty unix based phone. Got a little more annoyed with apple every day though.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you might be surprised how many of us there are .
It seemed so simple at first , jailbreak it and then you 've got a nifty unix based phone .
Got a little more annoyed with apple every day though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you might be surprised how many of us there are.
It seemed so simple at first, jailbreak it and then you've got a nifty unix based phone.
Got a little more annoyed with apple every day though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414766</id>
	<title>Re:Same old Apple</title>
	<author>BrokenHalo</author>
	<datestamp>1268154600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>they never signed on to the OS as an "open(ish) platform" thing that PC users (and unix geeks to an even greater extent) came to expect.</i> <br> <br>
In the case of the iPhone, one can barely call it an OS. The device somewhat reminds me of a turntable for playing black vinyl records. You have to take off one disc before you can play another. I personally don't place heavy demands on my own phone, but if I were to take mobile technology (other than my laptop with wireless cell connection) on board as a useful appliance for work online or (!) any real computing, I would expect some reasonable level of multi-tasking capability.</htmltext>
<tokenext>they never signed on to the OS as an " open ( ish ) platform " thing that PC users ( and unix geeks to an even greater extent ) came to expect .
In the case of the iPhone , one can barely call it an OS .
The device somewhat reminds me of a turntable for playing black vinyl records .
You have to take off one disc before you can play another .
I personally do n't place heavy demands on my own phone , but if I were to take mobile technology ( other than my laptop with wireless cell connection ) on board as a useful appliance for work online or ( !
) any real computing , I would expect some reasonable level of multi-tasking capability .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they never signed on to the OS as an "open(ish) platform" thing that PC users (and unix geeks to an even greater extent) came to expect.
In the case of the iPhone, one can barely call it an OS.
The device somewhat reminds me of a turntable for playing black vinyl records.
You have to take off one disc before you can play another.
I personally don't place heavy demands on my own phone, but if I were to take mobile technology (other than my laptop with wireless cell connection) on board as a useful appliance for work online or (!
) any real computing, I would expect some reasonable level of multi-tasking capability.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415032</id>
	<title>Re:Same old Apple</title>
	<author>adamstew</author>
	<datestamp>1268155440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can support certain aspects of their business and not others...Apple has accountants, and they know where their money is coming from.</p><p>If enough people decide that they don't want to buy iPhones because of the closed nature of the platform, they will likely have customer survey's and such that will tell them so.  And if they aren't making money on the iPhone because of that, then it will switch.</p><p>However, they will continue to see their mac platform, one that is open for anyone to develop and distribute for, shining and growing well.  Apple has some very smart management...they will put 2 + 2 together....Assuming that is what actually happens.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can support certain aspects of their business and not others...Apple has accountants , and they know where their money is coming from.If enough people decide that they do n't want to buy iPhones because of the closed nature of the platform , they will likely have customer survey 's and such that will tell them so .
And if they are n't making money on the iPhone because of that , then it will switch.However , they will continue to see their mac platform , one that is open for anyone to develop and distribute for , shining and growing well .
Apple has some very smart management...they will put 2 + 2 together....Assuming that is what actually happens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can support certain aspects of their business and not others...Apple has accountants, and they know where their money is coming from.If enough people decide that they don't want to buy iPhones because of the closed nature of the platform, they will likely have customer survey's and such that will tell them so.
And if they aren't making money on the iPhone because of that, then it will switch.However, they will continue to see their mac platform, one that is open for anyone to develop and distribute for, shining and growing well.
Apple has some very smart management...they will put 2 + 2 together....Assuming that is what actually happens.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415318</id>
	<title>Its already on their website</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1268156460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Great, you revealed something thats already publically available on their website.</p><p>You can see the agreement before you agree to it, thats kind of a requirement of contract law.</p><p>Anyone can get to it on Apples website, when 'signing up' for the developers program.  Just view it and don't agree to it.</p><p>Its not as if its actually been 'secret' or anything.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Great , you revealed something thats already publically available on their website.You can see the agreement before you agree to it , thats kind of a requirement of contract law.Anyone can get to it on Apples website , when 'signing up ' for the developers program .
Just view it and do n't agree to it.Its not as if its actually been 'secret ' or anything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Great, you revealed something thats already publically available on their website.You can see the agreement before you agree to it, thats kind of a requirement of contract law.Anyone can get to it on Apples website, when 'signing up' for the developers program.
Just view it and don't agree to it.Its not as if its actually been 'secret' or anything.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415226</id>
	<title>Re:Another nail in their coffin (for me).</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1268156160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>But I'm done giving money to Apple for their mobile devices. I just got screwed buying an unlicenced cable because I didn't think charging CAD $55 was a reasonable price for a $3 output cable; turns out you either pay the piper or live without, because Apple (and their licencees) all chip their accessories now and the iPhone won't work without detecting one. The only exception seems to be charging, which I only discovered after spending another $50 or so to buy an AC-USB plug and another cable.</p></div></blockquote><p>No, they don't.  There is a resistor between a couple pins so the device can tell the cable is fully plugged in, but that hasn't changed since the cable was updated to support more than just charging and syncing. (3rd gen ipod I think).</p><p>Switching to Serial control mode requires that certain commands be sent to the iPhone so it knows to keep operating all radios as a measure of protection against putting it in a crappy doc and soundly like shit.  This will only happen in docks that have ways to cntrol the phone though.</p><blockquote><div><p>I very much hate trying to interoperate with the device using Linux (it doesn't; not even a little bit; yes I've tried Wine and all the other native apps; it's not supported). Total waste of time. It's a good thing I have a token mac mini as an HTPC or it would be a total wash.</p></div></blockquote><p>You didn't look very hard.  GtkPod and Amarok are the first results on google for my first 3 word search.</p><blockquote><div><p>I recently needed to piggyback files from one windows computer to another and didn't have a USB key handy. But here was my iTouch. Done deal, right? This should be easy. Wrong. I couldn't put a zip file on it when mounted via USB, and I couldn't download the file directly from the web using Safari either. I ended up doing the job with a portable audio recorder, because yes -- even though this device has no reason to support anything but audio and audio metadata files, it didn't actively gun down any attempts to do otherwise.