<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_15_147251</id>
	<title>Fifteen Classic PC Design Mistakes</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1245077100000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="mailto:harry@technologizer.com" rel="nofollow">Harry</a> writes <i>"Once upon a time, it wasn't a given that PC owners should be able to format their own floppy disks. Or that ports should be standard, not proprietary. Or that it was a lousy idea to hardwire a PC's AC adapter, or to put the power supply in the printer so that a printer failure rendered the PC unusable, too. Over at Technologizer, Benj Edwards has taken a look at some of the <a href="http://technologizer.com/2009/06/14/fifteen-classic-pc-design-mistakes/">worst design decisions from personal computing's early years</a> &mdash; including ones involving famous flops such as the PCJr, obscure failures such as Mattel's Aquarius, and machines that succeeded despite flaws, like the first Mac. In most instances &mdash; but not all &mdash; their bad decisions taught the rest of the industry not to make the same errors again."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Harry writes " Once upon a time , it was n't a given that PC owners should be able to format their own floppy disks .
Or that ports should be standard , not proprietary .
Or that it was a lousy idea to hardwire a PC 's AC adapter , or to put the power supply in the printer so that a printer failure rendered the PC unusable , too .
Over at Technologizer , Benj Edwards has taken a look at some of the worst design decisions from personal computing 's early years    including ones involving famous flops such as the PCJr , obscure failures such as Mattel 's Aquarius , and machines that succeeded despite flaws , like the first Mac .
In most instances    but not all    their bad decisions taught the rest of the industry not to make the same errors again .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Harry writes "Once upon a time, it wasn't a given that PC owners should be able to format their own floppy disks.
Or that ports should be standard, not proprietary.
Or that it was a lousy idea to hardwire a PC's AC adapter, or to put the power supply in the printer so that a printer failure rendered the PC unusable, too.
Over at Technologizer, Benj Edwards has taken a look at some of the worst design decisions from personal computing's early years — including ones involving famous flops such as the PCJr, obscure failures such as Mattel's Aquarius, and machines that succeeded despite flaws, like the first Mac.
In most instances — but not all — their bad decisions taught the rest of the industry not to make the same errors again.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335933</id>
	<title>Re: The 15 problems</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245084060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>More like blindingly intense blue LEDs period on all current hardware. Give me back my soft red LEDs...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>More like blindingly intense blue LEDs period on all current hardware .
Give me back my soft red LEDs.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More like blindingly intense blue LEDs period on all current hardware.
Give me back my soft red LEDs...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336723</id>
	<title>No standard connectors in 1983</title>
	<author>fm6</author>
	<datestamp>1245087360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The PCjr's serial port, monitor port, joystick ports, keyboard port, and others used different connectors from the IBM PC.  In fact they were not only non-standard connectors, but completely proprietary connectors that couldn't be found on any other computer.</p></div><p>People, this is 1983. <i>All</i> connectors were "non-standard". Nowadays we're used to a standard connector and pinout for <a href="http://www.lammertbies.nl/comm/cable/RS-232.html" title="lammertbies.nl">RS-232</a> [lammertbies.nl] and <a href="http://www.diyha.co.uk/electronics/parallel.html" title="diyha.co.uk">parallel</a> [diyha.co.uk] ports on the back of PCs. But in 1983, exactly one model of computer used them: the IBM PC. It didn't more than a couple years for people to realize that the only way to compete with the IBM PC was to be <i>extremely</i> compatible with it. But when the PC Jr. came out, everybody (<i>especially</i> IBM) used business and sales models that paid no attention to the idea that computers and their components could be commodified.</p><p>Small qualification: the use of 25-pin D-shaped connectors with specific pinouts was part of the RS-232 standard. But 25-conductor, straight-across cables cost, and you actually didn't need most of those signals for typical applications. So making cables that would connect some random computer to some random modem or serial printer was a serious black art. There was even a <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Rs-232-Solution-Joe-Campbell/dp/0895884887" title="amazon.com">book</a> [amazon.com] on the subject.</p><p>(Jerry Pournelle once wrote that he used internal modems because he could never remember the pinouts he needed to make cables. But by the time he wrote this, RS-232 pinouts had been standardized and cheap pre-made modem cables were in all the stores. Pournelle is the original know-it-all ignoramus computer pundit.)</p><p>Parallel printer cables were even worse. They all used the  <a href="http://pinouts.ru/connector/36\_pin\_CENTRONICS\_female\_connector.shtml" title="pinouts.ru">Centronic</a> [pinouts.ru] de-facto standard on the printer side. But to save money, everybody used 25-pin D connectors at the computer side, and the way the 36 Centronics signals mapped to those 25 computer pins was different for every manufacturer. It took IBM to standardize the pinout, and also to standardize making the printer connector female so you didn't accidentally plug a modem into it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The PCjr 's serial port , monitor port , joystick ports , keyboard port , and others used different connectors from the IBM PC .
