<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_05_0517231</id>
	<title>Google Announces Chrome For Mac and Linux Dev Builds</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1244195400000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="mailto:dank@kegel.com" rel="nofollow">Dan Kegel</a>  (who admits to being a Chrome developer) writes to point out a post from Mike Smith and Karen Grunberg, Product Managers for Google Chrome, with some <a href="http://blog.chromium.org/2009/06/danger-mac-and-linux-builds-available.html">good news for non-Windows users who want to play with Chrome</a>: <i>"In order to get more feedback from developers, we have early developer channel versions of Google Chrome for Mac OS X and Linux (for a couple of different Linux distributions), but whatever you do, please DON'T DOWNLOAD THEM! Unless of course you are a developer or take great pleasure in incomplete, unpredictable, and potentially crashing software."</i> (The announcement continues below.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dan Kegel ( who admits to being a Chrome developer ) writes to point out a post from Mike Smith and Karen Grunberg , Product Managers for Google Chrome , with some good news for non-Windows users who want to play with Chrome : " In order to get more feedback from developers , we have early developer channel versions of Google Chrome for Mac OS X and Linux ( for a couple of different Linux distributions ) , but whatever you do , please DO N'T DOWNLOAD THEM !
Unless of course you are a developer or take great pleasure in incomplete , unpredictable , and potentially crashing software .
" ( The announcement continues below .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dan Kegel  (who admits to being a Chrome developer) writes to point out a post from Mike Smith and Karen Grunberg, Product Managers for Google Chrome, with some good news for non-Windows users who want to play with Chrome: "In order to get more feedback from developers, we have early developer channel versions of Google Chrome for Mac OS X and Linux (for a couple of different Linux distributions), but whatever you do, please DON'T DOWNLOAD THEM!
Unless of course you are a developer or take great pleasure in incomplete, unpredictable, and potentially crashing software.
" (The announcement continues below.
)</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222937</id>
	<title>Not a Chrome user I see...</title>
	<author>GameboyRMH</author>
	<datestamp>1244218740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You should give it a try.<br>.<br>The other feature I think should be universally adopted is tab grouping by site, like you can get with the Tab Kit addon for Firefox.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You should give it a try..The other feature I think should be universally adopted is tab grouping by site , like you can get with the Tab Kit addon for Firefox .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You should give it a try..The other feature I think should be universally adopted is tab grouping by site, like you can get with the Tab Kit addon for Firefox.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220229</id>
	<title>CPU Usage...</title>
	<author>PhotoGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1244203440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's why I'm excited about/anxious for Chrome on OS/X:</p><p>I used Firefox for awhile, a couple of years back.  It bogged down the CPU, especially after running for awhile.</p><p>So I switched to Opera (and shortly thereafter went from Windows to OS X).  It was a peppier experience.  But with newer releases, and the increasing use of Flash (I think) on the Net, it started getting slower and slower.  I don't like having my fan run while I'm simply sitting and reading a static page.  Turning off all plugins seems to avoid that, so I point the finger at Flash.  But not having Flash, or only having it on demand, is fairly annoying.  Also, there's some sites Opera just won't render properly.  Not many, but some.</p><p>So I switched back to Firefox, with the advent of 3.0.  Even doing nothing, sitting with a few static pages open (and Adblock, Flashblock) it seems to still hover at 10\% CPU usage.  Bleh.  Enough to keep my fan humming all the time.</p><p>When I tried Chrome on Windows, I was quite excited, with the process-per-page approach.  I can see *what* page is slowing things down, and kill it if I chose.  That's my biggest beef with Opera/Firefox (I won't even let IE into the discussion<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P): you can't tell *what* page is slowing down your browser.  I've tried JavaScript debuggers, other dev tools to try and found out, but have had no success.</p><p>I'm praying that Chrome on OS/X will be my salvation (although I've become dependent upon some Firefox extensions, particularly vimperator<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P).  Upon first glance, it looks pretty good (and I'm using it to post this article).  It seems to suck up 30\% CPU for 20 seconds or so *after* finishing loading a page, but then does settle down.</p><p>Right now I have about 5 tabs open, and each is using 2-3\%, which is slightly concerning.  That could add up to be just as bad as Firefox/Opera.  But for now, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt of being an early release, and keep my fingers crossed that the "Browser That Finally Doesn't Suck [CPU]" is on the horizon...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's why I 'm excited about/anxious for Chrome on OS/X : I used Firefox for awhile , a couple of years back .
It bogged down the CPU , especially after running for awhile.So I switched to Opera ( and shortly thereafter went from Windows to OS X ) .
It was a peppier experience .
But with newer releases , and the increasing use of Flash ( I think ) on the Net , it started getting slower and slower .
I do n't like having my fan run while I 'm simply sitting and reading a static page .
Turning off all plugins seems to avoid that , so I point the finger at Flash .
But not having Flash , or only having it on demand , is fairly annoying .
Also , there 's some sites Opera just wo n't render properly .
Not many , but some.So I switched back to Firefox , with the advent of 3.0 .
Even doing nothing , sitting with a few static pages open ( and Adblock , Flashblock ) it seems to still hover at 10 \ % CPU usage .
Bleh. Enough to keep my fan humming all the time.When I tried Chrome on Windows , I was quite excited , with the process-per-page approach .
I can see * what * page is slowing things down , and kill it if I chose .
That 's my biggest beef with Opera/Firefox ( I wo n't even let IE into the discussion : P ) : you ca n't tell * what * page is slowing down your browser .
I 've tried JavaScript debuggers , other dev tools to try and found out , but have had no success.I 'm praying that Chrome on OS/X will be my salvation ( although I 've become dependent upon some Firefox extensions , particularly vimperator : P ) .
Upon first glance , it looks pretty good ( and I 'm using it to post this article ) .
It seems to suck up 30 \ % CPU for 20 seconds or so * after * finishing loading a page , but then does settle down.Right now I have about 5 tabs open , and each is using 2-3 \ % , which is slightly concerning .
That could add up to be just as bad as Firefox/Opera .
But for now , I 'll give them the benefit of the doubt of being an early release , and keep my fingers crossed that the " Browser That Finally Does n't Suck [ CPU ] " is on the horizon.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's why I'm excited about/anxious for Chrome on OS/X:I used Firefox for awhile, a couple of years back.
It bogged down the CPU, especially after running for awhile.So I switched to Opera (and shortly thereafter went from Windows to OS X).
It was a peppier experience.
But with newer releases, and the increasing use of Flash (I think) on the Net, it started getting slower and slower.
I don't like having my fan run while I'm simply sitting and reading a static page.
Turning off all plugins seems to avoid that, so I point the finger at Flash.
But not having Flash, or only having it on demand, is fairly annoying.
Also, there's some sites Opera just won't render properly.
Not many, but some.So I switched back to Firefox, with the advent of 3.0.
Even doing nothing, sitting with a few static pages open (and Adblock, Flashblock) it seems to still hover at 10\% CPU usage.
Bleh.  Enough to keep my fan humming all the time.When I tried Chrome on Windows, I was quite excited, with the process-per-page approach.
I can see *what* page is slowing things down, and kill it if I chose.
That's my biggest beef with Opera/Firefox (I won't even let IE into the discussion :P): you can't tell *what* page is slowing down your browser.
I've tried JavaScript debuggers, other dev tools to try and found out, but have had no success.I'm praying that Chrome on OS/X will be my salvation (although I've become dependent upon some Firefox extensions, particularly vimperator :P).
Upon first glance, it looks pretty good (and I'm using it to post this article).
It seems to suck up 30\% CPU for 20 seconds or so *after* finishing loading a page, but then does settle down.Right now I have about 5 tabs open, and each is using 2-3\%, which is slightly concerning.
That could add up to be just as bad as Firefox/Opera.
But for now, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt of being an early release, and keep my fingers crossed that the "Browser That Finally Doesn't Suck [CPU]" is on the horizon...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28225243</id>
	<title>Almost done!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244227560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"Meanwhile, we'll get back to trying to get Google Chrome on these platforms stable enough for a beta release as soon as possible<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..."</p></div><p>... at which point, of course, they will be done.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Meanwhile , we 'll get back to trying to get Google Chrome on these platforms stable enough for a beta release as soon as possible ... " ... at which point , of course , they will be done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Meanwhile, we'll get back to trying to get Google Chrome on these platforms stable enough for a beta release as soon as possible ..."... at which point, of course, they will be done.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222927</id>
	<title>Re:Already have Safari, kbyethnx</title>
	<author>everynerd</author>
	<datestamp>1244218680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Mod parent insightful. Safari is a glossy, bloated nightmare.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mod parent insightful .
Safari is a glossy , bloated nightmare .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mod parent insightful.
Safari is a glossy, bloated nightmare.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219867</id>
	<title>Wha...?</title>
	<author>pHus10n</author>
	<datestamp>1244199300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Quote:  "How incomplete? So incomplete that, among other things , you won't yet be able to view YouTube videos, change your privacy settings, set your default search provider, or even print."
<br>
<br>

What the hell did they release?  A box of crayons where you have to draw the Internet <i>manually</i>?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Quote : " How incomplete ?
So incomplete that , among other things , you wo n't yet be able to view YouTube videos , change your privacy settings , set your default search provider , or even print .
" What the hell did they release ?
A box of crayons where you have to draw the Internet manually ?
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Quote:  "How incomplete?
So incomplete that, among other things , you won't yet be able to view YouTube videos, change your privacy settings, set your default search provider, or even print.
"



What the hell did they release?
A box of crayons where you have to draw the Internet manually?
:)
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28224057</id>
	<title>Re:NOT amd64</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244222820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, they really have managed write an javascript engine that isn't 64-bit clean in 2008. Inspiring, isn't it? They try (but fail) to deflect accusations of cluelessness at</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; http://dev.chromium.org/developers/design-documents/64-bit-support</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , they really have managed write an javascript engine that is n't 64-bit clean in 2008 .
Inspiring , is n't it ?
They try ( but fail ) to deflect accusations of cluelessness at     http : //dev.chromium.org/developers/design-documents/64-bit-support</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, they really have managed write an javascript engine that isn't 64-bit clean in 2008.
Inspiring, isn't it?
They try (but fail) to deflect accusations of cluelessness at
    http://dev.chromium.org/developers/design-documents/64-bit-support</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221215</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220427</id>
	<title>Re:Wha...?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244205720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not current on development for the Mac, but I've heard that multiple processes can't share a single window in OS/X.</p><p>Do you happen to know how Chrome works around this, or is this not an actual limitation?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not current on development for the Mac , but I 've heard that multiple processes ca n't share a single window in OS/X.Do you happen to know how Chrome works around this , or is this not an actual limitation ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not current on development for the Mac, but I've heard that multiple processes can't share a single window in OS/X.Do you happen to know how Chrome works around this, or is this not an actual limitation?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220321</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220041</id>
	<title>Re:Wha...?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244201220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>A box of crayons where you have to draw the Internet manually?</p></div><p>Why, that is a <b>fantastic</b> idea!!<br>brb, making Internet Etch-a-Sketch.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A box of crayons where you have to draw the Internet manually ? Why , that is a fantastic idea !
! brb , making Internet Etch-a-Sketch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A box of crayons where you have to draw the Internet manually?Why, that is a fantastic idea!
!brb, making Internet Etch-a-Sketch.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219867</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220981</id>
	<title>Use the repositories</title>
	<author>an.echte.trilingue</author>
	<datestamp>1244209920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am not sure why this is news, actually.  The repository for Chromium has been available for Ubuntu for some time.  Instructions for adding it are here:
<br> <br>
<a href="https://launchpad.net/~chromium-daily/+archive/ppa" title="launchpad.net">https://launchpad.net/~chromium-daily/+archive/ppa</a> [launchpad.net]
<br> <br>
The big advantage to this is that you get the nightly builds automatically every time you update; no need to mess with downloading and installing debs</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am not sure why this is news , actually .
The repository for Chromium has been available for Ubuntu for some time .
Instructions for adding it are here : https : //launchpad.net/ ~ chromium-daily/ + archive/ppa [ launchpad.net ] The big advantage to this is that you get the nightly builds automatically every time you update ; no need to mess with downloading and installing debs</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am not sure why this is news, actually.
The repository for Chromium has been available for Ubuntu for some time.
Instructions for adding it are here:
 
https://launchpad.net/~chromium-daily/+archive/ppa [launchpad.net]
 
The big advantage to this is that you get the nightly builds automatically every time you update; no need to mess with downloading and installing debs</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219875</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220927</id>
	<title>Re:intel only</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244209680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you own a Mac then part of that experience is forking over large amounts of cash to always have the latest gear.  That's Apple's MO.  The upcoming new version of OS X won't run on your computer either.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you own a Mac then part of that experience is forking over large amounts of cash to always have the latest gear .
That 's Apple 's MO .
The upcoming new version of OS X wo n't run on your computer either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you own a Mac then part of that experience is forking over large amounts of cash to always have the latest gear.
That's Apple's MO.
The upcoming new version of OS X won't run on your computer either.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219915</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220913</id>
	<title>Speaking of browser innovation...</title>
	<author>an.echte.trilingue</author>
	<datestamp>1244209560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Speaking of browser innovation, why is it that we still don't have any major browsers that have detachable/retachable tabs?  Konqueror has done this for years: you can right click on an open tab and detach it to its own window, or drag one window into another to consolidate them.
<br> <br>
I personally find this really handy, to the point that I am willing to overlook that several popular javascript libraries (like jQuerry) are buggy in Konqueror which breaks a lot of useful websites (google aps, yahoo mail...)  and I use it anyway.
<br> <br>
Yet none of the other browser people have done this.  Does anybody know why?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Speaking of browser innovation , why is it that we still do n't have any major browsers that have detachable/retachable tabs ?
Konqueror has done this for years : you can right click on an open tab and detach it to its own window , or drag one window into another to consolidate them .
I personally find this really handy , to the point that I am willing to overlook that several popular javascript libraries ( like jQuerry ) are buggy in Konqueror which breaks a lot of useful websites ( google aps , yahoo mail... ) and I use it anyway .
Yet none of the other browser people have done this .
Does anybody know why ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Speaking of browser innovation, why is it that we still don't have any major browsers that have detachable/retachable tabs?
Konqueror has done this for years: you can right click on an open tab and detach it to its own window, or drag one window into another to consolidate them.
I personally find this really handy, to the point that I am willing to overlook that several popular javascript libraries (like jQuerry) are buggy in Konqueror which breaks a lot of useful websites (google aps, yahoo mail...)  and I use it anyway.
Yet none of the other browser people have done this.
Does anybody know why?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219891</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220603</id>
	<title>Re:It's okay</title>
	<author>McDutchie</author>
	<datestamp>1244207100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry for the extra reply. I forgot to recommend <a href="http://caminobrowser.org/" title="caminobrowser.org">Camino</a> [caminobrowser.org] which uses the Gecko rendering engine but is a real Mac application, and has built-in ad blocking.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry for the extra reply .
I forgot to recommend Camino [ caminobrowser.org ] which uses the Gecko rendering engine but is a real Mac application , and has built-in ad blocking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry for the extra reply.
I forgot to recommend Camino [caminobrowser.org] which uses the Gecko rendering engine but is a real Mac application, and has built-in ad blocking.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220125</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220081</id>
	<title>Re:It's okay</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244201580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Even if the rest of that argument (let's not have competition now that the browser I think is good is winning) made sense and all that matters is killing IE, Chrome is an additive force. In a world with only IE and Firefox, if you disliked Firefox, there'd be no alternative. There are people who like Chrome better than Firefox; if your goal is killing IE, that's *more* switchers, even if a bunch also switch back and forth between Firefox and Chrome.</p><p>However, outside of that, there's nothing bad with having many browsers around. What is bad is having many contrary *concepts* around. Chrome didn't drag a new rendering engine in, they used WebKit, which is good. Actually, they used a fork of WebKit, which is bad, but WebKit has been able to handle this stuff by merging in the necessary abstractions in the past.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Even if the rest of that argument ( let 's not have competition now that the browser I think is good is winning ) made sense and all that matters is killing IE , Chrome is an additive force .
In a world with only IE and Firefox , if you disliked Firefox , there 'd be no alternative .
There are people who like Chrome better than Firefox ; if your goal is killing IE , that 's * more * switchers , even if a bunch also switch back and forth between Firefox and Chrome.However , outside of that , there 's nothing bad with having many browsers around .
What is bad is having many contrary * concepts * around .
Chrome did n't drag a new rendering engine in , they used WebKit , which is good .
Actually , they used a fork of WebKit , which is bad , but WebKit has been able to handle this stuff by merging in the necessary abstractions in the past .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even if the rest of that argument (let's not have competition now that the browser I think is good is winning) made sense and all that matters is killing IE, Chrome is an additive force.
In a world with only IE and Firefox, if you disliked Firefox, there'd be no alternative.
There are people who like Chrome better than Firefox; if your goal is killing IE, that's *more* switchers, even if a bunch also switch back and forth between Firefox and Chrome.However, outside of that, there's nothing bad with having many browsers around.
What is bad is having many contrary *concepts* around.
Chrome didn't drag a new rendering engine in, they used WebKit, which is good.
Actually, they used a fork of WebKit, which is bad, but WebKit has been able to handle this stuff by merging in the necessary abstractions in the past.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219905</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28223265</id>
	<title>Re:Works for posting to Slashdot :)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244219940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>9.10 Alpha and 9.04 stable are not the same.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>9.10 Alpha and 9.04 stable are not the same .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>9.10 Alpha and 9.04 stable are not the same.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219915</id>
	<title>intel only</title>
	<author>pbjones</author>
	<datestamp>1244199720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>silly me for thinking that my G5 was good enough</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>silly me for thinking that my G5 was good enough</tokentext>
<sentencetext>silly me for thinking that my G5 was good enough</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28223041</id>
	<title>Re:NOT amd64</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244219100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>V8 (the Javascript engine) is 32-bit only for the moment. It will soon support 64-bit codegen at which point we'll be building real 64-bit binaries. Running 32-bit binaries on modern 64-bit systems sucks, as you've already found out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>V8 ( the Javascript engine ) is 32-bit only for the moment .
It will soon support 64-bit codegen at which point we 'll be building real 64-bit binaries .
Running 32-bit binaries on modern 64-bit systems sucks , as you 've already found out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>V8 (the Javascript engine) is 32-bit only for the moment.
It will soon support 64-bit codegen at which point we'll be building real 64-bit binaries.
Running 32-bit binaries on modern 64-bit systems sucks, as you've already found out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221215</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220917</id>
	<title>Re:It's okay</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244209620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's so bad about Firefox on the Mac? I mean, really? Admittedly I've been using the pre-3.5 betas for a while now, but even before that I didn't have problems with 3.0. Neither did I have problems with 2.x. It eats a lot of memory, but apart from that, no problems.</p><p>The simple answer in terms of your G3 is this - it's old. New stuff will run slow. Deal with it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's so bad about Firefox on the Mac ?
I mean , really ?
Admittedly I 've been using the pre-3.5 betas for a while now , but even before that I did n't have problems with 3.0 .
Neither did I have problems with 2.x .
It eats a lot of memory , but apart from that , no problems.The simple answer in terms of your G3 is this - it 's old .
New stuff will run slow .
Deal with it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's so bad about Firefox on the Mac?
I mean, really?
Admittedly I've been using the pre-3.5 betas for a while now, but even before that I didn't have problems with 3.0.
Neither did I have problems with 2.x.
It eats a lot of memory, but apart from that, no problems.The simple answer in terms of your G3 is this - it's old.
New stuff will run slow.
Deal with it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220125</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222057</id>
	<title>Re:Speaking of browser innovation...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244215260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Safari 4.0 does detachable/retachable tabs on Mac, you don't even have to right-click, just drag</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Safari 4.0 does detachable/retachable tabs on Mac , you do n't even have to right-click , just drag</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Safari 4.0 does detachable/retachable tabs on Mac, you don't even have to right-click, just drag</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220715</id>
	<title>Re:Already have Safari, kbyethnx</title>
	<author>ThePhilips</author>
	<datestamp>1244208180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> And how it doesn't suck then?