</p></div></blockquote><p>The iPhone's file system is mounted and in use by the iPhone OS.  In order for Linux or Windows to see it as a drive the USB device has to turn the space over as a raw block device.  This means it can't be mounted by the OS at the same time so your phone would have to umount its file system so it could turn it over to you.</p><p>There where at least 5 different WebDAV type apps that allowed the iPhone to be used as a file store over the network over a year ago, there are probably 20 of them by now, probably some acceptable free ones.  I use AirSharing.  Its not that great now, but it was the best when I was looking, it cost me $5, worth every penny.</p><p>Did you even look?</p><blockquote><div><p>Mobile devices seem to boil down to the same dilemma as on the desktop; you can either use Linux and have the freedom and choice -- which, for now, typically means either a lot less choice or a lot more effort to get things up and running like the state of affairs a decade or more ago; or you can grab your ankles, hand over your credit card and enjoy an overall smoother experience so long as you keep feeding proverbial quarters into the machine.</p></div></blockquote><p>Now you're just acting retarded.  Your definition of freedom is retarded.  Your freedom restricts you far more than the other options when you are saying aren't free enough for you.</p><p>When you start making arguments like this is becomes clear to every person around you that it has nothing to do with freedom or how well the device works for you, and its all about you being a fanboy and not being satisfied that your Golden Boy OS doesn't actually fit every situation perfectly.  Get a clue, learn that you don't always want to shove a square peg in a round hole, but that doesn't make the round hole OR the square peg any less valuable in the proper situation.</p><p>You use the word freedom like the name of a sports team.  I have a distinct notion that you don't actually know what the word means and are more likely just repeating Stallmans battle cry without even understanding why you are doing it.</p><blockquote><div><p>I've been holding out hope that the Nokia N900 comes to Canada in an 850MHz flavour but it looks like I'll be waiting in vain; time to decide whether to suck it up and deal with only EDGE connectivity or consider going to a different flavour of evil/greed from Apple.</p></div></blockquote><p>Ah yes, so you can run a device with less software available for it than the alternative you are looking at.  No, you can't say 'I can run linux so I can run all linux apps on it!' because thats utterly incorrect for about 20 different reasons.  You can run apps written for mobile devices, you can run a few crappy ports of non-mobile software straight to a phone which will suck ass, and you COULD port over other Linux apps.  But you won't.  You'll run a few apps designed for your mobile and be happy.  You'll screw around with some other apps, sure, but in a month you'll be back to using apps designed for a mobile device, why?  Because trying to use a desktop app on a phone is a real pain in the ass.  This is why there are special UIs for phones and they don't run the desktop OS natively among other reasons.</p><p>I see you blabbing, and I see your +5 score, and I realize how many people read your post and saw 'Yay Linux' and modded you up without actually putting a thought into understanding your post which was factually incorrect or wrong from a practical standpoint in every single point it made.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But I 'm done giving money to Apple for their mobile devices .
I just got screwed buying an unlicenced cable because I did n't think charging CAD $ 55 was a reasonable price for a $ 3 output cable ; turns out you either pay the piper or live without , because Apple ( and their licencees ) all chip their accessories now and the iPhone wo n't work without detecting one .
The only exception seems to be charging , which I only discovered after spending another $ 50 or so to buy an AC-USB plug and another cable.No , they do n't .
There is a resistor between a couple pins so the device can tell the cable is fully plugged in , but that has n't changed since the cable was updated to support more than just charging and syncing .
( 3rd gen ipod I think ) .Switching to Serial control mode requires that certain commands be sent to the iPhone so it knows to keep operating all radios as a measure of protection against putting it in a crappy doc and soundly like shit .
This will only happen in docks that have ways to cntrol the phone though.I very much hate trying to interoperate with the device using Linux ( it does n't ; not even a little bit ; yes I 've tried Wine and all the other native apps ; it 's not supported ) .
Total waste of time .
It 's a good thing I have a token mac mini as an HTPC or it would be a total wash.You did n't look very hard .
GtkPod and Amarok are the first results on google for my first 3 word search.I recently needed to piggyback files from one windows computer to another and did n't have a USB key handy .
But here was my iTouch .
Done deal , right ?
This should be easy .
Wrong. I could n't put a zip file on it when mounted via USB , and I could n't download the file directly from the web using Safari either .
I ended up doing the job with a portable audio recorder , because yes -- even though this device has no reason to support anything but audio and audio metadata files , it did n't actively gun down any attempts to do otherwise.The iPhone 's file system is mounted and in use by the iPhone OS .
In order for Linux or Windows to see it as a drive the USB device has to turn the space over as a raw block device .
This means it ca n't be mounted by the OS at the same time so your phone would have to umount its file system so it could turn it over to you.There where at least 5 different WebDAV type apps that allowed the iPhone to be used as a file store over the network over a year ago , there are probably 20 of them by now , probably some acceptable free ones .
I use AirSharing .
Its not that great now , but it was the best when I was looking , it cost me $ 5 , worth every penny.Did you even look ? Mobile devices seem to boil down to the same dilemma as on the desktop ; you can either use Linux and have the freedom and choice -- which , for now , typically means either a lot less choice or a lot more effort to get things up and running like the state of affairs a decade or more ago ; or you can grab your ankles , hand over your credit card and enjoy an overall smoother experience so long as you keep feeding proverbial quarters into the machine.Now you 're just acting retarded .
Your definition of freedom is retarded .
Your freedom restricts you far more than the other options when you are saying are n't free enough for you.When you start making arguments like this is becomes clear to every person around you that it has nothing to do with freedom or how well the device works for you , and its all about you being a fanboy and not being satisfied that your Golden Boy OS does n't actually fit every situation perfectly .
Get a clue , learn that you do n't always want to shove a square peg in a round hole , but that does n't make the round hole OR the square peg any less valuable in the proper situation.You use the word freedom like the name of a sports team .
I have a distinct notion that you do n't actually know what the word means and are more likely just repeating Stallmans battle cry without even understanding why you are doing it.I 've been holding out hope that the Nokia N900 comes to Canada in an 850MHz flavour but it looks like I 'll be waiting in vain ; time to decide whether to suck it up and deal with only EDGE connectivity or consider going to a different flavour of evil/greed from Apple.Ah yes , so you can run a device with less software available for it than the alternative you are looking at .
No , you ca n't say 'I can run linux so I can run all linux apps on it !
' because thats utterly incorrect for about 20 different reasons .
You can run apps written for mobile devices , you can run a few crappy ports of non-mobile software straight to a phone which will suck ass , and you COULD port over other Linux apps .
But you wo n't .
You 'll run a few apps designed for your mobile and be happy .