In fact they were not only non-standard connectors , but completely proprietary connectors that could n't be found on any other computer.People , this is 1983 .
All connectors were " non-standard " .
Nowadays we 're used to a standard connector and pinout for RS-232 [ lammertbies.nl ] and parallel [ diyha.co.uk ] ports on the back of PCs .
But in 1983 , exactly one model of computer used them : the IBM PC .
It did n't more than a couple years for people to realize that the only way to compete with the IBM PC was to be extremely compatible with it .
But when the PC Jr. came out , everybody ( especially IBM ) used business and sales models that paid no attention to the idea that computers and their components could be commodified.Small qualification : the use of 25-pin D-shaped connectors with specific pinouts was part of the RS-232 standard .
But 25-conductor , straight-across cables cost , and you actually did n't need most of those signals for typical applications .
So making cables that would connect some random computer to some random modem or serial printer was a serious black art .
There was even a book [ amazon.com ] on the subject .
( Jerry Pournelle once wrote that he used internal modems because he could never remember the pinouts he needed to make cables .
But by the time he wrote this , RS-232 pinouts had been standardized and cheap pre-made modem cables were in all the stores .
Pournelle is the original know-it-all ignoramus computer pundit .
) Parallel printer cables were even worse .
They all used the Centronic [ pinouts.ru ] de-facto standard on the printer side .
But to save money , everybody used 25-pin D connectors at the computer side , and the way the 36 Centronics signals mapped to those 25 computer pins was different for every manufacturer .
It took IBM to standardize the pinout , and also to standardize making the printer connector female so you did n't accidentally plug a modem into it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The PCjr's serial port, monitor port, joystick ports, keyboard port, and others used different connectors from the IBM PC.
In fact they were not only non-standard connectors, but completely proprietary connectors that couldn't be found on any other computer.People, this is 1983.
All connectors were "non-standard".
Nowadays we're used to a standard connector and pinout for RS-232 [lammertbies.nl] and parallel [diyha.co.uk] ports on the back of PCs.
But in 1983, exactly one model of computer used them: the IBM PC.
It didn't more than a couple years for people to realize that the only way to compete with the IBM PC was to be extremely compatible with it.
But when the PC Jr. came out, everybody (especially IBM) used business and sales models that paid no attention to the idea that computers and their components could be commodified.Small qualification: the use of 25-pin D-shaped connectors with specific pinouts was part of the RS-232 standard.
But 25-conductor, straight-across cables cost, and you actually didn't need most of those signals for typical applications.
So making cables that would connect some random computer to some random modem or serial printer was a serious black art.
There was even a book [amazon.com] on the subject.
(Jerry Pournelle once wrote that he used internal modems because he could never remember the pinouts he needed to make cables.
But by the time he wrote this, RS-232 pinouts had been standardized and cheap pre-made modem cables were in all the stores.
Pournelle is the original know-it-all ignoramus computer pundit.
)Parallel printer cables were even worse.
They all used the  Centronic [pinouts.ru] de-facto standard on the printer side.
But to save money, everybody used 25-pin D connectors at the computer side, and the way the 36 Centronics signals mapped to those 25 computer pins was different for every manufacturer.
It took IBM to standardize the pinout, and also to standardize making the printer connector female so you didn't accidentally plug a modem into it.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336021</id>
	<title>Re:biggest mistake: PC = 8088 not M68000!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245084480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The cost for 16bit hardware was considerably higher.  This was not a mistake, but a very practical decision to allow the IBM PC to use existing hardware with little modification.  The other reason for not using the 68000 was that part of the point of using a member of the 808x family was so that CP/M could be run on the PC (that's not the direction they went in the end, but still CP/M was the king of business systems at the time).</p><p>IBM was very specifically making a business decision.  There wasn't a lot of software out there for the 68000, 16-bit hardware was expensive, and the 808x were a battle tested family of chips with excellent hardware support.  When RAM was uber-expensive, nobody gave a damn about how big a theoretical address space a CPU could access, or whether it could more adequately support pre-emptive multitasking.  These factors really only came into play by the late 1980s when hardware and RAM prices began to drop.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The cost for 16bit hardware was considerably higher .