</p><p> I'd say that Safari and Chrome are comparable. But setting speed aside, Chrome 2.0 really felt more like 0.2 when compared to FireFox. Long list of missing features, blatantly non-existent integration with Google own on-line applications...

</p><p> I understand the enthusiasm about faster surfing (Chrome is about only browser which can render<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. new layout in near real time), but otherwise they have quite long way before minimalist's feature parity.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And how it does n't suck then ?
I 'd say that Safari and Chrome are comparable .
But setting speed aside , Chrome 2.0 really felt more like 0.2 when compared to FireFox .
Long list of missing features , blatantly non-existent integration with Google own on-line applications.. . I understand the enthusiasm about faster surfing ( Chrome is about only browser which can render / .
new layout in near real time ) , but otherwise they have quite long way before minimalist 's feature parity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> And how it doesn't suck then?
I'd say that Safari and Chrome are comparable.
But setting speed aside, Chrome 2.0 really felt more like 0.2 when compared to FireFox.
Long list of missing features, blatantly non-existent integration with Google own on-line applications...

 I understand the enthusiasm about faster surfing (Chrome is about only browser which can render /.
new layout in near real time), but otherwise they have quite long way before minimalist's feature parity.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220293</id>
	<title>Nice html engine. Pitty about the UI</title>
	<author>vandan</author>
	<datestamp>1244204280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I find the Chrome interface quite revolting. But what's even worse is the <a href="http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev/browse\_thread/thread/b89ab99a0c848b89" title="google.com">psychotic bitchings of Ben Goodger</a> [google.com], former Mozilla developer. My <a href="http://entropy.homelinux.org/blog/?p=227" title="homelinux.org">response to Ben</a> [homelinux.org] discusses the issues he raised.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I find the Chrome interface quite revolting .
But what 's even worse is the psychotic bitchings of Ben Goodger [ google.com ] , former Mozilla developer .
My response to Ben [ homelinux.org ] discusses the issues he raised .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find the Chrome interface quite revolting.
But what's even worse is the psychotic bitchings of Ben Goodger [google.com], former Mozilla developer.
My response to Ben [homelinux.org] discusses the issues he raised.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220341</id>
	<title>Re:Works for posting to Slashdot :)</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1244205000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You've found a browser that actually works with Slashdot? I'm amazed<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 've found a browser that actually works with Slashdot ?
I 'm amazed : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You've found a browser that actually works with Slashdot?
I'm amazed :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219875</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220157</id>
	<title>I Know......</title>
	<author>segedunum</author>
	<datestamp>1244202480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Let's give Dan Kegel even more spam by posting his e-mail address.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's give Dan Kegel even more spam by posting his e-mail address .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's give Dan Kegel even more spam by posting his e-mail address.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220669</id>
	<title>Re:intel only</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244207760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>wow, you knowingly bought a EOL computer and now you're having a whinge it's not supported, nearly 4 years after the last one was sold? wtf mate?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>wow , you knowingly bought a EOL computer and now you 're having a whinge it 's not supported , nearly 4 years after the last one was sold ?
wtf mate ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>wow, you knowingly bought a EOL computer and now you're having a whinge it's not supported, nearly 4 years after the last one was sold?
wtf mate?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219915</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28226323</id>
	<title>quality is job 2.1</title>
	<author>Something Witty Here</author>
	<datestamp>1244232660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; incomplete, unpredictable, and potentially crashing software</p><p>As opposed to other web browsers?  Seriously,<br>when are we going to have a web browser that<br>actually works properly?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; incomplete , unpredictable , and potentially crashing softwareAs opposed to other web browsers ?
Seriously,when are we going to have a web browser thatactually works properly ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; incomplete, unpredictable, and potentially crashing softwareAs opposed to other web browsers?
Seriously,when are we going to have a web browser thatactually works properly?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219875</id>
	<title>Works for posting to Slashdot :)</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1244199360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just installed the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.deb on this laptop, running Ubuntu 9.10 alpha. So far, seems nice and pleasant<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>I seem some rendering problems, but Hey, I blame google!</p><p>timothy</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just installed the .deb on this laptop , running Ubuntu 9.10 alpha .
So far , seems nice and pleasant : ) I seem some rendering problems , but Hey , I blame google ! timothy</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just installed the .deb on this laptop, running Ubuntu 9.10 alpha.
So far, seems nice and pleasant :)I seem some rendering problems, but Hey, I blame google!timothy</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220935</id>
	<title>Re:Chromium (not Google Chrome) already works nice</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244209680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am posting this from Chrome for Ubuntu, and although Webkit and the engine itself is a great experience(after the 50\% CPU usage for the first two minutes), I don't think I will use anything based on this until it gets a Firefox skin.<br>I am sure many people like this useless eyecandy that looks great on their slow candybloat window managers, but I still use Firefox 1.5 style tabs with one close button and 15 minwidth for maximum capacity. Chrome tabs look ugly and slow. Over or under the adress bar doesn't matter that much, just ugliness and bloat. Somebody fix that please.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am posting this from Chrome for Ubuntu , and although Webkit and the engine itself is a great experience ( after the 50 \ % CPU usage for the first two minutes ) , I do n't think I will use anything based on this until it gets a Firefox skin.I am sure many people like this useless eyecandy that looks great on their slow candybloat window managers , but I still use Firefox 1.5 style tabs with one close button and 15 minwidth for maximum capacity .
Chrome tabs look ugly and slow .
Over or under the adress bar does n't matter that much , just ugliness and bloat .
Somebody fix that please .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am posting this from Chrome for Ubuntu, and although Webkit and the engine itself is a great experience(after the 50\% CPU usage for the first two minutes), I don't think I will use anything based on this until it gets a Firefox skin.I am sure many people like this useless eyecandy that looks great on their slow candybloat window managers, but I still use Firefox 1.5 style tabs with one close button and 15 minwidth for maximum capacity.
Chrome tabs look ugly and slow.
Over or under the adress bar doesn't matter that much, just ugliness and bloat.
Somebody fix that please.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219877</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221525</id>
	<title>Re:Wha...?</title>
	<author>palmerj3</author>
	<datestamp>1244212740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Also, no Basic Auth.  Just sits there.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Also , no Basic Auth .
Just sits there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also, no Basic Auth.
Just sits there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220321</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220625</id>
	<title>Re:CPU Usage...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244207340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds like you have other problems. Several million other tech users don't get this CPU issue. You might want to investigate what settings are causing problems, or disabling / removing all plug-ins until you find a guilty party.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like you have other problems .
Several million other tech users do n't get this CPU issue .
You might want to investigate what settings are causing problems , or disabling / removing all plug-ins until you find a guilty party .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like you have other problems.
Several million other tech users don't get this CPU issue.
You might want to investigate what settings are causing problems, or disabling / removing all plug-ins until you find a guilty party.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220229</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221215</id>
	<title>NOT amd64</title>
	<author>uhmmmm</author>
	<datestamp>1244211300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A friend wrote up a Gentoo ebuild for it, which I went and installed (for the amd64 version - I run an almost entirely 64 bit system).  Try to run it, and got this message:</p><p><div class="quote"><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr><tt>/opt/google/chrome/chrome: error while loading shared libraries: libgconf-2.so.4: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory</tt></p> </div><p>That's odd<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... double check<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... yes,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/lib64/libgconf-2.so.4 exists<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... No<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... they couldn't have<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p><div class="quote"><p> <tt>$ file<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/opt/google/chrome/chrome<br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>/opt/google/chrome/chrome: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.6.8, stripped</tt></p> </div><p>*facepalm*</p><p>The 64-bit Chrome is *NOT* 64-bit, and will not run on 64-bit systems which are missing a number of 32-bit libraries.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A friend wrote up a Gentoo ebuild for it , which I went and installed ( for the amd64 version - I run an almost entirely 64 bit system ) .
Try to run it , and got this message : /opt/google/chrome/chrome : error while loading shared libraries : libgconf-2.so.4 : can not open shared object file : No such file or directory That 's odd ... double check ... yes , /usr/lib64/libgconf-2.so.4 exists ... No ... they could n't have ... $ file /opt/google/chrome/chrome /opt/google/chrome/chrome : ELF 32-bit LSB executable , Intel 80386 , version 1 ( SYSV ) , dynamically linked ( uses shared libs ) , for GNU/Linux 2.6.8 , stripped * facepalm * The 64-bit Chrome is * NOT * 64-bit , and will not run on 64-bit systems which are missing a number of 32-bit libraries .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A friend wrote up a Gentoo ebuild for it, which I went and installed (for the amd64 version - I run an almost entirely 64 bit system).
Try to run it, and got this message: /opt/google/chrome/chrome: error while loading shared libraries: libgconf-2.so.4: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory That's odd ... double check ... yes, /usr/lib64/libgconf-2.so.4 exists ... No ... they couldn't have ... $ file /opt/google/chrome/chrome /opt/google/chrome/chrome: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.6.8, stripped *facepalm*The 64-bit Chrome is *NOT* 64-bit, and will not run on 64-bit systems which are missing a number of 32-bit libraries.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221629</id>
	<title>Re:It's okay</title>
	<author>pizzach</author>
	<datestamp>1244213280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Not on a Mac it doesn't. While Fx 3.0 is far better than previous versions on a Mac, it's still pretty poor. And you can't use Fx 3.0 on older Macs at all.</p></div><p>The last version of Safari for Mac OS X 10.3 was 1.3.2 (January 11, 2006).  The last release of the Firefox 2 series for Mac OS X 10.3 was 2.0.20 (20 Dec 2008).  That is a helluva lot of dedication and you just stepped all over it.</p><p>There was a proposal for <a href="http://docs.google.com/View?docid=ddgz99zp\_3f7p24k" title="google.com">the drop of Mac OS X 10.3</a> [google.com] support a long time ago for Firefox 3.  I recommend you read it.  I'll be giving a few quotes below to stress the important parts.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>For Gecko 1.8 there were significantly more Panther testers in the community than there are now. That trend will continue over the next 6 months and almost certainly accelerate when Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard) is released. By the time we release Gecko 1.9, I suspect that our community Panther testing resources will be so small as to be nearly insignificant.</p></div><p>I think you can guess how small a minority of a minority is.  At that time, Omnigroup was was estimating "2\% of their users were on Panther at the end of 2006."  I wonder what that percent is now in 2009?  Instead of supporting 10 people on Mac OS X 10.3, I would rather have the Mozilla folks focusing on making the experience better for versions that actually have users. The development team only has so many resources to use.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not on a Mac it does n't .
While Fx 3.0 is far better than previous versions on a Mac , it 's still pretty poor .
And you ca n't use Fx 3.0 on older Macs at all.The last version of Safari for Mac OS X 10.3 was 1.3.2 ( January 11 , 2006 ) .
The last release of the Firefox 2 series for Mac OS X 10.3 was 2.0.20 ( 20 Dec 2008 ) .
That is a helluva lot of dedication and you just stepped all over it.There was a proposal for the drop of Mac OS X 10.3 [ google.com ] support a long time ago for Firefox 3 .
I recommend you read it .
I 'll be giving a few quotes below to stress the important parts.For Gecko 1.8 there were significantly more Panther testers in the community than there are now .
That trend will continue over the next 6 months and almost certainly accelerate when Mac OS X 10.5 ( Leopard ) is released .
By the time we release Gecko 1.9 , I suspect that our community Panther testing resources will be so small as to be nearly insignificant.I think you can guess how small a minority of a minority is .
At that time , Omnigroup was was estimating " 2 \ % of their users were on Panther at the end of 2006 .
" I wonder what that percent is now in 2009 ?
Instead of supporting 10 people on Mac OS X 10.3 , I would rather have the Mozilla folks focusing on making the experience better for versions that actually have users .
The development team only has so many resources to use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not on a Mac it doesn't.
While Fx 3.0 is far better than previous versions on a Mac, it's still pretty poor.
And you can't use Fx 3.0 on older Macs at all.The last version of Safari for Mac OS X 10.3 was 1.3.2 (January 11, 2006).
The last release of the Firefox 2 series for Mac OS X 10.3 was 2.0.20 (20 Dec 2008).
That is a helluva lot of dedication and you just stepped all over it.There was a proposal for the drop of Mac OS X 10.3 [google.com] support a long time ago for Firefox 3.
I recommend you read it.
I'll be giving a few quotes below to stress the important parts.For Gecko 1.8 there were significantly more Panther testers in the community than there are now.
That trend will continue over the next 6 months and almost certainly accelerate when Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard) is released.
By the time we release Gecko 1.9, I suspect that our community Panther testing resources will be so small as to be nearly insignificant.I think you can guess how small a minority of a minority is.
At that time, Omnigroup was was estimating "2\% of their users were on Panther at the end of 2006.
"  I wonder what that percent is now in 2009?
Instead of supporting 10 people on Mac OS X 10.3, I would rather have the Mozilla folks focusing on making the experience better for versions that actually have users.
The development team only has so many resources to use.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220125</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220597</id>
	<title>Re:Wha...?</title>
	<author>IBBoard</author>
	<datestamp>1244207100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>What Doesn't Work</p><p>* Plugins (No flash -&gt; No youtube)</p></div></blockquote><p>Hurrah! They've implemented an even more effective Flash stopper than FlashBlock<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:) Now if only they had generic RPMs for it for us Fedora/openSuse/other users.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What Does n't Work * Plugins ( No flash - &gt; No youtube ) Hurrah !
They 've implemented an even more effective Flash stopper than FlashBlock : ) Now if only they had generic RPMs for it for us Fedora/openSuse/other users .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What Doesn't Work* Plugins (No flash -&gt; No youtube)Hurrah!
They've implemented an even more effective Flash stopper than FlashBlock :) Now if only they had generic RPMs for it for us Fedora/openSuse/other users.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220321</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220129</id>
	<title>Still mad at Google</title>
	<author>bogaboga</author>
	<datestamp>1244202120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Trust me, I admire Google. But I am mad at them for using the  "wrong"  toolkit in developing Chrome for Linux. Slashdotters, this is *my* opinion having used both toolkits and deployed software though not as complex as a browser on all operating systems.</p><p>And I have at least one <a href="http://www.purinchu.net/wp/2009/02/15/google-chrome/" title="purinchu.net" rel="nofollow"> supporter </a> [purinchu.net] on this front.</p><p>What they should have done is to fund development of Chrome using the "right" tool for the job. What would be wrong with that?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Trust me , I admire Google .
But I am mad at them for using the " wrong " toolkit in developing Chrome for Linux .
Slashdotters , this is * my * opinion having used both toolkits and deployed software though not as complex as a browser on all operating systems.And I have at least one supporter [ purinchu.net ] on this front.What they should have done is to fund development of Chrome using the " right " tool for the job .
What would be wrong with that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Trust me, I admire Google.
But I am mad at them for using the  "wrong"  toolkit in developing Chrome for Linux.
Slashdotters, this is *my* opinion having used both toolkits and deployed software though not as complex as a browser on all operating systems.And I have at least one  supporter  [purinchu.net] on this front.What they should have done is to fund development of Chrome using the "right" tool for the job.
What would be wrong with that?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219973</id>
	<title>mac version only intel</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244200440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess it makes sense if you want exceptionally fast javascript, but still disappointing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess it makes sense if you want exceptionally fast javascript , but still disappointing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess it makes sense if you want exceptionally fast javascript, but still disappointing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220483</id>
	<title>Pretty happy with Firefox at the moment</title>
	<author>erroneus</author>
	<datestamp>1244206140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Using the Fedora Linux here and have been for a rather long time.  I am very much "anti-advertiser" simply because they have a huge propensity to "go too far" with their advertising and data collection.  (I have nothing against advertising when it comes to respectful means that the customer seeks out for himself.)  Google, for everything else they do in terms of evolving the internet technologies, is still an advertiser.  I don't trust them.  I can't imagine why anyone else would either.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Using the Fedora Linux here and have been for a rather long time .
I am very much " anti-advertiser " simply because they have a huge propensity to " go too far " with their advertising and data collection .
( I have nothing against advertising when it comes to respectful means that the customer seeks out for himself .
) Google , for everything else they do in terms of evolving the internet technologies , is still an advertiser .
I do n't trust them .
I ca n't imagine why anyone else would either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Using the Fedora Linux here and have been for a rather long time.
I am very much "anti-advertiser" simply because they have a huge propensity to "go too far" with their advertising and data collection.
(I have nothing against advertising when it comes to respectful means that the customer seeks out for himself.
)  Google, for everything else they do in terms of evolving the internet technologies, is still an advertiser.
I don't trust them.
I can't imagine why anyone else would either.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220105</id>
	<title>Of course I do!</title>
	<author>metacell</author>
	<datestamp>1244201880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"[...]but whatever you do, please DON'T DOWNLOAD THEM! Unless of course you are a developer or take great pleasure in incomplete, unpredictable, and potentially crashing software."</p><p>Of course I do. I used Windows 95 for years!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" [ ... ] but whatever you do , please DO N'T DOWNLOAD THEM !
Unless of course you are a developer or take great pleasure in incomplete , unpredictable , and potentially crashing software .
" Of course I do .
I used Windows 95 for years !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"[...]but whatever you do, please DON'T DOWNLOAD THEM!
Unless of course you are a developer or take great pleasure in incomplete, unpredictable, and potentially crashing software.
"Of course I do.
I used Windows 95 for years!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220915</id>
	<title>Broad generalizations but the point stands</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244209560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Besides, that is just an excuse to anyone browsing Slashdot. I understand that my grandmother can't do that but the folks here should be able to download some local proxy (Privoxy is lightweight and works on multiple platforms) that can be configured to block ads. If they really would otherwise want to use chrome but didn't because of adblock, they could work around it.</p><p>People on Slashdot complaining "I don't use product X because of Y" remind me of people signing petitions or joining facebook groups about boycotting some company from which they wouldn't have bought products anyways.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Besides , that is just an excuse to anyone browsing Slashdot .
I understand that my grandmother ca n't do that but the folks here should be able to download some local proxy ( Privoxy is lightweight and works on multiple platforms ) that can be configured to block ads .
If they really would otherwise want to use chrome but did n't because of adblock , they could work around it.People on Slashdot complaining " I do n't use product X because of Y " remind me of people signing petitions or joining facebook groups about boycotting some company from which they would n't have bought products anyways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Besides, that is just an excuse to anyone browsing Slashdot.
I understand that my grandmother can't do that but the folks here should be able to download some local proxy (Privoxy is lightweight and works on multiple platforms) that can be configured to block ads.
If they really would otherwise want to use chrome but didn't because of adblock, they could work around it.People on Slashdot complaining "I don't use product X because of Y" remind me of people signing petitions or joining facebook groups about boycotting some company from which they wouldn't have bought products anyways.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219909</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28248313</id>
	<title>Re:Distro support is abysmal</title>
	<author>IBBoard</author>
	<datestamp>1244453220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you're still running 32-bit then you <i>may</i> be able to download the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.deb, open it with File Roller, open the data.tar.gz file inside, extract<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/opt to wherever you want, sym-link the main executable to a bin folder, and run it.</p><p>Unfortunately the 64-bit<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.deb is a 32-bit app, so I just get "bad ELF interpreter: No such file or directory" then "error while loading shared libraries: libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory" after installing the i686 glibc, and so on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're still running 32-bit then you may be able to download the .deb , open it with File Roller , open the data.tar.gz file inside , extract /opt to wherever you want , sym-link the main executable to a bin folder , and run it.Unfortunately the 64-bit .deb is a 32-bit app , so I just get " bad ELF interpreter : No such file or directory " then " error while loading shared libraries : libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0 : can not open shared object file : No such file or directory " after installing the i686 glibc , and so on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're still running 32-bit then you may be able to download the .deb, open it with File Roller, open the data.tar.gz file inside, extract /opt to wherever you want, sym-link the main executable to a bin folder, and run it.Unfortunately the 64-bit .deb is a 32-bit app, so I just get "bad ELF interpreter: No such file or directory" then "error while loading shared libraries: libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory" after installing the i686 glibc, and so on.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220079</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28251925</id>
	<title>Re:Works for posting to Slashdot :)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244480760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"(By the way, you can upgrade to regular Jaunty. There's no need to keep the Alpha.)"</p><p>Your parent said 9.10, not 9.04. That's Karmic Koala.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" ( By the way , you can upgrade to regular Jaunty .
There 's no need to keep the Alpha .
) " Your parent said 9.10 , not 9.04 .
That 's Karmic Koala .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"(By the way, you can upgrade to regular Jaunty.
There's no need to keep the Alpha.
)"Your parent said 9.10, not 9.04.
That's Karmic Koala.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222069</id>
	<title>Re:CPU Usage...</title>
	<author>cbhacking</author>
	<datestamp>1244215320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For the record, IE8 (even the first beta) used multiple processes to handle tabs. It doesn't have Chrome's nice "Task Manger" interface, but you can fairly easily tell which tab is slowing things down (by cycling through them, if nothing else) and can kill a slow or even completely hung tab without brining down the rest of the browser. I'm not sure which of Chrome and IE8 had this idea first (or if they got it from some common source) but it's a good one and could stand to be copied widely. Firefox in particular still completely explodes if any tab (or the UI, or the freaking download manager even) crashes - it's all a single process.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For the record , IE8 ( even the first beta ) used multiple processes to handle tabs .
It does n't have Chrome 's nice " Task Manger " interface , but you can fairly easily tell which tab is slowing things down ( by cycling through them , if nothing else ) and can kill a slow or even completely hung tab without brining down the rest of the browser .
I 'm not sure which of Chrome and IE8 had this idea first ( or if they got it from some common source ) but it 's a good one and could stand to be copied widely .
Firefox in particular still completely explodes if any tab ( or the UI , or the freaking download manager even ) crashes - it 's all a single process .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For the record, IE8 (even the first beta) used multiple processes to handle tabs.
It doesn't have Chrome's nice "Task Manger" interface, but you can fairly easily tell which tab is slowing things down (by cycling through them, if nothing else) and can kill a slow or even completely hung tab without brining down the rest of the browser.
I'm not sure which of Chrome and IE8 had this idea first (or if they got it from some common source) but it's a good one and could stand to be copied widely.
Firefox in particular still completely explodes if any tab (or the UI, or the freaking download manager even) crashes - it's all a single process.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220229</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28224757</id>
	<title>Dept. of Redundancy Dept.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244225520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Unless of course you are a developer or take great pleasure in incomplete, unpredictable, and potentially crashing software.</p></div></blockquote><p>Considering they are already running OSX or Teh Lunix, that should be a given.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unless of course you are a developer or take great pleasure in incomplete , unpredictable , and potentially crashing software.Considering they are already running OSX or Teh Lunix , that should be a given .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unless of course you are a developer or take great pleasure in incomplete, unpredictable, and potentially crashing software.Considering they are already running OSX or Teh Lunix, that should be a given.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219867</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221001</id>
	<title>Re:Chromium (not Google Chrome) already works nice</title>
	<author>splict</author>
	<datestamp>1244210040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For those okay with using a browser which is under heavy development, <a href="http://www.twotoasts.de/" title="twotoasts.de" rel="nofollow">Midori</a> [twotoasts.de] is another great option.</p><p>It's my main browser on my eeepc for its RAM savings and it has been great. I've been using the <a href="https://launchpad.net/~midori/+archive/ppa" title="launchpad.net" rel="nofollow">PPA</a> [launchpad.net] (note you also need the <a href="https://launchpad.net/~webkit-team/+archive/ppa" title="launchpad.net" rel="nofollow">Webkit PPA</a> [launchpad.net] in Ubuntu 9.04 and has been very stable. Many features are missing, however, it is maturing very quickly. Keep firefox around, though, as Midori has had issues with a few sites.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For those okay with using a browser which is under heavy development , Midori [ twotoasts.de ] is another great option.It 's my main browser on my eeepc for its RAM savings and it has been great .
I 've been using the PPA [ launchpad.net ] ( note you also need the Webkit PPA [ launchpad.net ] in Ubuntu 9.04 and has been very stable .
Many features are missing , however , it is maturing very quickly .
Keep firefox around , though , as Midori has had issues with a few sites .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For those okay with using a browser which is under heavy development, Midori [twotoasts.de] is another great option.It's my main browser on my eeepc for its RAM savings and it has been great.
I've been using the PPA [launchpad.net] (note you also need the Webkit PPA [launchpad.net] in Ubuntu 9.04 and has been very stable.
Many features are missing, however, it is maturing very quickly.
Keep firefox around, though, as Midori has had issues with a few sites.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219877</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220063</id>
	<title>Re:repo</title>
	<author>sveard</author>
	<datestamp>1244201340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Okay, never mind my previous post</p><p>Knowing Google, they did things differently and added<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/etc/chron.daily/google-chrome which has the deb line and the signing key</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Okay , never mind my previous postKnowing Google , they did things differently and added /etc/chron.daily/google-chrome which has the deb line and the signing key</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Okay, never mind my previous postKnowing Google, they did things differently and added /etc/chron.daily/google-chrome which has the deb line and the signing key</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220037</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28223879</id>
	<title>The Chrominator is back!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244222160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Chrominator is back!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Chrominator is back ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Chrominator is back!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28291561</id>
	<title>Re:Irony</title>
	<author>pavithran</author>
	<datestamp>1244726280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have to search google + chrome + linux for getting it . Anyways it was a sour experience cause my chrome install wont even open *a* page<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have to search google + chrome + linux for getting it .
Anyways it was a sour experience cause my chrome install wont even open * a * page : (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have to search google + chrome + linux for getting it .
Anyways it was a sour experience cause my chrome install wont even open *a* page :(</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220907</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222957</id>
	<title>... for a couple of different Linux distributions</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244218800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So long as your distribution is spelled U.B.U.N.T.U</p><p>For everyone else: FUCK OFF!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So long as your distribution is spelled U.B.U.N.T.UFor everyone else : FUCK OFF !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So long as your distribution is spelled U.B.U.N.T.UFor everyone else: FUCK OFF!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220039</id>
	<title>Re:It's okay</title>
	<author>LinuxAndLube</author>
	<datestamp>1244201160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They are not eliminating the competition. They are replacing it with their own baby, that's all. Bye bye, Mozilla...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They are not eliminating the competition .
They are replacing it with their own baby , that 's all .
Bye bye , Mozilla.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They are not eliminating the competition.
They are replacing it with their own baby, that's all.
Bye bye, Mozilla...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219905</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221097</id>
	<title>Re:Distro support is abysmal</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244210700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>LOL, sorry but RPM was never a good format.  The world has chosen and it's Debian.</p><p>My Debian based systems have a little program called 'alien' that lets me install RPM's and such.  Are you telling me that Redhat based distros are so piss-poor that you have nothing that will install a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.deb package?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>LOL , sorry but RPM was never a good format .
The world has chosen and it 's Debian.My Debian based systems have a little program called 'alien ' that lets me install RPM 's and such .
Are you telling me that Redhat based distros are so piss-poor that you have nothing that will install a .deb package ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>LOL, sorry but RPM was never a good format.
The world has chosen and it's Debian.My Debian based systems have a little program called 'alien' that lets me install RPM's and such.
Are you telling me that Redhat based distros are so piss-poor that you have nothing that will install a .deb package?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220059</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219909</id>
	<title>Cue the "not using until it has adblock" posts</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244199720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Cue the "not using until it has adblock" posts in 3<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... 2<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... 1<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...