You 'll screw around with some other apps , sure , but in a month you 'll be back to using apps designed for a mobile device , why ?
Because trying to use a desktop app on a phone is a real pain in the ass .
This is why there are special UIs for phones and they do n't run the desktop OS natively among other reasons.I see you blabbing , and I see your + 5 score , and I realize how many people read your post and saw 'Yay Linux ' and modded you up without actually putting a thought into understanding your post which was factually incorrect or wrong from a practical standpoint in every single point it made .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But I'm done giving money to Apple for their mobile devices.
I just got screwed buying an unlicenced cable because I didn't think charging CAD $55 was a reasonable price for a $3 output cable; turns out you either pay the piper or live without, because Apple (and their licencees) all chip their accessories now and the iPhone won't work without detecting one.
The only exception seems to be charging, which I only discovered after spending another $50 or so to buy an AC-USB plug and another cable.No, they don't.
There is a resistor between a couple pins so the device can tell the cable is fully plugged in, but that hasn't changed since the cable was updated to support more than just charging and syncing.
(3rd gen ipod I think).Switching to Serial control mode requires that certain commands be sent to the iPhone so it knows to keep operating all radios as a measure of protection against putting it in a crappy doc and soundly like shit.
This will only happen in docks that have ways to cntrol the phone though.I very much hate trying to interoperate with the device using Linux (it doesn't; not even a little bit; yes I've tried Wine and all the other native apps; it's not supported).
Total waste of time.
It's a good thing I have a token mac mini as an HTPC or it would be a total wash.You didn't look very hard.
GtkPod and Amarok are the first results on google for my first 3 word search.I recently needed to piggyback files from one windows computer to another and didn't have a USB key handy.
But here was my iTouch.
Done deal, right?
This should be easy.
Wrong. I couldn't put a zip file on it when mounted via USB, and I couldn't download the file directly from the web using Safari either.
I ended up doing the job with a portable audio recorder, because yes -- even though this device has no reason to support anything but audio and audio metadata files, it didn't actively gun down any attempts to do otherwise.The iPhone's file system is mounted and in use by the iPhone OS.
In order for Linux or Windows to see it as a drive the USB device has to turn the space over as a raw block device.
This means it can't be mounted by the OS at the same time so your phone would have to umount its file system so it could turn it over to you.There where at least 5 different WebDAV type apps that allowed the iPhone to be used as a file store over the network over a year ago, there are probably 20 of them by now, probably some acceptable free ones.
I use AirSharing.
Its not that great now, but it was the best when I was looking, it cost me $5, worth every penny.Did you even look?Mobile devices seem to boil down to the same dilemma as on the desktop; you can either use Linux and have the freedom and choice -- which, for now, typically means either a lot less choice or a lot more effort to get things up and running like the state of affairs a decade or more ago; or you can grab your ankles, hand over your credit card and enjoy an overall smoother experience so long as you keep feeding proverbial quarters into the machine.Now you're just acting retarded.
Your definition of freedom is retarded.
Your freedom restricts you far more than the other options when you are saying aren't free enough for you.When you start making arguments like this is becomes clear to every person around you that it has nothing to do with freedom or how well the device works for you, and its all about you being a fanboy and not being satisfied that your Golden Boy OS doesn't actually fit every situation perfectly.
Get a clue, learn that you don't always want to shove a square peg in a round hole, but that doesn't make the round hole OR the square peg any less valuable in the proper situation.You use the word freedom like the name of a sports team.
I have a distinct notion that you don't actually know what the word means and are more likely just repeating Stallmans battle cry without even understanding why you are doing it.I've been holding out hope that the Nokia N900 comes to Canada in an 850MHz flavour but it looks like I'll be waiting in vain; time to decide whether to suck it up and deal with only EDGE connectivity or consider going to a different flavour of evil/greed from Apple.Ah yes, so you can run a device with less software available for it than the alternative you are looking at.
No, you can't say 'I can run linux so I can run all linux apps on it!
' because thats utterly incorrect for about 20 different reasons.
You can run apps written for mobile devices, you can run a few crappy ports of non-mobile software straight to a phone which will suck ass, and you COULD port over other Linux apps.
But you won't.
You'll run a few apps designed for your mobile and be happy.
You'll screw around with some other apps, sure, but in a month you'll be back to using apps designed for a mobile device, why?
Because trying to use a desktop app on a phone is a real pain in the ass.
This is why there are special UIs for phones and they don't run the desktop OS natively among other reasons.I see you blabbing, and I see your +5 score, and I realize how many people read your post and saw 'Yay Linux' and modded you up without actually putting a thought into understanding your post which was factually incorrect or wrong from a practical standpoint in every single point it made.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414334</id>
	<title>Re:Another nail in their coffin (for me).</title>
	<author>jedidiah</author>
	<datestamp>1268153040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; I am equally sick of forking out money every time I sneeze. Maybe it's unreasonable of me, but<br>&gt; I somehow feel like I shouldn't be paying $10 for an ssh client, and that I shouldn't have</p><p>Yes. I too find the whole "nickel and dime you to death" approach with Mac software to be terribly annoying.</p><p>&gt; to essentially "break the law" to use the underlying operating system features. I totally understand<br>&gt; that to even develop for this thing costs you &gt;$100/year; maybe I've been using Linux for too long.<br>&gt; I very much hate trying to interoperate with the device using Linux (it doesn't; not even a little bit;<br>&gt; yes I've tried Wine and all the other native apps; it's not supported). Total waste of time. It's a good</p><p>You can also use Windows inside of a VM. The non-OSE version of VirtualBox will allow you to access<br>USB devices inside the VM. So you can run iTunes and load your phone with it. It doesn't seem to be<br>any slower than an actual mini.</p><p>&gt; thing I have a token mac mini as an HTPC or it would be a total wash.</p><p>I still prefer a VM to a seperate machine for this sort of thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; I am equally sick of forking out money every time I sneeze .
Maybe it 's unreasonable of me , but &gt; I somehow feel like I should n't be paying $ 10 for an ssh client , and that I should n't haveYes .
I too find the whole " nickel and dime you to death " approach with Mac software to be terribly annoying. &gt; to essentially " break the law " to use the underlying operating system features .
I totally understand &gt; that to even develop for this thing costs you &gt; $ 100/year ; maybe I 've been using Linux for too long. &gt; I very much hate trying to interoperate with the device using Linux ( it does n't ; not even a little bit ; &gt; yes I 've tried Wine and all the other native apps ; it 's not supported ) .
Total waste of time .
It 's a goodYou can also use Windows inside of a VM .
The non-OSE version of VirtualBox will allow you to accessUSB devices inside the VM .
So you can run iTunes and load your phone with it .
It does n't seem to beany slower than an actual mini. &gt; thing I have a token mac mini as an HTPC or it would be a total wash.I still prefer a VM to a seperate machine for this sort of thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; I am equally sick of forking out money every time I sneeze.
Maybe it's unreasonable of me, but&gt; I somehow feel like I shouldn't be paying $10 for an ssh client, and that I shouldn't haveYes.
I too find the whole "nickel and dime you to death" approach with Mac software to be terribly annoying.&gt; to essentially "break the law" to use the underlying operating system features.
I totally understand&gt; that to even develop for this thing costs you &gt;$100/year; maybe I've been using Linux for too long.&gt; I very much hate trying to interoperate with the device using Linux (it doesn't; not even a little bit;&gt; yes I've tried Wine and all the other native apps; it's not supported).
Total waste of time.
It's a goodYou can also use Windows inside of a VM.
The non-OSE version of VirtualBox will allow you to accessUSB devices inside the VM.
So you can run iTunes and load your phone with it.
It doesn't seem to beany slower than an actual mini.&gt; thing I have a token mac mini as an HTPC or it would be a total wash.I still prefer a VM to a seperate machine for this sort of thing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31423416</id>
	<title>What sticks out</title>
	<author>\_Shad0w\_</author>
	<datestamp>1268161500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think the bit of this that sticks in my memory is actually the EFF's ingenuity.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the bit of this that sticks in my memory is actually the EFF 's ingenuity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the bit of this that sticks in my memory is actually the EFF's ingenuity.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415140</id>
	<title>Re:Another nail in their coffin (for me).</title>
	<author>phorm</author>
	<datestamp>1268155800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"I just got screwed buying an unlicenced cable because I didn't think charging CAD $55 was a reasonable price for a $3 output cable; turns out you either pay the piper or live without, because Apple (and their licencees) all chip their accessories now and the iPhone won't work without detecting one"</p><p>Exactly what kind of cable is this, and which device? I have an iphone 3G, and it works fine with my bought-from-Hong-Kong-Ebay-Seller cables, as did my friend's 3Gs. It charges fine, and allows USB connections for transferring data, syncing, or flashing the phone.<br>Maybe you just got a broken cable? I know that in my lot of 5, one of them had a loose connection.</p><p>As for the N900... I have a Milestone (motorola), which is essentially in the same basket for 3G since it only supports the European frequences and thus is edge-only here (plus you have to manually enter your APN the first time, but you can find those online). Running on Edge isn't too bad though - if I actually need to do something like downloading over 1-2MB, wifi is usually nearby - and getting past the hassles of the irritating on-screen keyboard, unchangable batteries, mediocre battery life and etc of my iPhone is worth it. The iPhone now does well as a fancy Mp3 player with wifi for downloads, but then it always somewhat sucked as a phone anyhow.</p><p>Perhaps what we really need are phones that all allow tethering on data, and the ability to hook up the extra stuff (like ipods, PDA's or Mp3 players) via USB when you need to download a tune or app on the run.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I just got screwed buying an unlicenced cable because I did n't think charging CAD $ 55 was a reasonable price for a $ 3 output cable ; turns out you either pay the piper or live without , because Apple ( and their licencees ) all chip their accessories now and the iPhone wo n't work without detecting one " Exactly what kind of cable is this , and which device ?
I have an iphone 3G , and it works fine with my bought-from-Hong-Kong-Ebay-Seller cables , as did my friend 's 3Gs .
It charges fine , and allows USB connections for transferring data , syncing , or flashing the phone.Maybe you just got a broken cable ?
I know that in my lot of 5 , one of them had a loose connection.As for the N900... I have a Milestone ( motorola ) , which is essentially in the same basket for 3G since it only supports the European frequences and thus is edge-only here ( plus you have to manually enter your APN the first time , but you can find those online ) .
Running on Edge is n't too bad though - if I actually need to do something like downloading over 1-2MB , wifi is usually nearby - and getting past the hassles of the irritating on-screen keyboard , unchangable batteries , mediocre battery life and etc of my iPhone is worth it .
The iPhone now does well as a fancy Mp3 player with wifi for downloads , but then it always somewhat sucked as a phone anyhow.Perhaps what we really need are phones that all allow tethering on data , and the ability to hook up the extra stuff ( like ipods , PDA 's or Mp3 players ) via USB when you need to download a tune or app on the run .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I just got screwed buying an unlicenced cable because I didn't think charging CAD $55 was a reasonable price for a $3 output cable; turns out you either pay the piper or live without, because Apple (and their licencees) all chip their accessories now and the iPhone won't work without detecting one"Exactly what kind of cable is this, and which device?
I have an iphone 3G, and it works fine with my bought-from-Hong-Kong-Ebay-Seller cables, as did my friend's 3Gs.
It charges fine, and allows USB connections for transferring data, syncing, or flashing the phone.Maybe you just got a broken cable?
I know that in my lot of 5, one of them had a loose connection.As for the N900... I have a Milestone (motorola), which is essentially in the same basket for 3G since it only supports the European frequences and thus is edge-only here (plus you have to manually enter your APN the first time, but you can find those online).
Running on Edge isn't too bad though - if I actually need to do something like downloading over 1-2MB, wifi is usually nearby - and getting past the hassles of the irritating on-screen keyboard, unchangable batteries, mediocre battery life and etc of my iPhone is worth it.