Seriously, nobody cares if you are not using, no need to repeat it every time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Cue the " not using until it has adblock " posts in 3 ... 2 ... 1 .. . Seriously , nobody cares if you are not using , no need to repeat it every time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cue the "not using until it has adblock" posts in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ...

Seriously, nobody cares if you are not using, no need to repeat it every time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219863</id>
	<title>Already have Safari, kbyethnx</title>
	<author>The Nipponese</author>
	<datestamp>1244199240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why would I need this? I already have a webkit browser with tabs on top.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would I need this ?
I already have a webkit browser with tabs on top .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would I need this?
I already have a webkit browser with tabs on top.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219959</id>
	<title>How does this differ?</title>
	<author>acb</author>
	<datestamp>1244200260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How does this differ from <a href="https://launchpad.net/~chromium-daily" title="launchpad.net">the Chromium daily builds</a> [launchpad.net]? Is it identical only officially a Google product, or are there technical differences?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How does this differ from the Chromium daily builds [ launchpad.net ] ?
Is it identical only officially a Google product , or are there technical differences ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How does this differ from the Chromium daily builds [launchpad.net]?
Is it identical only officially a Google product, or are there technical differences?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220545</id>
	<title>My prediction</title>
	<author>Starlon</author>
	<datestamp>1244206740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My computer's all black. I don't want any Chrome. I wonder how they're going to do automatic updates in Linux.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My computer 's all black .
I do n't want any Chrome .
I wonder how they 're going to do automatic updates in Linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My computer's all black.
I don't want any Chrome.
I wonder how they're going to do automatic updates in Linux.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28230893</id>
	<title>Random Mac Question</title>
	<author>drew</author>
	<datestamp>1244321160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As somebody relatively new to the Mac world, I have a random question.  Given how standardized all of the other Meta key commands seem to be from one application to the next, why can't any two programs agree on the same key combination to switch tabs?</p><p>Chrome uses Meta+Alt+Arrow.  Safari uses Meta+Shift+{}.  Firefox uses Ctrl+Tab.  Coming from a non-Mac background, Firefox is the only one that makes any sense to me, although I'll admit it's a little odd in that it is the only one that doesn't use the Meta key.  And it's a little hard to keep that straight with Meta+Tab / Meta + `.  But at least it doesn't require double chording or taking my hand off the mouse.</p><p>But really, can't you guys just all agree on the one true way and be done with it?  Must I be condemned to constantly hit the wrong key combination every time I switch windows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As somebody relatively new to the Mac world , I have a random question .
Given how standardized all of the other Meta key commands seem to be from one application to the next , why ca n't any two programs agree on the same key combination to switch tabs ? Chrome uses Meta + Alt + Arrow .
Safari uses Meta + Shift + { } .
Firefox uses Ctrl + Tab .
Coming from a non-Mac background , Firefox is the only one that makes any sense to me , although I 'll admit it 's a little odd in that it is the only one that does n't use the Meta key .
And it 's a little hard to keep that straight with Meta + Tab / Meta + ` .
But at least it does n't require double chording or taking my hand off the mouse.But really , ca n't you guys just all agree on the one true way and be done with it ?
Must I be condemned to constantly hit the wrong key combination every time I switch windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As somebody relatively new to the Mac world, I have a random question.
Given how standardized all of the other Meta key commands seem to be from one application to the next, why can't any two programs agree on the same key combination to switch tabs?Chrome uses Meta+Alt+Arrow.
Safari uses Meta+Shift+{}.
Firefox uses Ctrl+Tab.
Coming from a non-Mac background, Firefox is the only one that makes any sense to me, although I'll admit it's a little odd in that it is the only one that doesn't use the Meta key.
And it's a little hard to keep that straight with Meta+Tab / Meta + `.
But at least it doesn't require double chording or taking my hand off the mouse.But really, can't you guys just all agree on the one true way and be done with it?
Must I be condemned to constantly hit the wrong key combination every time I switch windows.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28223921</id>
	<title>Re:Wha...?</title>
	<author>dzfoo</author>
	<datestamp>1244222280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt; <i>What the hell did they release? A box of crayons where you have to draw the Internet manually? </i></p><p>Yes, at least for the Mac.  The linux version is a wrench, a screwdriver and a roll of duck tape, where you have to <i>build</i> the Internet yourself.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; -dZ.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; What the hell did they release ?
A box of crayons where you have to draw the Internet manually ?
Yes , at least for the Mac .
The linux version is a wrench , a screwdriver and a roll of duck tape , where you have to build the Internet yourself .
        -dZ .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt; What the hell did they release?
A box of crayons where you have to draw the Internet manually?
Yes, at least for the Mac.
The linux version is a wrench, a screwdriver and a roll of duck tape, where you have to build the Internet yourself.
        -dZ.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219867</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221267</id>
	<title>Re:It's okay</title>
	<author>plover</author>
	<datestamp>1244211540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
And why do you think Google is interested in preserving Firefox as an end goal?  They are not a non-profit foundation.  They are much more like Microsoft or Apple: they want to make money.
</p><p>
One potential way to make money is to control the internet content all the way through end-user delivery.  It may enable some things that seem otherwise impossible:  delivering protected copyrighted content, for example.  If they offered a browser that wouldn't let you save YouTube streams, then maybe the RIAA would let them display music videos.  Maybe book publishers would let them display Google Books along a Kindle model.  Or maybe Google has a workable micro-payment system in place that depends on the browser not spoofing the for-pay site.  Or maybe they just want to make sure that Google AdSense and google-analytics can't be blocked by the end users.
</p><p>
A "non-trustable" browser (like Firefox with all its Greasemonkey scripts and Noscript and AdBlock etc.) can't offer the rights-holders enough assurance that they can deliver their data without it being copied.  Chrome may be the guarantee that lets them make money.
</p><p>
Before another DRM flamewar erupts, I'm not saying that Chrome can technically offer any more magic solutions than CSS or copy-protected diskettes or any of a thousand other failed DRM schemes.  But like Apple's Fair Play, it might be "enough" protection to convince the copyright holders to distribute their content through Google's tubes.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And why do you think Google is interested in preserving Firefox as an end goal ?
They are not a non-profit foundation .
They are much more like Microsoft or Apple : they want to make money .
One potential way to make money is to control the internet content all the way through end-user delivery .
It may enable some things that seem otherwise impossible : delivering protected copyrighted content , for example .
If they offered a browser that would n't let you save YouTube streams , then maybe the RIAA would let them display music videos .
Maybe book publishers would let them display Google Books along a Kindle model .
Or maybe Google has a workable micro-payment system in place that depends on the browser not spoofing the for-pay site .
Or maybe they just want to make sure that Google AdSense and google-analytics ca n't be blocked by the end users .
A " non-trustable " browser ( like Firefox with all its Greasemonkey scripts and Noscript and AdBlock etc .
) ca n't offer the rights-holders enough assurance that they can deliver their data without it being copied .
Chrome may be the guarantee that lets them make money .
Before another DRM flamewar erupts , I 'm not saying that Chrome can technically offer any more magic solutions than CSS or copy-protected diskettes or any of a thousand other failed DRM schemes .
But like Apple 's Fair Play , it might be " enough " protection to convince the copyright holders to distribute their content through Google 's tubes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
And why do you think Google is interested in preserving Firefox as an end goal?
They are not a non-profit foundation.
They are much more like Microsoft or Apple: they want to make money.
One potential way to make money is to control the internet content all the way through end-user delivery.
It may enable some things that seem otherwise impossible:  delivering protected copyrighted content, for example.
If they offered a browser that wouldn't let you save YouTube streams, then maybe the RIAA would let them display music videos.
Maybe book publishers would let them display Google Books along a Kindle model.
Or maybe Google has a workable micro-payment system in place that depends on the browser not spoofing the for-pay site.
Or maybe they just want to make sure that Google AdSense and google-analytics can't be blocked by the end users.
A "non-trustable" browser (like Firefox with all its Greasemonkey scripts and Noscript and AdBlock etc.
) can't offer the rights-holders enough assurance that they can deliver their data without it being copied.
Chrome may be the guarantee that lets them make money.
Before another DRM flamewar erupts, I'm not saying that Chrome can technically offer any more magic solutions than CSS or copy-protected diskettes or any of a thousand other failed DRM schemes.
But like Apple's Fair Play, it might be "enough" protection to convince the copyright holders to distribute their content through Google's tubes.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219905</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221213</id>
	<title>Re:intel only</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1244211240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, it doesn't run on my Abacus, either. That's fucking ridiculous, yo.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , it does n't run on my Abacus , either .
That 's fucking ridiculous , yo .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, it doesn't run on my Abacus, either.
That's fucking ridiculous, yo.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219915</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220559</id>
	<title>Re:intel only</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1244206860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Doesn't support my 68060 either<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does n't support my 68060 either : (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doesn't support my 68060 either :(</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219915</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222241</id>
	<title>Safari crashes with Flash a lot</title>
	<author>yabos</author>
	<datestamp>1244216160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't know if you've noticed but Flash tends to crash Safari all the time.  If it can now only crash a single tab instead of the whole browser due to separate processes for each tab then that would be great.  I hope Apple follows suit with Safari.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know if you 've noticed but Flash tends to crash Safari all the time .
If it can now only crash a single tab instead of the whole browser due to separate processes for each tab then that would be great .
I hope Apple follows suit with Safari .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know if you've noticed but Flash tends to crash Safari all the time.
If it can now only crash a single tab instead of the whole browser due to separate processes for each tab then that would be great.
I hope Apple follows suit with Safari.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219863</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28224729</id>
	<title>Re:Works for posting to Slashdot :)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244225340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not good if you're looking at porn, and you don't want your wife to know after you've left<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not good if you 're looking at porn , and you do n't want your wife to know after you 've left : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not good if you're looking at porn, and you don't want your wife to know after you've left :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221351</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219893</id>
	<title>Re:Already have Safari, kbyethnx</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244199480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Webkit + tabs on top. Those are the only important factors to you? No wonder you bought a Mac.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Webkit + tabs on top .
Those are the only important factors to you ?
No wonder you bought a Mac .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Webkit + tabs on top.
Those are the only important factors to you?
No wonder you bought a Mac.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219863</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222817</id>
	<title>A quick look</title>
	<author>99BottlesOfBeerInMyF</author>
	<datestamp>1244218380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, the other day I tried out the new Opera on OS X, so I might as well give Chrome a spin. It scores 100 on ACID3, although it does say the linktest failed. The javascript performance is quite good, beating even the Webkit nightly 846 to 963. To give you some reference here the Safari beta 4 gets 7223 and regular Safari does 3144, so we're seeing javascript running 3 times as fast as the fastest of the currently, stable browsers and actually faster than anything else in development I've tested (although not by a lot). Sadly, Chrome does not use the native text handling so it does not currently use the native spellchecking, but a separate one. It can't use the built in grammar checker or dictionary/thesaurus or other cool services in OS X. It can, by default, resize text fields though, so that's a plus. Basically, it isn't there yet for an everyday browser, but it has a lot of potential.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , the other day I tried out the new Opera on OS X , so I might as well give Chrome a spin .
It scores 100 on ACID3 , although it does say the linktest failed .
The javascript performance is quite good , beating even the Webkit nightly 846 to 963 .
To give you some reference here the Safari beta 4 gets 7223 and regular Safari does 3144 , so we 're seeing javascript running 3 times as fast as the fastest of the currently , stable browsers and actually faster than anything else in development I 've tested ( although not by a lot ) .
Sadly , Chrome does not use the native text handling so it does not currently use the native spellchecking , but a separate one .
It ca n't use the built in grammar checker or dictionary/thesaurus or other cool services in OS X. It can , by default , resize text fields though , so that 's a plus .
Basically , it is n't there yet for an everyday browser , but it has a lot of potential .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, the other day I tried out the new Opera on OS X, so I might as well give Chrome a spin.
It scores 100 on ACID3, although it does say the linktest failed.
The javascript performance is quite good, beating even the Webkit nightly 846 to 963.
To give you some reference here the Safari beta 4 gets 7223 and regular Safari does 3144, so we're seeing javascript running 3 times as fast as the fastest of the currently, stable browsers and actually faster than anything else in development I've tested (although not by a lot).
Sadly, Chrome does not use the native text handling so it does not currently use the native spellchecking, but a separate one.
It can't use the built in grammar checker or dictionary/thesaurus or other cool services in OS X. It can, by default, resize text fields though, so that's a plus.
Basically, it isn't there yet for an everyday browser, but it has a lot of potential.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28225963</id>
	<title>Re:CPU Usage...</title>
	<author>sootman</author>
	<datestamp>1244230860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When Chrome came out, I was excited. Being a Mac user, though, I knew I'd have to wait. Then Safari 4 Beta came out, and it is quite fast (my main desire) and overall it kicks quite a bit of ass. You should check it out. I just hope <a href="http://swedishcampground.com/safari-4-hidden-preferences" title="swedishcampground.com">these hidden preferences</a> [swedishcampground.com] are still available in the final build.</p><p>Hmm... will Safari 4 (final) be announced at next weeks' WWDC?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When Chrome came out , I was excited .
Being a Mac user , though , I knew I 'd have to wait .
Then Safari 4 Beta came out , and it is quite fast ( my main desire ) and overall it kicks quite a bit of ass .
You should check it out .
I just hope these hidden preferences [ swedishcampground.com ] are still available in the final build.Hmm... will Safari 4 ( final ) be announced at next weeks ' WWDC ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When Chrome came out, I was excited.
Being a Mac user, though, I knew I'd have to wait.
Then Safari 4 Beta came out, and it is quite fast (my main desire) and overall it kicks quite a bit of ass.
You should check it out.
I just hope these hidden preferences [swedishcampground.com] are still available in the final build.Hmm... will Safari 4 (final) be announced at next weeks' WWDC?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220229</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221241</id>
	<title>Re:Still mad at Google</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1244211420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It would have been smarter to use Qt than to have very Windows- and Mac- customized ports, and then you would have got a Linux port for free. You can use QGtkStyle (included in Qt 4.5, but you can run it yourself now) to make Qt apps look like GTK ones.</p><p>This seems kind of retarded because Google Gadgets is already GTK and Qt. Obviously they didn't build a GUI abstraction layer then, and reinvented the wheel then (with Qt and GTK+ versions.) So now they will do it all again for Chrome. I guess someone should explain to Google about code and component reuse.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It would have been smarter to use Qt than to have very Windows- and Mac- customized ports , and then you would have got a Linux port for free .
You can use QGtkStyle ( included in Qt 4.5 , but you can run it yourself now ) to make Qt apps look like GTK ones.This seems kind of retarded because Google Gadgets is already GTK and Qt .
Obviously they did n't build a GUI abstraction layer then , and reinvented the wheel then ( with Qt and GTK + versions .
) So now they will do it all again for Chrome .
I guess someone should explain to Google about code and component reuse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would have been smarter to use Qt than to have very Windows- and Mac- customized ports, and then you would have got a Linux port for free.
You can use QGtkStyle (included in Qt 4.5, but you can run it yourself now) to make Qt apps look like GTK ones.This seems kind of retarded because Google Gadgets is already GTK and Qt.
Obviously they didn't build a GUI abstraction layer then, and reinvented the wheel then (with Qt and GTK+ versions.
) So now they will do it all again for Chrome.
I guess someone should explain to Google about code and component reuse.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220129</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220211</id>
	<title>adblock...</title>
	<author>zoso</author>
	<datestamp>1244203200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well there is already Chromium for Linux and it contains adblock preinstalled which obviously original Chrome won't have.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well there is already Chromium for Linux and it contains adblock preinstalled which obviously original Chrome wo n't have .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well there is already Chromium for Linux and it contains adblock preinstalled which obviously original Chrome won't have.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220397</id>
	<title>Does the job?</title>
	<author>rxmd</author>
	<datestamp>1244205480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would bet that while you can't print, view YouTube videos or change your privacy settings yet, the core functionality of aggregating data about the user's browsing behaviour and sending it to Google with a uniquely identifiable ID is firmly in place.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would bet that while you ca n't print , view YouTube videos or change your privacy settings yet , the core functionality of aggregating data about the user 's browsing behaviour and sending it to Google with a uniquely identifiable ID is firmly in place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would bet that while you can't print, view YouTube videos or change your privacy settings yet, the core functionality of aggregating data about the user's browsing behaviour and sending it to Google with a uniquely identifiable ID is firmly in place.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220233</id>
	<title>FpN homo?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244203500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>problem stems number of FreeBSD GNAA (GAY NIGGEr World will have</htmltext>
<tokenext>problem stems number of FreeBSD GNAA ( GAY NIGGEr World will have</tokentext>
<sentencetext>problem stems number of FreeBSD GNAA (GAY NIGGEr World will have</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220455</id>
	<title>Re:CPU Usage...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244205960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But.. Why don't you just use Safari or Webkit?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But.. Why do n't you just use Safari or Webkit ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But.. Why don't you just use Safari or Webkit?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220229</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222141</id>
	<title>Stainless</title>
	<author>the right sock</author>
	<datestamp>1244215740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.stainlessapp.com/" title="stainlessapp.com" rel="nofollow">Stainless</a> [stainlessapp.com] is the only Chromium-based browser so-far that does what I hoped Chrome would do: let me have true separate sessions in each tab or window. To be clear: I can be logged in to every one of my gmail accounts in different tabs at the same time. It's still fairly immature, but hopefully it'll get to the point where I can use no-script and be done with FF.</p><p>Despite our hopes, FF is not immune to the Mozilla disease, that almost lupus-like systemic breakdown over time, inflicting its greatest damage just at its most critical point in life, when its every extremity is needed to fend off competitors but each slowly degenerating to useless dead weight easily torn, eaten, spat out on the remains of its predecessors.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Stainless [ stainlessapp.com ] is the only Chromium-based browser so-far that does what I hoped Chrome would do : let me have true separate sessions in each tab or window .
To be clear : I can be logged in to every one of my gmail accounts in different tabs at the same time .
It 's still fairly immature , but hopefully it 'll get to the point where I can use no-script and be done with FF.Despite our hopes , FF is not immune to the Mozilla disease , that almost lupus-like systemic breakdown over time , inflicting its greatest damage just at its most critical point in life , when its every extremity is needed to fend off competitors but each slowly degenerating to useless dead weight easily torn , eaten , spat out on the remains of its predecessors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stainless [stainlessapp.com] is the only Chromium-based browser so-far that does what I hoped Chrome would do: let me have true separate sessions in each tab or window.
To be clear: I can be logged in to every one of my gmail accounts in different tabs at the same time.
It's still fairly immature, but hopefully it'll get to the point where I can use no-script and be done with FF.Despite our hopes, FF is not immune to the Mozilla disease, that almost lupus-like systemic breakdown over time, inflicting its greatest damage just at its most critical point in life, when its every extremity is needed to fend off competitors but each slowly degenerating to useless dead weight easily torn, eaten, spat out on the remains of its predecessors.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222385</id>
	<title>Re:Speaking of browser innovation...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244216700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Safari has been doing this for ages. At least, they were detachable; Safari 4 allows tabs to be re-attached.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Safari has been doing this for ages .
At least , they were detachable ; Safari 4 allows tabs to be re-attached .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Safari has been doing this for ages.
At least, they were detachable; Safari 4 allows tabs to be re-attached.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219885</id>
	<title>Re:Already have Safari, kbyethnx</title>
	<author>arodland</author>
	<datestamp>1244199360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why would I need this? I already have a webkit browser with tabs on top.</p></div><p>Because you want one that doesn't suck.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would I need this ?
I already have a webkit browser with tabs on top.Because you want one that does n't suck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would I need this?
I already have a webkit browser with tabs on top.Because you want one that doesn't suck.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219863</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220037</id>
	<title>repo</title>
	<author>sveard</author>
	<datestamp>1244201160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>from <a href="http://dev.chromium.org/getting-involved/dev-channel" title="chromium.org">http://dev.chromium.org/getting-involved/dev-channel</a> [chromium.org]<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Installing Google Chrome <b>will add the Google repository</b> so your system will automatically keep Chrome up to date. (If you don't want Google's repository, do "sudo touch<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/etc/defaults/google-chrome" before installing the package.)</p></div><p>But it didn't (and I didn't touch<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/etc/defaults/google-chrome)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>from http : //dev.chromium.org/getting-involved/dev-channel [ chromium.org ] : Installing Google Chrome will add the Google repository so your system will automatically keep Chrome up to date .
( If you do n't want Google 's repository , do " sudo touch /etc/defaults/google-chrome " before installing the package .
) But it did n't ( and I did n't touch /etc/defaults/google-chrome )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>from http://dev.chromium.org/getting-involved/dev-channel [chromium.org] :Installing Google Chrome will add the Google repository so your system will automatically keep Chrome up to date.
(If you don't want Google's repository, do "sudo touch /etc/defaults/google-chrome" before installing the package.
)But it didn't (and I didn't touch /etc/defaults/google-chrome)
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28228535</id>
	<title>Re:Already have Safari, kbyethnx</title>
	<author>LeonN</author>
	<datestamp>1244203020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>and anger leads to hate, and hate leads to suffering!!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>and anger leads to hate , and hate leads to suffering ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and anger leads to hate, and hate leads to suffering!!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219891</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220013</id>
	<title>Beta?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244200920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'll just wait for the final release.. can't take to long.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll just wait for the final release.. ca n't take to long .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll just wait for the final release.. can't take to long.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28224043</id>
	<title>more crashing?</title>
	<author>incripshin</author>
	<datestamp>1244222760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't think it could possibly crash more than Seamonkey (I hated Phoenix, and I carry a grudge) does for me.  It seems none of the devs ever thought to see if their code works with gcc-4.0.  Or if they did, they threw their hands up in the air and gave up.  It used to be a rarity with Seamonkey, but lately, the browser just freezes up after I look at 'so much' stuff.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think it could possibly crash more than Seamonkey ( I hated Phoenix , and I carry a grudge ) does for me .
It seems none of the devs ever thought to see if their code works with gcc-4.0 .
Or if they did , they threw their hands up in the air and gave up .
It used to be a rarity with Seamonkey , but lately , the browser just freezes up after I look at 'so much ' stuff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think it could possibly crash more than Seamonkey (I hated Phoenix, and I carry a grudge) does for me.
It seems none of the devs ever thought to see if their code works with gcc-4.0.
Or if they did, they threw their hands up in the air and gave up.
It used to be a rarity with Seamonkey, but lately, the browser just freezes up after I look at 'so much' stuff.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221625</id>
	<title>Re:Speaking of browser innovation...</title>
	<author>techess</author>
	<datestamp>1244213280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know about Safari on Windows but Safari on the Mac does this.  I agree that it is very useful to pull a tab out into a window or collapse windows into tabs.  I'll often open product searches in a series of tabs and then pull one off to do a side by side comparison.  That is probably the biggest reason I still use Safari and not just Firefox.</p><p>Maybe it has something to with providing the OS/Window Manager and making the browser which allows the feature to work smoothly.  Now that android seems like an OS possibility for netbooks &amp; laptops maybe we'll see that feature on Chrome for android.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know about Safari on Windows but Safari on the Mac does this .
I agree that it is very useful to pull a tab out into a window or collapse windows into tabs .
I 'll often open product searches in a series of tabs and then pull one off to do a side by side comparison .
That is probably the biggest reason I still use Safari and not just Firefox.Maybe it has something to with providing the OS/Window Manager and making the browser which allows the feature to work smoothly .
Now that android seems like an OS possibility for netbooks &amp; laptops maybe we 'll see that feature on Chrome for android .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know about Safari on Windows but Safari on the Mac does this.
I agree that it is very useful to pull a tab out into a window or collapse windows into tabs.
I'll often open product searches in a series of tabs and then pull one off to do a side by side comparison.
That is probably the biggest reason I still use Safari and not just Firefox.Maybe it has something to with providing the OS/Window Manager and making the browser which allows the feature to work smoothly.
Now that android seems like an OS possibility for netbooks &amp; laptops maybe we'll see that feature on Chrome for android.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28229823</id>
	<title>Hemanth</title>
	<author>hemanth.hm</author>
	<datestamp>1244218320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was waiting for this . But still this page <a href="http://www.google.com/chrome/intl/en/linux.html" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.google.com/chrome/intl/en/linux.html</a> [google.com] doesn't speak about this version .
Anyhow is Google still planning to release Gtalk for Linux ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was waiting for this .
But still this page http : //www.google.com/chrome/intl/en/linux.html [ google.com ] does n't speak about this version .
Anyhow is Google still planning to release Gtalk for Linux ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was waiting for this .
But still this page http://www.google.com/chrome/intl/en/linux.html [google.com] doesn't speak about this version .
Anyhow is Google still planning to release Gtalk for Linux ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220125</id>
	<title>Re:It's okay</title>
	<author>owlnation</author>
	<datestamp>1244202060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Luckily, Firefox works great.</p></div></blockquote><p>