The iPhone now does well as a fancy Mp3 player with wifi for downloads, but then it always somewhat sucked as a phone anyhow.Perhaps what we really need are phones that all allow tethering on data, and the ability to hook up the extra stuff (like ipods, PDA's or Mp3 players) via USB when you need to download a tune or app on the run.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413936</id>
	<title>So now we are all going to get iKeys?</title>
	<author>paulsnx2</author>
	<datestamp>1268151420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't care what Apple does because I don't develop for them.  I can ignore IPhones and IPads and ITunes and other Apple products.  But slowly and surely Apple is gaining ground by rapidly out running development in some (I have to admit) cool applications.</p><p>We have to free up the infrastructure.  Nothing about the IPhone required Apple to invent it other than the fact that it took Apple/Jobs to stand up to the wireless operators and deliver a platform outside *their* control.  It took Apple/Jobs to stand up to the RIAA and deliver legitimate digital music over the Internet.</p><p>So what is Apple good at?  They are good at forcing their way through various Corporate and Social barriers because they have the ego to do so.  But many customers do not recognize that Apple does this while at the same time erecting barriers for others to prevent them from following their path.  Apple erects barriers to prevent others from leveraging their products.</p><p>So why do I say "ego" to do this?  Because they don't respect any other corporate entity's efforts to protect their turf (a good thing, I think), but haven't any problem doing a far better and more comprehensive job of protecting their own (good in the short term for customers, bad in the long term).</p><p>Hurray to Apple for breaking barriers.  Boo to Apple for building replacements that might be far more difficult to break down.</p><p>All is great as long as Apple is innovating.  But all innovative companies become stagnate over time.  And I fear at some point Apple will no longer be the rising star of technology, but just another corporate boat anchor.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't care what Apple does because I do n't develop for them .
I can ignore IPhones and IPads and ITunes and other Apple products .
But slowly and surely Apple is gaining ground by rapidly out running development in some ( I have to admit ) cool applications.We have to free up the infrastructure .
Nothing about the IPhone required Apple to invent it other than the fact that it took Apple/Jobs to stand up to the wireless operators and deliver a platform outside * their * control .
It took Apple/Jobs to stand up to the RIAA and deliver legitimate digital music over the Internet.So what is Apple good at ?
They are good at forcing their way through various Corporate and Social barriers because they have the ego to do so .
But many customers do not recognize that Apple does this while at the same time erecting barriers for others to prevent them from following their path .
Apple erects barriers to prevent others from leveraging their products.So why do I say " ego " to do this ?
Because they do n't respect any other corporate entity 's efforts to protect their turf ( a good thing , I think ) , but have n't any problem doing a far better and more comprehensive job of protecting their own ( good in the short term for customers , bad in the long term ) .Hurray to Apple for breaking barriers .
Boo to Apple for building replacements that might be far more difficult to break down.All is great as long as Apple is innovating .
But all innovative companies become stagnate over time .
And I fear at some point Apple will no longer be the rising star of technology , but just another corporate boat anchor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't care what Apple does because I don't develop for them.
I can ignore IPhones and IPads and ITunes and other Apple products.
But slowly and surely Apple is gaining ground by rapidly out running development in some (I have to admit) cool applications.We have to free up the infrastructure.
Nothing about the IPhone required Apple to invent it other than the fact that it took Apple/Jobs to stand up to the wireless operators and deliver a platform outside *their* control.
It took Apple/Jobs to stand up to the RIAA and deliver legitimate digital music over the Internet.So what is Apple good at?
They are good at forcing their way through various Corporate and Social barriers because they have the ego to do so.
But many customers do not recognize that Apple does this while at the same time erecting barriers for others to prevent them from following their path.
Apple erects barriers to prevent others from leveraging their products.So why do I say "ego" to do this?
Because they don't respect any other corporate entity's efforts to protect their turf (a good thing, I think), but haven't any problem doing a far better and more comprehensive job of protecting their own (good in the short term for customers, bad in the long term).Hurray to Apple for breaking barriers.
Boo to Apple for building replacements that might be far more difficult to break down.All is great as long as Apple is innovating.
But all innovative companies become stagnate over time.
And I fear at some point Apple will no longer be the rising star of technology, but just another corporate boat anchor.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31421174</id>
	<title>We wouldn't have any viruses</title>
	<author>ptr2004</author>
	<datestamp>1268139420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>if only windows had such a license agreement !!!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>if only windows had such a license agreement ! ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if only windows had such a license agreement !!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31416214</id>
	<title>Re:Nintendo?</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1268159820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why all the Apple hate, but not Nintendo? Nintendo's policies are far more restrictive</p></div><p>
Wii has an alternative called Aspire Revo, made by Acer. It's roughly the same size and price as a Wii. Like the PLAYSTATION 3, the Aspire Revo has an NVIDIA GPU. It has VGA and HDMI outputs and six USB ports, ordinarily used for a keyboard, mouse, USB memory card or external hard drive, and up to three gamepads. It runs an operating system called Windows, which is similar in some ways to the Xbox operating system but doesn't require applications to be digitally signed. And unlike the major consoles, it has multiple app stores, including Steam, Direct2Drive, GOG, and SourceForge. Apple has a similar but significantly more expensive offering called Mac mini, so I guess the Apple hate has something to do with the fact that it decided to make the iPhone and iPod Touch more exclusive than the Mac mini.
</p><p>
That covers consoles; let's move on to handhelds. The DS, PSP, and iPod Touch are handheld devices marketed for playing video games and sold in United States electronics chains for &lt;= 200 USD without a phone service contract. What is the open alternative to these? To put it another way, iPhone is to an Android or Maemo/MeeGo phone as iPod Touch is to what?
</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why all the Apple hate , but not Nintendo ?
Nintendo 's policies are far more restrictive Wii has an alternative called Aspire Revo , made by Acer .
It 's roughly the same size and price as a Wii .
Like the PLAYSTATION 3 , the Aspire Revo has an NVIDIA GPU .
It has VGA and HDMI outputs and six USB ports , ordinarily used for a keyboard , mouse , USB memory card or external hard drive , and up to three gamepads .
It runs an operating system called Windows , which is similar in some ways to the Xbox operating system but does n't require applications to be digitally signed .
And unlike the major consoles , it has multiple app stores , including Steam , Direct2Drive , GOG , and SourceForge .
Apple has a similar but significantly more expensive offering called Mac mini , so I guess the Apple hate has something to do with the fact that it decided to make the iPhone and iPod Touch more exclusive than the Mac mini .
That covers consoles ; let 's move on to handhelds .
The DS , PSP , and iPod Touch are handheld devices marketed for playing video games and sold in United States electronics chains for</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why all the Apple hate, but not Nintendo?
Nintendo's policies are far more restrictive
Wii has an alternative called Aspire Revo, made by Acer.
It's roughly the same size and price as a Wii.
Like the PLAYSTATION 3, the Aspire Revo has an NVIDIA GPU.
It has VGA and HDMI outputs and six USB ports, ordinarily used for a keyboard, mouse, USB memory card or external hard drive, and up to three gamepads.