Not on a Mac it doesn't. While Fx 3.0 is far better than previous versions on a Mac, it's still pretty poor. And you can't use Fx 3.0 on older Macs at all.<br> <br>

Adblock and flashblock etc are coming for Chrome. I use Firefox now, but unless Fx4.0 works significantly better on a Mac, and is multi-threaded, my continued use of it is time-limited. That's entirely Mozilla's own fault. They seem to be focusing on rebuilding Firefox as the Netscape suite, rather than actually making the core browser work efficiently.<br> <br>

Google has, unfortunately, been very slow about developing Chrome for Mac (as they usually are for all their software, Macs users appear to be an afterthought for them). This version appears to be intel only -- I sincerely hope that this is going to change. I have an old G3 running 10.3 that looks great and works well for surfing and playing music. I'd absolutely love to get Fx 2.0 off it, and use a browser that works effectively.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Luckily , Firefox works great .
Not on a Mac it does n't .
While Fx 3.0 is far better than previous versions on a Mac , it 's still pretty poor .
And you ca n't use Fx 3.0 on older Macs at all .
Adblock and flashblock etc are coming for Chrome .
I use Firefox now , but unless Fx4.0 works significantly better on a Mac , and is multi-threaded , my continued use of it is time-limited .
That 's entirely Mozilla 's own fault .
They seem to be focusing on rebuilding Firefox as the Netscape suite , rather than actually making the core browser work efficiently .
Google has , unfortunately , been very slow about developing Chrome for Mac ( as they usually are for all their software , Macs users appear to be an afterthought for them ) .
This version appears to be intel only -- I sincerely hope that this is going to change .
I have an old G3 running 10.3 that looks great and works well for surfing and playing music .
I 'd absolutely love to get Fx 2.0 off it , and use a browser that works effectively .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Luckily, Firefox works great.
Not on a Mac it doesn't.
While Fx 3.0 is far better than previous versions on a Mac, it's still pretty poor.
And you can't use Fx 3.0 on older Macs at all.
Adblock and flashblock etc are coming for Chrome.
I use Firefox now, but unless Fx4.0 works significantly better on a Mac, and is multi-threaded, my continued use of it is time-limited.
That's entirely Mozilla's own fault.
They seem to be focusing on rebuilding Firefox as the Netscape suite, rather than actually making the core browser work efficiently.
Google has, unfortunately, been very slow about developing Chrome for Mac (as they usually are for all their software, Macs users appear to be an afterthought for them).
This version appears to be intel only -- I sincerely hope that this is going to change.
I have an old G3 running 10.3 that looks great and works well for surfing and playing music.
I'd absolutely love to get Fx 2.0 off it, and use a browser that works effectively.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219905</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220839</id>
	<title>BETA    A.S.A.P.?</title>
	<author>jDeepbeep</author>
	<datestamp>1244209020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>we'll get back to trying to get Google Chrome on these platforms stable enough for a beta release as soon as possible<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..</p></div></blockquote><p>

Yes, hurry up with that.... so you can keep them in BETA for 5+ years afterwards.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:p</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>we 'll get back to trying to get Google Chrome on these platforms stable enough for a beta release as soon as possible . . Yes , hurry up with that.... so you can keep them in BETA for 5 + years afterwards .
: p</tokentext>
<sentencetext>we'll get back to trying to get Google Chrome on these platforms stable enough for a beta release as soon as possible ..

Yes, hurry up with that.... so you can keep them in BETA for 5+ years afterwards.
:p
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28281795</id>
	<title>Re:Works for posting to Slashdot :)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244657460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Chrome has spell-check, but does it have comprehension-check?<br>(By the way, he can *downgrade* to regular Jaunty. 9.04 == 9.10, right?)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Chrome has spell-check , but does it have comprehension-check ?
( By the way , he can * downgrade * to regular Jaunty .
9.04 = = 9.10 , right ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Chrome has spell-check, but does it have comprehension-check?
(By the way, he can *downgrade* to regular Jaunty.
9.04 == 9.10, right?
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219891</id>
	<title>Re:Already have Safari, kbyethnx</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244199480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Why would I need this? I already have a webkit browser with tabs on top.</i> <br> <br>

Because multiple players means competition, and competition means innovation, which leads to a better browsing experience for all of us, regardless of which you're using.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would I need this ?
I already have a webkit browser with tabs on top .
Because multiple players means competition , and competition means innovation , which leads to a better browsing experience for all of us , regardless of which you 're using .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would I need this?
I already have a webkit browser with tabs on top.
Because multiple players means competition, and competition means innovation, which leads to a better browsing experience for all of us, regardless of which you're using.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219863</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28230957</id>
	<title>Get Chrome running on Fedora</title>
	<author>cerberusss</author>
	<datestamp>1244279160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hi,</p><p>To get Chrome running under Fedora, take the following steps:<br>Download chrome<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.deb file<br>Create a temporary directory in your home dir:<br>$ mkdir ~/blah<br>Unpack the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.deb file there:<br>$ cd ~/blah<br>$ ar x ~/Download/chrome*deb<br>Unpack the binary code:<br>$ tar xfz data.tar.gz<br>Move the binaries to your<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/opt<br>$ mv opt/*<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/opt</p><p>Now create a couple of symlinks in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/lib so Chrome can find all the necessary libraries (apparently these are named differently under Debian and Ubuntu):<br>$ cd<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr<br>$ sudo ln -s libnss3.so libnss3.so.1d<br>$ sudo ln -s libnssutil3.so.1d libnssutil3.so<br>$ sudo ln -s libnssutil3.so libnssutil3.so.1d<br>$ sudo ln -s libsmime3.so libsmime3.so.1d<br>$ sudo ln -s libssl3.so libssl3.so.1d<br>$ sudo ln -s libplds4.so libplds4.so.0d<br>$ sudo ln -s libplc4.so libplc4.so.0d<br>$ sudo ln -s libnspr4.so libnspr4.so.0d</p><p>Now chrome can be started:<br>$<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/opt/google/chrome/google-chrome</p><p>Create an application launcher on any panel for easy access.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hi,To get Chrome running under Fedora , take the following steps : Download chrome .deb fileCreate a temporary directory in your home dir : $ mkdir ~ /blahUnpack the .deb file there : $ cd ~ /blah $ ar x ~ /Download/chrome * debUnpack the binary code : $ tar xfz data.tar.gzMove the binaries to your /opt $ mv opt/ * /optNow create a couple of symlinks in /lib so Chrome can find all the necessary libraries ( apparently these are named differently under Debian and Ubuntu ) : $ cd /usr $ sudo ln -s libnss3.so libnss3.so.1d $ sudo ln -s libnssutil3.so.1d libnssutil3.so $ sudo ln -s libnssutil3.so libnssutil3.so.1d $ sudo ln -s libsmime3.so libsmime3.so.1d $ sudo ln -s libssl3.so libssl3.so.1d $ sudo ln -s libplds4.so libplds4.so.0d $ sudo ln -s libplc4.so libplc4.so.0d $ sudo ln -s libnspr4.so libnspr4.so.0dNow chrome can be started : $ /opt/google/chrome/google-chromeCreate an application launcher on any panel for easy access .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hi,To get Chrome running under Fedora, take the following steps:Download chrome .deb fileCreate a temporary directory in your home dir:$ mkdir ~/blahUnpack the .deb file there:$ cd ~/blah$ ar x ~/Download/chrome*debUnpack the binary code:$ tar xfz data.tar.gzMove the binaries to your /opt$ mv opt/* /optNow create a couple of symlinks in /lib so Chrome can find all the necessary libraries (apparently these are named differently under Debian and Ubuntu):$ cd /usr$ sudo ln -s libnss3.so libnss3.so.1d$ sudo ln -s libnssutil3.so.1d libnssutil3.so$ sudo ln -s libnssutil3.so libnssutil3.so.1d$ sudo ln -s libsmime3.so libsmime3.so.1d$ sudo ln -s libssl3.so libssl3.so.1d$ sudo ln -s libplds4.so libplds4.so.0d$ sudo ln -s libplc4.so libplc4.so.0d$ sudo ln -s libnspr4.so libnspr4.so.0dNow chrome can be started:$ /opt/google/chrome/google-chromeCreate an application launcher on any panel for easy access.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221045</id>
	<title>Re:CPU Usage...</title>
	<author>amn108</author>
	<datestamp>1244210400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>NoScript extension for Firefox may alleviate the symptoms<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-) Does it fix the REAL problem? No. It is almost most annoying to use, when 75\% of ALL websites I visit just fail to work without JavaScript, and I mean even navigation does not work, as sloppy Web-programmers use the horrid Microsoft-invented "postback" technique, which uses encoded navigation target as part of a JavaScript function call. Nothing insults WWW when the very method of navigating it - hyperlinks - is rejected in favour of some proprietary, user-unfriendly navigation URLs that need JavaScript to work. So with NoScript, it sort of defeats the purpose of using it, when you have to enable scripting anyway, which also brings all those non-filtered Flash Player applications to life.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>NoScript extension for Firefox may alleviate the symptoms : - ) Does it fix the REAL problem ?
No. It is almost most annoying to use , when 75 \ % of ALL websites I visit just fail to work without JavaScript , and I mean even navigation does not work , as sloppy Web-programmers use the horrid Microsoft-invented " postback " technique , which uses encoded navigation target as part of a JavaScript function call .
Nothing insults WWW when the very method of navigating it - hyperlinks - is rejected in favour of some proprietary , user-unfriendly navigation URLs that need JavaScript to work .
So with NoScript , it sort of defeats the purpose of using it , when you have to enable scripting anyway , which also brings all those non-filtered Flash Player applications to life .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NoScript extension for Firefox may alleviate the symptoms :-) Does it fix the REAL problem?
No. It is almost most annoying to use, when 75\% of ALL websites I visit just fail to work without JavaScript, and I mean even navigation does not work, as sloppy Web-programmers use the horrid Microsoft-invented "postback" technique, which uses encoded navigation target as part of a JavaScript function call.
Nothing insults WWW when the very method of navigating it - hyperlinks - is rejected in favour of some proprietary, user-unfriendly navigation URLs that need JavaScript to work.
So with NoScript, it sort of defeats the purpose of using it, when you have to enable scripting anyway, which also brings all those non-filtered Flash Player applications to life.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220229</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220279</id>
	<title>Re:Distro support is abysmal</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244204100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For testing purposes you can just extract the files from deb. I just did this Arch using dpkg installed from AUR. Sure, it doesn't integrate with the rest of installed packages, but I'm not committed to using it full time anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For testing purposes you can just extract the files from deb .
I just did this Arch using dpkg installed from AUR .
Sure , it does n't integrate with the rest of installed packages , but I 'm not committed to using it full time anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For testing purposes you can just extract the files from deb.
I just did this Arch using dpkg installed from AUR.
Sure, it doesn't integrate with the rest of installed packages, but I'm not committed to using it full time anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220059</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221181</id>
	<title>Re:CPU Usage...</title>
	<author>RMH101</author>
	<datestamp>1244211060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Does it support keychain?  That's why I'm still using Camino as opposed to Firefox...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does it support keychain ?
That 's why I 'm still using Camino as opposed to Firefox.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does it support keychain?
That's why I'm still using Camino as opposed to Firefox...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220229</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28229395</id>
	<title>Re:Phoning home</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244212560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FYI, you can block the RLZ thing by creating a copy of the default Google search engine, removing the {google:RLZ} part of the URL, and setting it as the new default.  (Edit your search engines by right-clicking in the Address Bar.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FYI , you can block the RLZ thing by creating a copy of the default Google search engine , removing the { google : RLZ } part of the URL , and setting it as the new default .
( Edit your search engines by right-clicking in the Address Bar .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FYI, you can block the RLZ thing by creating a copy of the default Google search engine, removing the {google:RLZ} part of the URL, and setting it as the new default.
(Edit your search engines by right-clicking in the Address Bar.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221157</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221473</id>
	<title>Re:intel only</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244212560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>silly me for thinking that my G5 was good enough</p></div><p>That's what you get for buying Apple stuff. Sudden changes that break backwards compatibility. You need to constantly buy upgrades to your hardware and especially software in order to be able to run current software.</p><p>Meanwhile, I'll happily run chrome on my 10+ year old Pentium 2, which is still in heavy use.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>silly me for thinking that my G5 was good enoughThat 's what you get for buying Apple stuff .
Sudden changes that break backwards compatibility .
You need to constantly buy upgrades to your hardware and especially software in order to be able to run current software.Meanwhile , I 'll happily run chrome on my 10 + year old Pentium 2 , which is still in heavy use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>silly me for thinking that my G5 was good enoughThat's what you get for buying Apple stuff.
Sudden changes that break backwards compatibility.
You need to constantly buy upgrades to your hardware and especially software in order to be able to run current software.Meanwhile, I'll happily run chrome on my 10+ year old Pentium 2, which is still in heavy use.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219915</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28223185</id>
	<title>from the summary</title>
	<author>sorak</author>
	<datestamp>1244219700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>please DON'T DOWNLOAD THEM! Unless of course you are a developer or take great pleasure in incomplete, unpredictable, and potentially crashing software."</p></div><p>You're just begging for a windows joke, aren't you?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>please DO N'T DOWNLOAD THEM !
Unless of course you are a developer or take great pleasure in incomplete , unpredictable , and potentially crashing software .
" You 're just begging for a windows joke , are n't you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>please DON'T DOWNLOAD THEM!
Unless of course you are a developer or take great pleasure in incomplete, unpredictable, and potentially crashing software.
"You're just begging for a windows joke, aren't you?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220477</id>
	<title>Re:Cue the "not using until it has adblock" posts</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244206080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>privoxy is almost as good, although sometimes over-sensitive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>privoxy is almost as good , although sometimes over-sensitive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>privoxy is almost as good, although sometimes over-sensitive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219909</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222841</id>
	<title>Re:Still mad at Google</title>
	<author>SleepingWaterBear</author>
	<datestamp>1244218440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It would have been smarter to use Qt than to have very Windows- and Mac- customized ports, and then you would have got a Linux port for free. You can use QGtkStyle (included in Qt 4.5, but you can run it yourself now) to make Qt apps look like GTK ones.</p></div><p>Qt may be a cross platform toolkit, but the reality is that you don't get the same level of responsiveness out of it on all platforms as you can get using platform specific tools.</p><p>In a market like the web browser market, feeling a little sluggish compared to the competition is fatal, and they were completely correct not to use Qt for all platforms.  Not that I'm sure GTK is the best choice for Linux, but for a project like Chrome, it's definitely the right choice to use the best tools available on each platform even if it means rewriting a lot of code.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It would have been smarter to use Qt than to have very Windows- and Mac- customized ports , and then you would have got a Linux port for free .
You can use QGtkStyle ( included in Qt 4.5 , but you can run it yourself now ) to make Qt apps look like GTK ones.Qt may be a cross platform toolkit , but the reality is that you do n't get the same level of responsiveness out of it on all platforms as you can get using platform specific tools.In a market like the web browser market , feeling a little sluggish compared to the competition is fatal , and they were completely correct not to use Qt for all platforms .
Not that I 'm sure GTK is the best choice for Linux , but for a project like Chrome , it 's definitely the right choice to use the best tools available on each platform even if it means rewriting a lot of code .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would have been smarter to use Qt than to have very Windows- and Mac- customized ports, and then you would have got a Linux port for free.
You can use QGtkStyle (included in Qt 4.5, but you can run it yourself now) to make Qt apps look like GTK ones.Qt may be a cross platform toolkit, but the reality is that you don't get the same level of responsiveness out of it on all platforms as you can get using platform specific tools.In a market like the web browser market, feeling a little sluggish compared to the competition is fatal, and they were completely correct not to use Qt for all platforms.
Not that I'm sure GTK is the best choice for Linux, but for a project like Chrome, it's definitely the right choice to use the best tools available on each platform even if it means rewriting a lot of code.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221241</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221157</id>
	<title>Phoning home</title>
	<author>karmaflux</author>
	<datestamp>1244211000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does it still <a href="http://foliovision.com/2008/12/09/adwords-ppc-organic-rlz/" title="foliovision.com">send unknown encrypted data back to google at will</a> [foliovision.com]?</p><p>Thanks, that's all I need to know about this browser.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does it still send unknown encrypted data back to google at will [ foliovision.com ] ? Thanks , that 's all I need to know about this browser .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does it still send unknown encrypted data back to google at will [foliovision.com]?Thanks, that's all I need to know about this browser.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28234303</id>
	<title>Re:Phoning home</title>
	<author>egosum</author>
	<datestamp>1244312100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Does it stil send unknown encrypted data back to google at wil</p></div><p>The article you link to claims the rlz parameter is encoded, not encrypted. Everything you read on the internet is encoded in some way. Encoded != encrypted.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does it stil send unknown encrypted data back to google at wilThe article you link to claims the rlz parameter is encoded , not encrypted .
Everything you read on the internet is encoded in some way .
Encoded ! = encrypted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does it stil send unknown encrypted data back to google at wilThe article you link to claims the rlz parameter is encoded, not encrypted.
Everything you read on the internet is encoded in some way.
Encoded != encrypted.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221157</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28226495</id>
	<title>Re:Still mad at Google</title>
	<author>Fastolfe</author>
	<datestamp>1244233440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Simply using a cross-platform toolkit doesn't mean your ports are "for free".  The sandboxing techniques used by Chrome, for instance, depend heavily upon the facilities provided by the OS.  The UI toolkit is a very small part of the problem for some applications.</p><blockquote><div><p> I guess someone should explain to Google about code and component reuse.</p></div> </blockquote><p> <a href="http://www.google.com/intl/en/jobs/joininggoogle/index.html" title="google.com">Clearly, they need your help!</a> [google.com] </p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Simply using a cross-platform toolkit does n't mean your ports are " for free " .
The sandboxing techniques used by Chrome , for instance , depend heavily upon the facilities provided by the OS .
The UI toolkit is a very small part of the problem for some applications .