It runs an operating system called Windows, which is similar in some ways to the Xbox operating system but doesn't require applications to be digitally signed.
And unlike the major consoles, it has multiple app stores, including Steam, Direct2Drive, GOG, and SourceForge.
Apple has a similar but significantly more expensive offering called Mac mini, so I guess the Apple hate has something to do with the fact that it decided to make the iPhone and iPod Touch more exclusive than the Mac mini.
That covers consoles; let's move on to handhelds.
The DS, PSP, and iPod Touch are handheld devices marketed for playing video games and sold in United States electronics chains for 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414438</id>
	<title>Honestly I think Apple sucks but</title>
	<author>NotSoHeavyD3</author>
	<datestamp>1268153400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>really isn't this how it is for any closed platform? I mean I'd expect the agreement for any Microsoft, Nintendo, Sega, or Sony platform is pretty similar. I'd honestly be surprised if restrictions on say the XBox or PS3 were significantly different.</htmltext>
<tokenext>really is n't this how it is for any closed platform ?
I mean I 'd expect the agreement for any Microsoft , Nintendo , Sega , or Sony platform is pretty similar .
I 'd honestly be surprised if restrictions on say the XBox or PS3 were significantly different .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>really isn't this how it is for any closed platform?
I mean I'd expect the agreement for any Microsoft, Nintendo, Sega, or Sony platform is pretty similar.
I'd honestly be surprised if restrictions on say the XBox or PS3 were significantly different.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31418536</id>
	<title>Walled Gardens</title>
	<author>AutumnLeaf</author>
	<datestamp>1268126760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The iPhone is a walled garden.  Specifically, Apple's walled garden.  Want to enjoy Apple's garden and grow things in it?  Want to pick fruit from the trees (make money off the user base) - again - agree to Apple's terms.</p><p>There may be gardens out there that look wall-free, but on closer inspection you'll find the walls are simply lower.  Usually the walls are lower to entice people to enter the garden.  Given enough consumers, the walls get higher and trap people inside.   All of the vendors are playing the same game - trap the consumer, and take their money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The iPhone is a walled garden .
Specifically , Apple 's walled garden .
Want to enjoy Apple 's garden and grow things in it ?
Want to pick fruit from the trees ( make money off the user base ) - again - agree to Apple 's terms.There may be gardens out there that look wall-free , but on closer inspection you 'll find the walls are simply lower .
Usually the walls are lower to entice people to enter the garden .
Given enough consumers , the walls get higher and trap people inside .
All of the vendors are playing the same game - trap the consumer , and take their money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The iPhone is a walled garden.
Specifically, Apple's walled garden.
Want to enjoy Apple's garden and grow things in it?
Want to pick fruit from the trees (make money off the user base) - again - agree to Apple's terms.There may be gardens out there that look wall-free, but on closer inspection you'll find the walls are simply lower.
Usually the walls are lower to entice people to enter the garden.
Given enough consumers, the walls get higher and trap people inside.
All of the vendors are playing the same game - trap the consumer, and take their money.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31416404</id>
	<title>Re:Another nail in their coffin (for me).</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268160540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is the N900 the only option for an open (as in open development) platform in a size similar to the Touch? Are there any Android or Web OS devices without the phone that are any good. I haven't heard anything good about Archos' Android device, so I won't be buying that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is the N900 the only option for an open ( as in open development ) platform in a size similar to the Touch ?
Are there any Android or Web OS devices without the phone that are any good .
I have n't heard anything good about Archos ' Android device , so I wo n't be buying that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is the N900 the only option for an open (as in open development) platform in a size similar to the Touch?
Are there any Android or Web OS devices without the phone that are any good.
I haven't heard anything good about Archos' Android device, so I won't be buying that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31417650</id>
	<title>Re:Nintendo?</title>
	<author>\_vc90\_</author>
	<datestamp>1268166300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because the story is about Apple. There's as much disgust for any other company's draconian policies as well. Why can't we all just hate along?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because the story is about Apple .
There 's as much disgust for any other company 's draconian policies as well .
Why ca n't we all just hate along ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because the story is about Apple.
There's as much disgust for any other company's draconian policies as well.
Why can't we all just hate along?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31422808</id>
	<title>Re:Apple is 100\% correct</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1268153580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>If you were running a grocery store, wouldn't YOU want to have the final say on what products YOU stock in the store?</p></div> </blockquote><p>

The problem is that I cant run a store, if I want to sell cereal that will work with an Ibowl I have to sell it through an Isupermarket.<br> <br>

Your analogy does not work as if I do not like the product selection policies at IGA, I can go to Woolworths or sell out of my own home if I want to. With Apple I have to accept their selection policies or not at all.</p><blockquote><div><p>The idea that Grandma would ever buy ANYTHING from some 19-year old DRM-busting, open source Linux jockey is completely ludicrous.</p></div></blockquote><p>

The idea that your notions are in any way representative of the Open Source community, let alone of the Open Source business community is completely ludicrous...
<br> <br>
and completely wrong.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you were running a grocery store , would n't YOU want to have the final say on what products YOU stock in the store ?
The problem is that I cant run a store , if I want to sell cereal that will work with an Ibowl I have to sell it through an Isupermarket .
Your analogy does not work as if I do not like the product selection policies at IGA , I can go to Woolworths or sell out of my own home if I want to .
With Apple I have to accept their selection policies or not at all.The idea that Grandma would ever buy ANYTHING from some 19-year old DRM-busting , open source Linux jockey is completely ludicrous .
The idea that your notions are in any way representative of the Open Source community , let alone of the Open Source business community is completely ludicrous.. . and completely wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you were running a grocery store, wouldn't YOU want to have the final say on what products YOU stock in the store?
The problem is that I cant run a store, if I want to sell cereal that will work with an Ibowl I have to sell it through an Isupermarket.
Your analogy does not work as if I do not like the product selection policies at IGA, I can go to Woolworths or sell out of my own home if I want to.
With Apple I have to accept their selection policies or not at all.The idea that Grandma would ever buy ANYTHING from some 19-year old DRM-busting, open source Linux jockey is completely ludicrous.
The idea that your notions are in any way representative of the Open Source community, let alone of the Open Source business community is completely ludicrous...