I guess someone should explain to Google about code and component reuse .
Clearly , they need your help !
[ google.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Simply using a cross-platform toolkit doesn't mean your ports are "for free".
The sandboxing techniques used by Chrome, for instance, depend heavily upon the facilities provided by the OS.
The UI toolkit is a very small part of the problem for some applications.
I guess someone should explain to Google about code and component reuse.
Clearly, they need your help!
[google.com] 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221241</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220907</id>
	<title>Irony</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244209500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>DON'T DOWNLOAD THEM! Unless of course you are a developer or take great pleasure in incomplete, unpredictable, and potentially crashing software.</i></p><p>How ironic, they announce new Mac and Linux versions and tell you not to download them unless you use Windows.</p><p>-</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>DO N'T DOWNLOAD THEM !
Unless of course you are a developer or take great pleasure in incomplete , unpredictable , and potentially crashing software.How ironic , they announce new Mac and Linux versions and tell you not to download them unless you use Windows.-</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DON'T DOWNLOAD THEM!
Unless of course you are a developer or take great pleasure in incomplete, unpredictable, and potentially crashing software.How ironic, they announce new Mac and Linux versions and tell you not to download them unless you use Windows.-</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219905</id>
	<title>It's okay</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244199660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've used Chrome on Windows, but found it to be lacking features like advertisement blocking, pop-up blocking, and NoScript-like functionality.</p><p>Luckily, Firefox works great.</p><p>And that's what I don't understand about Chrome. It's definitely a great idea to make Javascript faster, and rendering should always be as fast as possible, and the concept of locking each browser instance to a process is not without merit. But why can't they help Firefox?</p><p>Firefox is the standard non-Microsoft browser now. It is a serious contender to IE in ways that no other browser ever was. Only Netscape 3 was in anyway comparable, but we know how NS dropped the ball with Navigator 4.</p><p>Open Source software is about freedom, and freedom to do your own thing is definitely a big one. But the Open Source market is also unlike the standard free market. Instead of getting better products due to competition, you get worse products due to the split of resources. By taking interest away from Firefox, Google is possibly killing the only serious competitor to IE.</p><p>Killing IE's competition is not a good thing. We all saw the stagnant browser world from IE5 through IE6 where there was no Netscape to set Microsoft's feet on fire and Firebird was still a heap of crap trying to dig itself out of the ashes of Netscape. I'm worried that Google's Chrome effort will stick us all with IE8 as the web standard for years to come.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've used Chrome on Windows , but found it to be lacking features like advertisement blocking , pop-up blocking , and NoScript-like functionality.Luckily , Firefox works great.And that 's what I do n't understand about Chrome .
It 's definitely a great idea to make Javascript faster , and rendering should always be as fast as possible , and the concept of locking each browser instance to a process is not without merit .
But why ca n't they help Firefox ? Firefox is the standard non-Microsoft browser now .
It is a serious contender to IE in ways that no other browser ever was .
Only Netscape 3 was in anyway comparable , but we know how NS dropped the ball with Navigator 4.Open Source software is about freedom , and freedom to do your own thing is definitely a big one .
But the Open Source market is also unlike the standard free market .
Instead of getting better products due to competition , you get worse products due to the split of resources .
By taking interest away from Firefox , Google is possibly killing the only serious competitor to IE.Killing IE 's competition is not a good thing .
We all saw the stagnant browser world from IE5 through IE6 where there was no Netscape to set Microsoft 's feet on fire and Firebird was still a heap of crap trying to dig itself out of the ashes of Netscape .
I 'm worried that Google 's Chrome effort will stick us all with IE8 as the web standard for years to come .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've used Chrome on Windows, but found it to be lacking features like advertisement blocking, pop-up blocking, and NoScript-like functionality.Luckily, Firefox works great.And that's what I don't understand about Chrome.
It's definitely a great idea to make Javascript faster, and rendering should always be as fast as possible, and the concept of locking each browser instance to a process is not without merit.
But why can't they help Firefox?Firefox is the standard non-Microsoft browser now.
It is a serious contender to IE in ways that no other browser ever was.
Only Netscape 3 was in anyway comparable, but we know how NS dropped the ball with Navigator 4.Open Source software is about freedom, and freedom to do your own thing is definitely a big one.
But the Open Source market is also unlike the standard free market.
Instead of getting better products due to competition, you get worse products due to the split of resources.
By taking interest away from Firefox, Google is possibly killing the only serious competitor to IE.Killing IE's competition is not a good thing.
We all saw the stagnant browser world from IE5 through IE6 where there was no Netscape to set Microsoft's feet on fire and Firebird was still a heap of crap trying to dig itself out of the ashes of Netscape.
I'm worried that Google's Chrome effort will stick us all with IE8 as the web standard for years to come.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28229325</id>
	<title>Re:It's okay</title>
	<author>rnd()</author>
	<datestamp>1244211660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>wake up and smell the github.  Forking is not bad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>wake up and smell the github .
Forking is not bad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>wake up and smell the github.
Forking is not bad.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220081</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221351</id>
	<title>Re:Works for posting to Slashdot :)</title>
	<author>Nimey</author>
	<datestamp>1244212020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know, there are these things called "bookmarks".  It's a lot smarter to use those instead of keeping open more tabs than you can use at once.  You can even bookmark a group of tabs!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know , there are these things called " bookmarks " .
It 's a lot smarter to use those instead of keeping open more tabs than you can use at once .
You can even bookmark a group of tabs !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know, there are these things called "bookmarks".
It's a lot smarter to use those instead of keeping open more tabs than you can use at once.
You can even bookmark a group of tabs!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220643</id>
	<title>Re:Works for posting to Slashdot :)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244207460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does Slashdot render correctly?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does Slashdot render correctly ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does Slashdot render correctly?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219875</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220079</id>
	<title>Re:Distro support is abysmal</title>
	<author>Adam Jorgensen</author>
	<datestamp>1244201580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I agree. This is a joke. I'm running OpenSuse right now and in the past I've mostly used Mandriva. Some RPMs would go a long way...

The world does not begin and end at<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.deb</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree .
This is a joke .
I 'm running OpenSuse right now and in the past I 've mostly used Mandriva .
Some RPMs would go a long way.. . The world does not begin and end at .deb</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree.
This is a joke.
I'm running OpenSuse right now and in the past I've mostly used Mandriva.
Some RPMs would go a long way...

The world does not begin and end at .deb</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220059</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221691</id>
	<title>Re:CPU Usage...</title>
	<author>Ann1ka</author>
	<datestamp>1244213520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you like the OSX experience enough to stick with it. Why not give Safari 4 beta a try? It comes with better integration into OSX and has most of Chrome's features, with biggest miss being the sandboxing. It also uses the Webkit engine for rendering webpages, which is somewhat faster than Firefox's Gecko.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you like the OSX experience enough to stick with it .
Why not give Safari 4 beta a try ?
It comes with better integration into OSX and has most of Chrome 's features , with biggest miss being the sandboxing .
It also uses the Webkit engine for rendering webpages , which is somewhat faster than Firefox 's Gecko .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you like the OSX experience enough to stick with it.
Why not give Safari 4 beta a try?
It comes with better integration into OSX and has most of Chrome's features, with biggest miss being the sandboxing.
It also uses the Webkit engine for rendering webpages, which is somewhat faster than Firefox's Gecko.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220229</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220055</id>
	<title>Re:It's okay</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244201280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apparently you haven't used it enough.  Chrome does pop-up blocking, and as far as I know, it works better than Firefox.  Notice how sometimes pop-ups come up with Firefox?  There's a javascript workaround that is specifically disabled in the V8 engine.</p><p>You're clearly biased towards Firefox, irrationally so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apparently you have n't used it enough .
Chrome does pop-up blocking , and as far as I know , it works better than Firefox .
Notice how sometimes pop-ups come up with Firefox ?
There 's a javascript workaround that is specifically disabled in the V8 engine.You 're clearly biased towards Firefox , irrationally so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apparently you haven't used it enough.
Chrome does pop-up blocking, and as far as I know, it works better than Firefox.
Notice how sometimes pop-ups come up with Firefox?
There's a javascript workaround that is specifically disabled in the V8 engine.You're clearly biased towards Firefox, irrationally so.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219905</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221745</id>
	<title>Re:Wha...?</title>
	<author>blind biker</author>
	<datestamp>1244213760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Window Positions Remembered</p></div><p>It does? I use Chrome on Windows XP, and I can't get it to remember the position and size of newly opened windows. It just won't do it.</p><p>And here's the funny thing: I played with some Dosbox games recently, and now I notice that Chrome opens new windows in another size and position - but not anything I told it to. Now a new window is just ridiculously small, so my quest to get Chrome to pen them at a certain size and position became that more pressing.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Window Positions RememberedIt does ?
I use Chrome on Windows XP , and I ca n't get it to remember the position and size of newly opened windows .
It just wo n't do it.And here 's the funny thing : I played with some Dosbox games recently , and now I notice that Chrome opens new windows in another size and position - but not anything I told it to .
Now a new window is just ridiculously small , so my quest to get Chrome to pen them at a certain size and position became that more pressing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Window Positions RememberedIt does?
I use Chrome on Windows XP, and I can't get it to remember the position and size of newly opened windows.
It just won't do it.And here's the funny thing: I played with some Dosbox games recently, and now I notice that Chrome opens new windows in another size and position - but not anything I told it to.
Now a new window is just ridiculously small, so my quest to get Chrome to pen them at a certain size and position became that more pressing.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220321</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220321</id>
	<title>Re:Wha...?</title>
	<author>mallumax</author>
	<datestamp>1244204760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have been following chrome for mac development <a href="http://www.manu-j.com/blog/download-updated-native-google-chrome-for-mac-os-x/230/" title="manu-j.com">closely on my blog</a> [manu-j.com] with weekly updates. Here is a list of the functionality as of Build 17426<br>

What Works<br> <br>

    * Almost All Websites <br>
    * Bookmark pages <br>
    * Most visited sites <br>
    * Open link in new tab <br>
    * Open new tabs <br>
    * Omnibox <br>
    * Back, Forward, Reload<br>
    * Open link in new window<br>
    * Drag a tab to make a window<br>
    * Launch new tab<br>
    * Cut, Copy, Paste<br>
    * Keyboard shortcuts<br>
    * about:version, about:dns, about:crash, about:histograms<br>
    * Find in page<br>
    * History with search<br>
    * Form Fill<br>
    * Delete Thumbnail in New Tab Page<br>
    * Window Positions Remembered<br>
    * View Source  with synatx highlighting and clickable links<br> <br>

What Doesn't Work<br> <br>


    * Plugins (No flash -&gt; No youtube)<br>
    * Bookmarks Bar<br>
    * Print<br>
    * about:network, about:memory<br>
    * Web Inspector<br>
    * Input methods such as Kotoeri (Japanese)<br>
    * Preferences (Partial implementation)<br>
    * Full Screen Browsing<br>
    * Favicon (thanks brin)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have been following chrome for mac development closely on my blog [ manu-j.com ] with weekly updates .
Here is a list of the functionality as of Build 17426 What Works * Almost All Websites * Bookmark pages * Most visited sites * Open link in new tab * Open new tabs * Omnibox * Back , Forward , Reload * Open link in new window * Drag a tab to make a window * Launch new tab * Cut , Copy , Paste * Keyboard shortcuts * about : version , about : dns , about : crash , about : histograms * Find in page * History with search * Form Fill * Delete Thumbnail in New Tab Page * Window Positions Remembered * View Source with synatx highlighting and clickable links What Does n't Work * Plugins ( No flash - &gt; No youtube ) * Bookmarks Bar * Print * about : network , about : memory * Web Inspector * Input methods such as Kotoeri ( Japanese ) * Preferences ( Partial implementation ) * Full Screen Browsing * Favicon ( thanks brin )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have been following chrome for mac development closely on my blog [manu-j.com] with weekly updates.
Here is a list of the functionality as of Build 17426

What Works 

    * Almost All Websites 
    * Bookmark pages 
    * Most visited sites 
    * Open link in new tab 
    * Open new tabs 
    * Omnibox 
    * Back, Forward, Reload
    * Open link in new window
    * Drag a tab to make a window
    * Launch new tab
    * Cut, Copy, Paste
    * Keyboard shortcuts
    * about:version, about:dns, about:crash, about:histograms
    * Find in page
    * History with search
    * Form Fill
    * Delete Thumbnail in New Tab Page
    * Window Positions Remembered
    * View Source  with synatx highlighting and clickable links 

What Doesn't Work 


    * Plugins (No flash -&gt; No youtube)
    * Bookmarks Bar
    * Print
    * about:network, about:memory
    * Web Inspector
    * Input methods such as Kotoeri (Japanese)
    * Preferences (Partial implementation)
    * Full Screen Browsing
    * Favicon (thanks brin)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219867</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220287</id>
	<title>So what is this in KDE speak?</title>
	<author>QCompson</author>
	<datestamp>1244204220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Final release 2.3?
<br> <br>
But seriously, this is how it's done KDE.  Note that people still want to download it and test it despite the fact that it is not labeled a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.0 release.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Final release 2.3 ?
But seriously , this is how it 's done KDE .
Note that people still want to download it and test it despite the fact that it is not labeled a .0 release .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Final release 2.3?
But seriously, this is how it's done KDE.
Note that people still want to download it and test it despite the fact that it is not labeled a .0 release.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220059</id>
	<title>Distro support is abysmal</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244201340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's thoroughly disappointing to see a team of programmers only able to produce releases for Debian-based systems &ndash; the "couple of distros" referred to in the story are Ubuntu and Debian. It's also a huge hassle getting it to compile because it's such an enormous download from SVN (gigabytes, I believe; I gave up when it got to 480 megs).

Make it a little easier to test please, guys.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's thoroughly disappointing to see a team of programmers only able to produce releases for Debian-based systems    the " couple of distros " referred to in the story are Ubuntu and Debian .
It 's also a huge hassle getting it to compile because it 's such an enormous download from SVN ( gigabytes , I believe ; I gave up when it got to 480 megs ) .
Make it a little easier to test please , guys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's thoroughly disappointing to see a team of programmers only able to produce releases for Debian-based systems – the "couple of distros" referred to in the story are Ubuntu and Debian.
It's also a huge hassle getting it to compile because it's such an enormous download from SVN (gigabytes, I believe; I gave up when it got to 480 megs).
Make it a little easier to test please, guys.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221539</id>
	<title>Re:Wha...?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244212800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But will it fcuk up adblock plus on other browsers like the windows version? Just Love that feature.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But will it fcuk up adblock plus on other browsers like the windows version ?
Just Love that feature .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But will it fcuk up adblock plus on other browsers like the windows version?
Just Love that feature.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219867</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221229</id>
	<title>Re:intel only</title>
	<author>harryandthehenderson</author>
	<datestamp>1244211360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well then you better get to porting that Javascript JIT to PPC then if you want it to run on your G5.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well then you better get to porting that Javascript JIT to PPC then if you want it to run on your G5 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well then you better get to porting that Javascript JIT to PPC then if you want it to run on your G5.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219915</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220705</id>
	<title>Re:Distro support is abysmal</title>
	<author>jocknerd</author>
	<datestamp>1244208000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>5 years ago I was arguing the same thing except I was questioning why everything was only packaged up as RPM.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>5 years ago I was arguing the same thing except I was questioning why everything was only packaged up as RPM .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>5 years ago I was arguing the same thing except I was questioning why everything was only packaged up as RPM.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220059</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220049</id>
	<title>Re:Works for posting to Slashdot :)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244201280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've installed the DEB also (on my Ubuntu 9.04). It's pretty stable (has not crashed on me once, though neither has Firefox) and fast. However, my Firefox has close to 80 tabs open (all filled with AJAX, Flash, etc. on my slow 1.4 GHz Celeron M with 512 MB RAM), so I'm not sure how they really compare in terms of noticeable speed while browsing regularly.</p><p>Also, just realized Chrome has spell-check!</p><p>(By the way, you can upgrade to regular Jaunty. There's no need to keep the Alpha.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've installed the DEB also ( on my Ubuntu 9.04 ) .
It 's pretty stable ( has not crashed on me once , though neither has Firefox ) and fast .
However , my Firefox has close to 80 tabs open ( all filled with AJAX , Flash , etc .
on my slow 1.4 GHz Celeron M with 512 MB RAM ) , so I 'm not sure how they really compare in terms of noticeable speed while browsing regularly.Also , just realized Chrome has spell-check !
( By the way , you can upgrade to regular Jaunty .
There 's no need to keep the Alpha .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've installed the DEB also (on my Ubuntu 9.04).
It's pretty stable (has not crashed on me once, though neither has Firefox) and fast.
However, my Firefox has close to 80 tabs open (all filled with AJAX, Flash, etc.
on my slow 1.4 GHz Celeron M with 512 MB RAM), so I'm not sure how they really compare in terms of noticeable speed while browsing regularly.Also, just realized Chrome has spell-check!
(By the way, you can upgrade to regular Jaunty.
There's no need to keep the Alpha.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219875</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28223073</id>
	<title>Re:Yuck, a Chrome developer</title>
	<author>IceFox</author>
	<datestamp>1244219220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well a lot of the chrome developers are Windows developers so I could see how it could be embarrassing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well a lot of the chrome developers are Windows developers so I could see how it could be embarrassing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well a lot of the chrome developers are Windows developers so I could see how it could be embarrassing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220121</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28224257</id>
	<title>Re:Still mad at Google</title>
	<author>segedunum</author>
	<datestamp>1244223660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Qt may be a cross platform toolkit, but the reality is that you don't get the same level of responsiveness out of it on all platforms as you can get using platform specific tools.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Oh please. Qt applications aren't Java ones, they're natively compiled and you're going to need to back that up with something for it to mean anything. I doubt whether you can get less responsive than Firefox on Linux which is built with a similar approach.<br> <br>

Besides, if you're creating cross-platform apps then you trade off certain things to make sure that your ports to different platforms actually work properly. Going for some mythical responsiveness isn't going to matter if your port is just plain inferior and people don't care about the bugs or features for it.</p><blockquote><div><p>Chrome, it's definitely the right choice to use the best tools available on each platform even if it means <b>rewriting <i>a lot</i> of code.</b></p></div> </blockquote><p>
If you believe that's acceptable for any application, especially one that people expect to work in the same way on each platform, then you're nuts.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Qt may be a cross platform toolkit , but the reality is that you do n't get the same level of responsiveness out of it on all platforms as you can get using platform specific tools .
Oh please .
Qt applications are n't Java ones , they 're natively compiled and you 're going to need to back that up with something for it to mean anything .
I doubt whether you can get less responsive than Firefox on Linux which is built with a similar approach .
Besides , if you 're creating cross-platform apps then you trade off certain things to make sure that your ports to different platforms actually work properly .
Going for some mythical responsiveness is n't going to matter if your port is just plain inferior and people do n't care about the bugs or features for it.Chrome , it 's definitely the right choice to use the best tools available on each platform even if it means rewriting a lot of code .
If you believe that 's acceptable for any application , especially one that people expect to work in the same way on each platform , then you 're nuts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Qt may be a cross platform toolkit, but the reality is that you don't get the same level of responsiveness out of it on all platforms as you can get using platform specific tools.
Oh please.
Qt applications aren't Java ones, they're natively compiled and you're going to need to back that up with something for it to mean anything.
I doubt whether you can get less responsive than Firefox on Linux which is built with a similar approach.
Besides, if you're creating cross-platform apps then you trade off certain things to make sure that your ports to different platforms actually work properly.
Going for some mythical responsiveness isn't going to matter if your port is just plain inferior and people don't care about the bugs or features for it.Chrome, it's definitely the right choice to use the best tools available on each platform even if it means rewriting a lot of code.
If you believe that's acceptable for any application, especially one that people expect to work in the same way on each platform, then you're nuts.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222841</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28231383</id>
	<title>So have the fixed the crashing yet?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244285760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Even now, after however long they've had to fix things up, Chrome still crashes like crazy on Windows.</p><p>I really cannot use a browser that displays a sad face every second page I open, and asks me to "reload, that might fix it".</p><p>Since the core is WebKit, which is rock solid, I can only blame Google's poor code...outside of search they seem to be a bunch of monkeys with typewriters.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Even now , after however long they 've had to fix things up , Chrome still crashes like crazy on Windows.I really can not use a browser that displays a sad face every second page I open , and asks me to " reload , that might fix it " .Since the core is WebKit , which is rock solid , I can only blame Google 's poor code...outside of search they seem to be a bunch of monkeys with typewriters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even now, after however long they've had to fix things up, Chrome still crashes like crazy on Windows.I really cannot use a browser that displays a sad face every second page I open, and asks me to "reload, that might fix it".Since the core is WebKit, which is rock solid, I can only blame Google's poor code...outside of search they seem to be a bunch of monkeys with typewriters.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220405</id>
	<title>Nice.. i guess, but not for me.</title>
	<author>msh104</author>
	<datestamp>1244205600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Great..., another package that wants me to install half of gnome.<br>( it's linked against gconf. )</p><p>As a kde user i'll have to say no this round.<br>I'll stick to firefox/konqueror for the time being.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Great... , another package that wants me to install half of gnome .
( it 's linked against gconf .
) As a kde user i 'll have to say no this round.I 'll stick to firefox/konqueror for the time being .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Great..., another package that wants me to install half of gnome.
( it's linked against gconf.
)As a kde user i'll have to say no this round.I'll stick to firefox/konqueror for the time being.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221819</id>
	<title>Not good enough for Apple....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244214060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It might be good enough for you, but it aint good enough for Apple.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It might be good enough for you , but it aint good enough for Apple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It might be good enough for you, but it aint good enough for Apple.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219915</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220441</id>
	<title>Re:How does this differ?</title>
	<author>Haiyadragon</author>
	<datestamp>1244205840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For one thing, there's a 64-bit build.</p><p>Chromium daily builds: "no native 64bit debs planed for now. The amd64 package is using ia32-libs.".</p><p>I guess they had to release a amd64 package to be compliant, so they just build a fake one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For one thing , there 's a 64-bit build.Chromium daily builds : " no native 64bit debs planed for now .
The amd64 package is using ia32-libs .
" .I guess they had to release a amd64 package to be compliant , so they just build a fake one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For one thing, there's a 64-bit build.Chromium daily builds: "no native 64bit debs planed for now.
The amd64 package is using ia32-libs.
".I guess they had to release a amd64 package to be compliant, so they just build a fake one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219959</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220169</id>
	<title>You're lucky</title>
	<author>CarpetShark</author>
	<datestamp>1244202660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If it's working at all for you, you're very lucky.  I've been trying every<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.deb update for a (short) while now, and none of them can even load their own start page.  Or google.  Not sure if the startpage is google.  All I see is an MacOS=9.x-style and/or AtariST-style crashed icon in the center of the page area.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If it 's working at all for you , you 're very lucky .
I 've been trying every .deb update for a ( short ) while now , and none of them can even load their own start page .
Or google .
Not sure if the startpage is google .
All I see is an MacOS = 9.x-style and/or AtariST-style crashed icon in the center of the page area .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it's working at all for you, you're very lucky.
I've been trying every .deb update for a (short) while now, and none of them can even load their own start page.
Or google.
Not sure if the startpage is google.
All I see is an MacOS=9.x-style and/or AtariST-style crashed icon in the center of the page area.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219875</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221645</id>
	<title>Re:intel only</title>
	<author>A12m0v</author>
	<datestamp>1244213340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>V8 is x86 only<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>V8 is x86 only : - (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>V8 is x86 only :-(</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219915</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28226901</id>
	<title>No universal binary, no Tiger</title>
	<author>Trutane</author>
	<datestamp>1244192400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Mac version of Chrome requires Intel CPU and Mac OS X 10.5.6 or later. So the (vast number?) of Mac users that are either still using a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple\_Intel\_transition" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">PowerPC-based</a> [wikipedia.org] or <a href="http://www.apple.com/support/tiger/" title="apple.com" rel="nofollow">Tiger</a> [apple.com] will have to sit this one out. With luck and perhaps some prodding, Google will produce a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal\_binary" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">universal binary</a> [wikipedia.org] version that runs on 10.4.x as well. The Leopard dependency might indicate a requirement for Java 1.6, which is <a href="http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1856" title="apple.com" rel="nofollow">not supported in Tiger</a> [apple.com], unless you have an <a href="http://landonf.bikemonkey.org/static/soylatte/" title="bikemonkey.org" rel="nofollow">Intel mac</a> [bikemonkey.org].</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Mac version of Chrome requires Intel CPU and Mac OS X 10.5.6 or later .
So the ( vast number ?
) of Mac users that are either still using a PowerPC-based [ wikipedia.org ] or Tiger [ apple.com ] will have to sit this one out .
With luck and perhaps some prodding , Google will produce a universal binary [ wikipedia.org ] version that runs on 10.4.x as well .
The Leopard dependency might indicate a requirement for Java 1.6 , which is not supported in Tiger [ apple.com ] , unless you have an Intel mac [ bikemonkey.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Mac version of Chrome requires Intel CPU and Mac OS X 10.5.6 or later.
So the (vast number?
) of Mac users that are either still using a PowerPC-based [wikipedia.org] or Tiger [apple.com] will have to sit this one out.
With luck and perhaps some prodding, Google will produce a universal binary [wikipedia.org] version that runs on 10.4.x as well.
The Leopard dependency might indicate a requirement for Java 1.6, which is not supported in Tiger [apple.com], unless you have an Intel mac [bikemonkey.org].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28223179</id>
	<title>Re:NOT amd64</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244219640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So your ebuild is fucked?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So your ebuild is fucked ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So your ebuild is fucked?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221215</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220159</id>
	<title>In related news: chromium!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244202480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just did..</p><p>$ apt-get install chromiunm</p><p>I am writting this from version 3.0.182.0 from the ubuntu repositories. I kind of like Chromium/Chrome over Firefox. And this is from a guy that develop XUL applications (lol!).</p><p>Reason to install chromium?</p><p>The ability to expand a textarea. Is usefull to edit some SQL in phpMyAdmin...  I can probably add a plugin to firefox to do that, but with chromium/chrome is a standard feature.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just did.. $ apt-get install chromiunmI am writting this from version 3.0.182.0 from the ubuntu repositories .
I kind of like Chromium/Chrome over Firefox .
And this is from a guy that develop XUL applications ( lol !
) .Reason to install chromium ? The ability to expand a textarea .
Is usefull to edit some SQL in phpMyAdmin... I can probably add a plugin to firefox to do that , but with chromium/chrome is a standard feature .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just did..$ apt-get install chromiunmI am writting this from version 3.0.182.0 from the ubuntu repositories.
I kind of like Chromium/Chrome over Firefox.
And this is from a guy that develop XUL applications (lol!
).Reason to install chromium?The ability to expand a textarea.
Is usefull to edit some SQL in phpMyAdmin...  I can probably add a plugin to firefox to do that, but with chromium/chrome is a standard feature.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220121</id>
	<title>Yuck, a Chrome developer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244202000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Dan Kegel (who admits to being a Chrome developer)</p></div></blockquote><p>They say it like it's something dirty!</p><p>Girl: "Mom, I've got a new boyfriend."<br>Mum: "Really, pumpkin?"<br>Girl: "Yes. He's a Chrome developer!"<br>Mum: "Oh!" *faints*<br>Dad: *finally looks over his newspaper* "Straight to your room YOUNG LADY! You're grounded for a week with no telephone!"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dan Kegel ( who admits to being a Chrome developer ) They say it like it 's something dirty ! Girl : " Mom , I 've got a new boyfriend .
" Mum : " Really , pumpkin ?
" Girl : " Yes .
He 's a Chrome developer !
" Mum : " Oh !
" * faints * Dad : * finally looks over his newspaper * " Straight to your room YOUNG LADY !
You 're grounded for a week with no telephone !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dan Kegel (who admits to being a Chrome developer)They say it like it's something dirty!Girl: "Mom, I've got a new boyfriend.
"Mum: "Really, pumpkin?
"Girl: "Yes.
He's a Chrome developer!
"Mum: "Oh!
" *faints*Dad: *finally looks over his newspaper* "Straight to your room YOUNG LADY!
You're grounded for a week with no telephone!
"
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221743</id>
	<title>Re:Works for posting to Slashdot :)</title>
	<author>black88</author>
	<datestamp>1244213760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Really?  Ubuntu? AND Firefox? with close to 80 tabs filled with flash and ajax?  Color me skeptical!</p><p>Running 8.10 here on a 2.8 ghz intel box, with a gig of ram, and firefox cannot handle even a moderate amount of flash content without locking up, turning gray, and eating shit.  It's so bad I have been considering trying to find a tabbed version of links2 to run in -g mode.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Really ?
Ubuntu ? AND Firefox ?
with close to 80 tabs filled with flash and ajax ?
Color me skeptical ! Running 8.10 here on a 2.8 ghz intel box , with a gig of ram , and firefox can not handle even a moderate amount of flash content without locking up , turning gray , and eating shit .
It 's so bad I have been considering trying to find a tabbed version of links2 to run in -g mode .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really?
Ubuntu? AND Firefox?
with close to 80 tabs filled with flash and ajax?
Color me skeptical!Running 8.10 here on a 2.8 ghz intel box, with a gig of ram, and firefox cannot handle even a moderate amount of flash content without locking up, turning gray, and eating shit.
It's so bad I have been considering trying to find a tabbed version of links2 to run in -g mode.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28321117</id>
	<title>Woo711!1</title>
	<author>awarrenfells</author>
	<datestamp>1244918880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's about time.  I love google chrome and hope they come out with a fully functional version soon.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's about time .
I love google chrome and hope they come out with a fully functional version soon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's about time.
I love google chrome and hope they come out with a fully functional version soon.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28235537</id>
	<title>Re:Works for posting to Slashdot :)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244320260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good thing you're anonymous - 9.10 alpha &gt; 9.04!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good thing you 're anonymous - 9.10 alpha &gt; 9.04 !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good thing you're anonymous - 9.10 alpha &gt; 9.04!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220811</id>
	<title>Obli Anti-MS</title>
	<author>Barumpus</author>
	<datestamp>1244208840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...but whatever you do, please DON'T DOWNLOAD THEM! Unless of course you are a developer or take great pleasure in incomplete, unpredictable, and potentially crashing software.</p></div><p>Nothing new here. I get the same thing on Windows. Browser of choice does not matter.</p><p>By no means nothing against Windows. But it was the absolute first thing that came to mind when I read it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...but whatever you do , please DO N'T DOWNLOAD THEM !
Unless of course you are a developer or take great pleasure in incomplete , unpredictable , and potentially crashing software.Nothing new here .
I get the same thing on Windows .
Browser of choice does not matter.By no means nothing against Windows .
But it was the absolute first thing that came to mind when I read it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...but whatever you do, please DON'T DOWNLOAD THEM!
Unless of course you are a developer or take great pleasure in incomplete, unpredictable, and potentially crashing software.Nothing new here.
I get the same thing on Windows.
Browser of choice does not matter.By no means nothing against Windows.
But it was the absolute first thing that came to mind when I read it.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222147</id>
	<title>Re:Already have Safari, kbyethnx</title>
	<author>cbhacking</author>
	<datestamp>1244215800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Avoiding software monoculture. On both OS X and Windows, Safari has been shown to have a substantial number of security flaws. Even if I liked its minimal configurability and general look and feel (I don't, but that's a personal thing) the security issues would lead me to avoid using it, much like IE6. (Hmm... is this some kind of rite of passage for a browser bundled with an OS? I hope Apple gets its security act in gear faster than Microsoft did - they're starting to become popular enough to be a worthwhile target.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Avoiding software monoculture .
On both OS X and Windows , Safari has been shown to have a substantial number of security flaws .
Even if I liked its minimal configurability and general look and feel ( I do n't , but that 's a personal thing ) the security issues would lead me to avoid using it , much like IE6 .
( Hmm... is this some kind of rite of passage for a browser bundled with an OS ?
I hope Apple gets its security act in gear faster than Microsoft did - they 're starting to become popular enough to be a worthwhile target .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Avoiding software monoculture.
On both OS X and Windows, Safari has been shown to have a substantial number of security flaws.
Even if I liked its minimal configurability and general look and feel (I don't, but that's a personal thing) the security issues would lead me to avoid using it, much like IE6.
(Hmm... is this some kind of rite of passage for a browser bundled with an OS?
I hope Apple gets its security act in gear faster than Microsoft did - they're starting to become popular enough to be a worthwhile target.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219863</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222983</id>
	<title>why delays</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244218920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If this is based on webkit why the H-E double hockey sticks is it taking so long to develop a version for Mac/Linux? If this was Microsoft we would all be up in arms about them dragging their feet. What's up Google? I like Firefox on the Mac but I also like competition and would love to try Chrome. On windows I stopped using Firefox after IE 7 came out. IE 8 is a bit buggy in spots but overall good.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If this is based on webkit why the H-E double hockey sticks is it taking so long to develop a version for Mac/Linux ?
If this was Microsoft we would all be up in arms about them dragging their feet .
What 's up Google ?
I like Firefox on the Mac but I also like competition and would love to try Chrome .
On windows I stopped using Firefox after IE 7 came out .
IE 8 is a bit buggy in spots but overall good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If this is based on webkit why the H-E double hockey sticks is it taking so long to develop a version for Mac/Linux?
If this was Microsoft we would all be up in arms about them dragging their feet.
What's up Google?
I like Firefox on the Mac but I also like competition and would love to try Chrome.
On windows I stopped using Firefox after IE 7 came out.
IE 8 is a bit buggy in spots but overall good.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219877</id>
	<title>Chromium (not Google Chrome) already works nicely</title>
	<author>pieterh</author>
	<datestamp>1244199360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been using Chromium for some time on my Eee 1000, since FireFox hangs intermittently (slow SSD, which does not like apps that write a lot of stuff).</p><p>Chromium is a pleasant experience, fast and snappy.  It used to crash all the time (e.g. when doing a copy/paste) but has been improved daily, and is now stable and usable.  I don't know what the Google branded version would add on top.  "DON'T DOWNLOAD" sounds like reverse psychology.  Definitely, download, and use if you have a machine that is a little slower than the average desktop.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been using Chromium for some time on my Eee 1000 , since FireFox hangs intermittently ( slow SSD , which does not like apps that write a lot of stuff ) .Chromium is a pleasant experience , fast and snappy .
It used to crash all the time ( e.g .
when doing a copy/paste ) but has been improved daily , and is now stable and usable .
I do n't know what the Google branded version would add on top .
" DO N'T DOWNLOAD " sounds like reverse psychology .
Definitely , download , and use if you have a machine that is a little slower than the average desktop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been using Chromium for some time on my Eee 1000, since FireFox hangs intermittently (slow SSD, which does not like apps that write a lot of stuff).Chromium is a pleasant experience, fast and snappy.
It used to crash all the time (e.g.
when doing a copy/paste) but has been improved daily, and is now stable and usable.
I don't know what the Google branded version would add on top.
"DON'T DOWNLOAD" sounds like reverse psychology.
Definitely, download, and use if you have a machine that is a little slower than the average desktop.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28229319</id>
	<title>Re:Still mad at Google</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244211660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, why don't they use QT, fund Nokia to fix the performance (if any critical)?</p><p>Google is one of the company that can go straight to the point without moving to sideways by their good financial status. And then everyone else developing cross platform applications can benefit too. And Google is trying to act like some private company by self doing everything?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , why do n't they use QT , fund Nokia to fix the performance ( if any critical ) ? Google is one of the company that can go straight to the point without moving to sideways by their good financial status .
And then everyone else developing cross platform applications can benefit too .
And Google is trying to act like some private company by self doing everything ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, why don't they use QT, fund Nokia to fix the performance (if any critical)?Google is one of the company that can go straight to the point without moving to sideways by their good financial status.
And then everyone else developing cross platform applications can benefit too.
And Google is trying to act like some private company by self doing everything?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222841</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28289695</id>
	<title>How incomplete ?</title>
	<author>pavithran</author>
	<datestamp>1244658600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><b>Quote:</b> <br>
<i>How incomplete? So incomplete that, among other things , you won't yet be able to view YouTube videos, change your privacy settings, set your default search provider, or even print.
</i> <br>
<b>End Quote</b> <br>
<br>
I was shocked to see a browser which was unable to display web pages<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:O
<br>
The irony is that it comes from <b>a company</b> which is a leader on the web and uses GNU/Linux extensively .
<br>
Other problems being I was unable to open the JS console or task manager<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. maybe <b>in simple words</b> this is a broken software which is <b>not even suitable for testing</b> !!
<br>
<b>Details:</b> <br>
Running google chrome 3.0.183.1 on Debian lenny 2.6.26-1-686 with KDE 4.1.4</div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Quote : How incomplete ?
So incomplete that , among other things , you wo n't yet be able to view YouTube videos , change your privacy settings , set your default search provider , or even print .
End Quote I was shocked to see a browser which was unable to display web pages : O The irony is that it comes from a company which is a leader on the web and uses GNU/Linux extensively .
Other problems being I was unable to open the JS console or task manager .. maybe in simple words this is a broken software which is not even suitable for testing ! !
Details : Running google chrome 3.0.183.1 on Debian lenny 2.6.26-1-686 with KDE 4.1.4</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Quote: 
How incomplete?
So incomplete that, among other things , you won't yet be able to view YouTube videos, change your privacy settings, set your default search provider, or even print.
End Quote 