 
and completely wrong.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31416784</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31416744</id>
	<title>Quantum computers</title>
	<author>Myria</author>
	<datestamp>1268162400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I for one can't wait until quantum computers destroy all current forms of public-key cryptography and end all these signing systems.</p><p>They could go with Lamport signatures, but those are terribly inconvenient to work with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I for one ca n't wait until quantum computers destroy all current forms of public-key cryptography and end all these signing systems.They could go with Lamport signatures , but those are terribly inconvenient to work with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I for one can't wait until quantum computers destroy all current forms of public-key cryptography and end all these signing systems.They could go with Lamport signatures, but those are terribly inconvenient to work with.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414006</id>
	<title>Another nail in their coffin (for me).</title>
	<author>isolationism</author>
	<datestamp>1268151660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know most users won't give up their iPhone/iTouch over their dead bodies -- and I've already invested in an iTouch, and I don't want to throw it away either while it still works.</p><p>But I'm done giving money to Apple for their mobile devices. I just got screwed buying an unlicenced cable because I didn't think charging CAD $55 was a reasonable price for a $3 output cable; turns out you either pay the piper or live without, because Apple (and their licencees) all chip their accessories now and the iPhone won't work without detecting one. The only exception seems to be charging, which I only discovered after spending another $50 or so to buy an AC-USB plug and another cable.</p><p>I am equally sick of forking out money every time I sneeze. Maybe it's unreasonable of me, but I somehow feel like I shouldn't be paying $10 for an ssh client, and that I shouldn't have to essentially "break the law" to use the underlying operating system features. I totally understand that to even develop for this thing costs you &gt;$100/year; maybe I've been using Linux for too long.</p><p>I very much hate trying to interoperate with the device using Linux (it doesn't; not even a little bit; yes I've tried Wine and all the other native apps; it's not supported). Total waste of time. It's a good thing I have a token mac mini as an HTPC or it would be a total wash.</p><p>I recently needed to piggyback files from one windows computer to another and didn't have a USB key handy. But here was my iTouch. Done deal, right? This should be easy. Wrong. I couldn't put a zip file on it when mounted via USB, and I couldn't download the file directly from the web using Safari either. I ended up doing the job with a portable audio recorder, because yes -- even though this device has no reason to support anything but audio and audio metadata files, it didn't actively gun down any attempts to do otherwise.</p><p>Mobile devices seem to boil down to the same dilemma as on the desktop; you can either use Linux and have the freedom and choice -- which, for now, typically means either a <em>lot</em> less choice or a <em>lot</em> more effort to get things up and running like the state of affairs a decade or more ago; or you can grab your ankles, hand over your credit card and enjoy an overall smoother experience so long as you keep feeding proverbial quarters into the machine.</p><p>I've been holding out hope that the Nokia N900 comes to Canada in an 850MHz flavour but it looks like I'll be waiting in vain; time to decide whether to suck it up and deal with only EDGE connectivity or consider going to a different flavour of evil/greed from Apple.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know most users wo n't give up their iPhone/iTouch over their dead bodies -- and I 've already invested in an iTouch , and I do n't want to throw it away either while it still works.But I 'm done giving money to Apple for their mobile devices .
I just got screwed buying an unlicenced cable because I did n't think charging CAD $ 55 was a reasonable price for a $ 3 output cable ; turns out you either pay the piper or live without , because Apple ( and their licencees ) all chip their accessories now and the iPhone wo n't work without detecting one .
The only exception seems to be charging , which I only discovered after spending another $ 50 or so to buy an AC-USB plug and another cable.I am equally sick of forking out money every time I sneeze .
Maybe it 's unreasonable of me , but I somehow feel like I should n't be paying $ 10 for an ssh client , and that I should n't have to essentially " break the law " to use the underlying operating system features .
I totally understand that to even develop for this thing costs you &gt; $ 100/year ; maybe I 've been using Linux for too long.I very much hate trying to interoperate with the device using Linux ( it does n't ; not even a little bit ; yes I 've tried Wine and all the other native apps ; it 's not supported ) .
Total waste of time .
It 's a good thing I have a token mac mini as an HTPC or it would be a total wash.I recently needed to piggyback files from one windows computer to another and did n't have a USB key handy .
But here was my iTouch .
Done deal , right ?
This should be easy .
Wrong. I could n't put a zip file on it when mounted via USB , and I could n't download the file directly from the web using Safari either .
I ended up doing the job with a portable audio recorder , because yes -- even though this device has no reason to support anything but audio and audio metadata files , it did n't actively gun down any attempts to do otherwise.Mobile devices seem to boil down to the same dilemma as on the desktop ; you can either use Linux and have the freedom and choice -- which , for now , typically means either a lot less choice or a lot more effort to get things up and running like the state of affairs a decade or more ago ; or you can grab your ankles , hand over your credit card and enjoy an overall smoother experience so long as you keep feeding proverbial quarters into the machine.I 've been holding out hope that the Nokia N900 comes to Canada in an 850MHz flavour but it looks like I 'll be waiting in vain ; time to decide whether to suck it up and deal with only EDGE connectivity or consider going to a different flavour of evil/greed from Apple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know most users won't give up their iPhone/iTouch over their dead bodies -- and I've already invested in an iTouch, and I don't want to throw it away either while it still works.But I'm done giving money to Apple for their mobile devices.
I just got screwed buying an unlicenced cable because I didn't think charging CAD $55 was a reasonable price for a $3 output cable; turns out you either pay the piper or live without, because Apple (and their licencees) all chip their accessories now and the iPhone won't work without detecting one.
The only exception seems to be charging, which I only discovered after spending another $50 or so to buy an AC-USB plug and another cable.I am equally sick of forking out money every time I sneeze.
Maybe it's unreasonable of me, but I somehow feel like I shouldn't be paying $10 for an ssh client, and that I shouldn't have to essentially "break the law" to use the underlying operating system features.
I totally understand that to even develop for this thing costs you &gt;$100/year; maybe I've been using Linux for too long.I very much hate trying to interoperate with the device using Linux (it doesn't; not even a little bit; yes I've tried Wine and all the other native apps; it's not supported).
Total waste of time.
It's a good thing I have a token mac mini as an HTPC or it would be a total wash.I recently needed to piggyback files from one windows computer to another and didn't have a USB key handy.
But here was my iTouch.
Done deal, right?
This should be easy.
Wrong. I couldn't put a zip file on it when mounted via USB, and I couldn't download the file directly from the web using Safari either.