I was shocked to see a browser which was unable to display web pages :O

The irony is that it comes from a company which is a leader on the web and uses GNU/Linux extensively .
Other problems being I was unable to open the JS console or task manager .. maybe in simple words this is a broken software which is not even suitable for testing !!
Details: 
Running google chrome 3.0.183.1 on Debian lenny 2.6.26-1-686 with KDE 4.1.4
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28223369</id>
	<title>Re:Still mad at Google</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244220300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hate to break it to you dude, but here's the reason Google didn't use Qt: they don't want to beta-test and work around your software. Sure, Qt in theory works on Linux, Mac and Windows, and newer versions can even be made to look reasonably native. What do you do when it doesn't work? Say a control looks weird on Windows, or the layout spacing is weird on OS X, or you want to add a widget that's a little outside Qt's standard set (such as a tab bar that melds with the title bar at the top of the window), or you run into a performance problem. If you're using Qt, your only option is to go debug someone else's giant library, learn how it works, then learn what is the minimal way to change it so it does the thing you wanted, then hope that your change can get integrated into trunk so that you don't have to maintain your own fork of Qt going forward. If you develop your own UI toolkit on each platform, it takes a bit longer to get started, but you can ensure that you have full control over the software, that it's blazingly fast, and that you have a developer who understand exactly what it's doing. Qt is "good enough" if you just want to get a GUI on the screen on 3 platforms and forget about it, but it's not there for getting a *great* GUI. And the whole point of the Google Chrome team is to write a fantastic GUI; not Bob's Open Source Music Player, not Joe's Programming Editor, but a web browser that people spend 90\% of their computer time interacting with. Qt is obviously still in development, and eventually it *may* turn nice enough that people want to write native Windows and OS X apps in it, or it may turn out like GTK and look like crap even with the "native" look. But in general it's going to be harder to make a cross-platform toolkit than to work separately on each platform when you care about the details.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hate to break it to you dude , but here 's the reason Google did n't use Qt : they do n't want to beta-test and work around your software .
Sure , Qt in theory works on Linux , Mac and Windows , and newer versions can even be made to look reasonably native .
What do you do when it does n't work ?
Say a control looks weird on Windows , or the layout spacing is weird on OS X , or you want to add a widget that 's a little outside Qt 's standard set ( such as a tab bar that melds with the title bar at the top of the window ) , or you run into a performance problem .
If you 're using Qt , your only option is to go debug someone else 's giant library , learn how it works , then learn what is the minimal way to change it so it does the thing you wanted , then hope that your change can get integrated into trunk so that you do n't have to maintain your own fork of Qt going forward .
If you develop your own UI toolkit on each platform , it takes a bit longer to get started , but you can ensure that you have full control over the software , that it 's blazingly fast , and that you have a developer who understand exactly what it 's doing .
Qt is " good enough " if you just want to get a GUI on the screen on 3 platforms and forget about it , but it 's not there for getting a * great * GUI .
And the whole point of the Google Chrome team is to write a fantastic GUI ; not Bob 's Open Source Music Player , not Joe 's Programming Editor , but a web browser that people spend 90 \ % of their computer time interacting with .
Qt is obviously still in development , and eventually it * may * turn nice enough that people want to write native Windows and OS X apps in it , or it may turn out like GTK and look like crap even with the " native " look .
But in general it 's going to be harder to make a cross-platform toolkit than to work separately on each platform when you care about the details .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hate to break it to you dude, but here's the reason Google didn't use Qt: they don't want to beta-test and work around your software.
Sure, Qt in theory works on Linux, Mac and Windows, and newer versions can even be made to look reasonably native.
What do you do when it doesn't work?
Say a control looks weird on Windows, or the layout spacing is weird on OS X, or you want to add a widget that's a little outside Qt's standard set (such as a tab bar that melds with the title bar at the top of the window), or you run into a performance problem.
If you're using Qt, your only option is to go debug someone else's giant library, learn how it works, then learn what is the minimal way to change it so it does the thing you wanted, then hope that your change can get integrated into trunk so that you don't have to maintain your own fork of Qt going forward.
If you develop your own UI toolkit on each platform, it takes a bit longer to get started, but you can ensure that you have full control over the software, that it's blazingly fast, and that you have a developer who understand exactly what it's doing.
Qt is "good enough" if you just want to get a GUI on the screen on 3 platforms and forget about it, but it's not there for getting a *great* GUI.
And the whole point of the Google Chrome team is to write a fantastic GUI; not Bob's Open Source Music Player, not Joe's Programming Editor, but a web browser that people spend 90\% of their computer time interacting with.
Qt is obviously still in development, and eventually it *may* turn nice enough that people want to write native Windows and OS X apps in it, or it may turn out like GTK and look like crap even with the "native" look.
But in general it's going to be harder to make a cross-platform toolkit than to work separately on each platform when you care about the details.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220129</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220091</id>
	<title>Re:It's okay</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244201700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mainly it is conflict of interest.</p><p>Mozilla have went too far at adding ever-more useless features to the Firefox code, instead of fixing the ACTUAL problems with it.<br>Google do not want that, they went to leave the features entirely to plugins. (more-or-less)</p><p>And considering the way that Chrome will handle plugins, i can say this as fact: Chrome &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Firefox<br>Chrome won't waste resources on plugins, you don't want one active?  The sub-process is terminated, memory is released, simple. No restarts needed.<br>Firefox?  "Oh, sorry bub, looks like you're going to have to shut 'er all down and wait while i get 'er back on her feet, should take a few minutes if you're lucky."</p><p>It is a shame what has happened to Firefox, it could have been so much more, but Mozilla ruined it all. (IMO)<br>Instead of adding a "billion more features", they could have spent time streamlining the code, actually making the browser more modular to save on resources.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mainly it is conflict of interest.Mozilla have went too far at adding ever-more useless features to the Firefox code , instead of fixing the ACTUAL problems with it.Google do not want that , they went to leave the features entirely to plugins .
( more-or-less ) And considering the way that Chrome will handle plugins , i can say this as fact : Chrome &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; FirefoxChrome wo n't waste resources on plugins , you do n't want one active ?
The sub-process is terminated , memory is released , simple .
No restarts needed.Firefox ?
" Oh , sorry bub , looks like you 're going to have to shut 'er all down and wait while i get 'er back on her feet , should take a few minutes if you 're lucky .
" It is a shame what has happened to Firefox , it could have been so much more , but Mozilla ruined it all .
( IMO ) Instead of adding a " billion more features " , they could have spent time streamlining the code , actually making the browser more modular to save on resources .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mainly it is conflict of interest.Mozilla have went too far at adding ever-more useless features to the Firefox code, instead of fixing the ACTUAL problems with it.Google do not want that, they went to leave the features entirely to plugins.
(more-or-less)And considering the way that Chrome will handle plugins, i can say this as fact: Chrome &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; FirefoxChrome won't waste resources on plugins, you don't want one active?
The sub-process is terminated, memory is released, simple.
No restarts needed.Firefox?
"Oh, sorry bub, looks like you're going to have to shut 'er all down and wait while i get 'er back on her feet, should take a few minutes if you're lucky.
"It is a shame what has happened to Firefox, it could have been so much more, but Mozilla ruined it all.
(IMO)Instead of adding a "billion more features", they could have spent time streamlining the code, actually making the browser more modular to save on resources.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219905</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221157
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28234303
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219875
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220049
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28251925
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219875
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220049
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221351
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28224729
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219959
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220441
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219867
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220041
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219909
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220477
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220129
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28223369
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219877
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220935
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219867
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220321
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221525
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221215
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28223041
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219905
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220039
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219863
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219891
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222057
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219867
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220321
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221745
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220229
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221691
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220063
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219905
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220055
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219915
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221645
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219915
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221473
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219875
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220341
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219875
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220643
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219905
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220091
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219875
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220049
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28223265
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219867
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220321
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220597
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219915
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219875
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220049
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28281795
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219867
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28223921
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219905
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220125
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220917
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219863
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220715
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220229
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221181
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219867
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221539
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221215
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28223179
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220229
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222069
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221157
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28229395
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219905
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221267
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220229
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220455
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220059
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221097
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219915
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221819
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219905
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220125
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221629
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219875
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220049
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28235537
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219915
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221229
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219915
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220927
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219875
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220981
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219863
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219891
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221625
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219909
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220915
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220229
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221045
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219875
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220169
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220907
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28291561
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220129
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221241
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222841
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28224257
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219905
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220081
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28229325
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220229
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220625
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219905
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220125
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220603
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219915
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220669
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219863
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222927
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220129
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221241
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222841
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28229319
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219875
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220049
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221743
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220059
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220279
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219867
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220321
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220427
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219863
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222147
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219867
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28224757
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220059
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220079
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28248313
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219915
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220559
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219863
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219891
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222385
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220229
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28225963
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219877
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221001
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220121
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28223073
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219863
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222241
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221215
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28224057
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219863
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219891
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222937
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219863
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219893
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220129
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221241
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28226495
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219863
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219891
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28228535
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0517231_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220059
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220705
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0517231.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221157
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28234303
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28229395
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0517231.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220037
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220063
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0517231.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220159
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0517231.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219905
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220081
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28229325
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220125
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221629
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220917
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220603
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220091
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220039
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221267
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220055
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0517231.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219909
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220915
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220477
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0517231.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220907
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28291561
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0517231.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220059
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220279
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221097
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220705
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220079
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28248313
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0517231.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28226901
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0517231.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220105
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0517231.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221215
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28224057
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28223179
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28223041
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0517231.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219863
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222147
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219893
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219885
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222927
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220715
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219891
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220913
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221625
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222057
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222937
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222385
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28228535
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222241
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0517231.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219915
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220927
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221229
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221473
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220669
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221819
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221213
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220559
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221645
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0517231.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219973
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0517231.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220121
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28223073
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0517231.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220129
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28223369
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221241
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28226495
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222841
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28224257
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28229319
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0517231.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219867
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220321
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220427
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220597
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221745
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221525
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221539
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28223921
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28224757
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220041
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0517231.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220229
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221181
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220625
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220455
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28222069
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221691
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221045
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28225963
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0517231.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219877
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220935
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221001
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0517231.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219875
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220169
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220049
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28235537
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221351
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28224729
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28281795
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28221743
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28251925
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28223265
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220341
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220981
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220643
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0517231.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28219959
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0517231.28220441
</commentlist>
</conversation>