I ended up doing the job with a portable audio recorder, because yes -- even though this device has no reason to support anything but audio and audio metadata files, it didn't actively gun down any attempts to do otherwise.Mobile devices seem to boil down to the same dilemma as on the desktop; you can either use Linux and have the freedom and choice -- which, for now, typically means either a lot less choice or a lot more effort to get things up and running like the state of affairs a decade or more ago; or you can grab your ankles, hand over your credit card and enjoy an overall smoother experience so long as you keep feeding proverbial quarters into the machine.I've been holding out hope that the Nokia N900 comes to Canada in an 850MHz flavour but it looks like I'll be waiting in vain; time to decide whether to suck it up and deal with only EDGE connectivity or consider going to a different flavour of evil/greed from Apple.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415846</id>
	<title>Re:Nintendo?</title>
	<author>Dominic</author>
	<datestamp>1268158560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And how about Microsoft? They are also worse than Apple. While people moan about iPhone development, can anyone tell me how I can develop and distribute XBox software for under 99 dollars, without MS having a number of rules about what my application does?</p><p>Hmm... thought not. People pick on Apple because it has become cool, but almost every other consumer device has similar (or worse) restrictions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And how about Microsoft ?
They are also worse than Apple .
While people moan about iPhone development , can anyone tell me how I can develop and distribute XBox software for under 99 dollars , without MS having a number of rules about what my application does ? Hmm... thought not .
People pick on Apple because it has become cool , but almost every other consumer device has similar ( or worse ) restrictions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And how about Microsoft?
They are also worse than Apple.
While people moan about iPhone development, can anyone tell me how I can develop and distribute XBox software for under 99 dollars, without MS having a number of rules about what my application does?Hmm... thought not.
People pick on Apple because it has become cool, but almost every other consumer device has similar (or worse) restrictions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413480</id>
	<title>What's the big deal?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268149380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not sure what the uproar is about...if you agree to develop apps for Apple's devices, this is the agreement you sign.  If you don't like it, don't make apps for Apple products.</p><p>Am I missing something?  This has nothing at all to do with "My Rights Online"...IMNSHO.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure what the uproar is about...if you agree to develop apps for Apple 's devices , this is the agreement you sign .
If you do n't like it , do n't make apps for Apple products.Am I missing something ?
This has nothing at all to do with " My Rights Online " ...IMNSHO .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure what the uproar is about...if you agree to develop apps for Apple's devices, this is the agreement you sign.
If you don't like it, don't make apps for Apple products.Am I missing something?
This has nothing at all to do with "My Rights Online"...IMNSHO.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414280</id>
	<title>ipod cracked yet?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268152740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Has the ipod 32GB/64GB version (not the nano or whatever other versions exist) been cracked so that it can run Linux (and possibly use android apps)?  I received the 32GB version as a gift and it's sitting in a drawer because I don't use apple products, run Linux, and couldn't get the ipod working when I attempted to "register" it by using the ipod software running on Windows 7 RC as a client in virtualbox.  I'd much prefer to use it with Linux especially if I could use the android apps that are available.  I received it about six months ago, and when I checked then, it really didn't seem possible to run Linux on it at that time, except for an ubuntu solution, who's steps weren't complete so it looked like the ubuntu solution wasn't complete at that time and therefore didn't work.</p><p>Is there interest in cracking an ipod to run Linux and/or Android, especially if the android apps can possibly be used now, or has the Linux community thrown in the towel on ipods and moved on to Android/Google phones?  Thanks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Has the ipod 32GB/64GB version ( not the nano or whatever other versions exist ) been cracked so that it can run Linux ( and possibly use android apps ) ?
I received the 32GB version as a gift and it 's sitting in a drawer because I do n't use apple products , run Linux , and could n't get the ipod working when I attempted to " register " it by using the ipod software running on Windows 7 RC as a client in virtualbox .
I 'd much prefer to use it with Linux especially if I could use the android apps that are available .
I received it about six months ago , and when I checked then , it really did n't seem possible to run Linux on it at that time , except for an ubuntu solution , who 's steps were n't complete so it looked like the ubuntu solution was n't complete at that time and therefore did n't work.Is there interest in cracking an ipod to run Linux and/or Android , especially if the android apps can possibly be used now , or has the Linux community thrown in the towel on ipods and moved on to Android/Google phones ?
Thanks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Has the ipod 32GB/64GB version (not the nano or whatever other versions exist) been cracked so that it can run Linux (and possibly use android apps)?
I received the 32GB version as a gift and it's sitting in a drawer because I don't use apple products, run Linux, and couldn't get the ipod working when I attempted to "register" it by using the ipod software running on Windows 7 RC as a client in virtualbox.
I'd much prefer to use it with Linux especially if I could use the android apps that are available.
I received it about six months ago, and when I checked then, it really didn't seem possible to run Linux on it at that time, except for an ubuntu solution, who's steps weren't complete so it looked like the ubuntu solution wasn't complete at that time and therefore didn't work.Is there interest in cracking an ipod to run Linux and/or Android, especially if the android apps can possibly be used now, or has the Linux community thrown in the towel on ipods and moved on to Android/Google phones?
Thanks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1326217_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1326217_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413640
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413436
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1326217_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31416404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414006
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1326217_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31423828
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415140
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414006
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1326217_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415368
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414006
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1326217_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413848
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1326217_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31426524
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1326217_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413848
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1326217_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415226
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414006
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1326217_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31416324
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414006
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1326217_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31416036
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414006
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1326217_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31416214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1326217_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31422808
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31416784
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1326217_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414006
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1326217_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31416476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414006
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1326217_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413538
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413436
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1326217_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414006
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1326217_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31421084
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1326217_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31417650
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1326217_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31418696
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414006
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1326217_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413566
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413436
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1326217_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413436
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1326217_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414808
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414006
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1326217_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413436
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1326217_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31420886
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414006
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1326217_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414334
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414006
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_1326217.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414306
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415846
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31416214
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31426524
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31421084
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31417650
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_1326217.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414148
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_1326217.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415108
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_1326217.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31416584
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_1326217.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31416784
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31422808
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_1326217.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415864
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_1326217.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413480
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_1326217.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414006
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31416324
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415226
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415140
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415902
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31423828
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31416036
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414824
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415368
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31416404
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414334
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31418696
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415164
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31420886
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414808
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31416476
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_1326217.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413436
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413566
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413552
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413640
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413538
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415878
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_1326217.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415234
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_1326217.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31413848
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31415032
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1326217.31414766
</commentlist>
</conversation>