This was not a mistake , but a very practical decision to allow the IBM PC to use existing hardware with little modification .
The other reason for not using the 68000 was that part of the point of using a member of the 808x family was so that CP/M could be run on the PC ( that 's not the direction they went in the end , but still CP/M was the king of business systems at the time ) .IBM was very specifically making a business decision .
There was n't a lot of software out there for the 68000 , 16-bit hardware was expensive , and the 808x were a battle tested family of chips with excellent hardware support .
When RAM was uber-expensive , nobody gave a damn about how big a theoretical address space a CPU could access , or whether it could more adequately support pre-emptive multitasking .
These factors really only came into play by the late 1980s when hardware and RAM prices began to drop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The cost for 16bit hardware was considerably higher.
This was not a mistake, but a very practical decision to allow the IBM PC to use existing hardware with little modification.
The other reason for not using the 68000 was that part of the point of using a member of the 808x family was so that CP/M could be run on the PC (that's not the direction they went in the end, but still CP/M was the king of business systems at the time).IBM was very specifically making a business decision.
There wasn't a lot of software out there for the 68000, 16-bit hardware was expensive, and the 808x were a battle tested family of chips with excellent hardware support.
When RAM was uber-expensive, nobody gave a damn about how big a theoretical address space a CPU could access, or whether it could more adequately support pre-emptive multitasking.
These factors really only came into play by the late 1980s when hardware and RAM prices began to drop.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335801</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335683</id>
	<title>Re:CapsLock</title>
	<author>jbeale53</author>
	<datestamp>1245083160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The NumLock has got to be more useless these days than the CapsLock ever has been.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The NumLock has got to be more useless these days than the CapsLock ever has been .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The NumLock has got to be more useless these days than the CapsLock ever has been.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339201</id>
	<title>Re:Amiga I/O ports</title>
	<author>Megane</author>
	<datestamp>1245097680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You might want to look into something called a "Catweasel" board. It's basically a disc controller which reads the spacing of the magnetic transitions without trying to interpret them. But there's a good chance that the disc is in some variant of FM/MFM format, which is a bit more reliable to copy on a Catweasel than a raw bit copy. The main thing left that you would have to worry about is whether you need a 40 track drive or an 80 track drive to write the copy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You might want to look into something called a " Catweasel " board .
It 's basically a disc controller which reads the spacing of the magnetic transitions without trying to interpret them .
But there 's a good chance that the disc is in some variant of FM/MFM format , which is a bit more reliable to copy on a Catweasel than a raw bit copy .
The main thing left that you would have to worry about is whether you need a 40 track drive or an 80 track drive to write the copy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You might want to look into something called a "Catweasel" board.
It's basically a disc controller which reads the spacing of the magnetic transitions without trying to interpret them.
But there's a good chance that the disc is in some variant of FM/MFM format, which is a bit more reliable to copy on a Catweasel than a raw bit copy.
The main thing left that you would have to worry about is whether you need a 40 track drive or an 80 track drive to write the copy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28341445</id>
	<title>Re:#1 failure...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245064320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First of all, IBM chose the 8088 for the PC. That enabled it to easily use 8-bit peripherals that were common at the time, and made porting CP/M software easy.</p><p>Hindsight is 20/20, but it's easy to forget that many of the things that seem like poor design decisions now, may have been necessary to make the machine popular enough to become the de facto industry standard.</p><p>Perhaps it was actually the 8086's compact instruction set that allowed vendors to fit more/better software in the paltry memory that was available back then (a base model PC shipped with 64k, which is why 640k seemed so immense). A 68000 might have required more RAM for the same program, making the machine less likely to succeed. Remember, there were *lots* of M68k machines (IBM was probably the only company that didn't have one) -- maybe none of those made it because the x86 really has some evolutionary advantages.</p><p>dom</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First of all , IBM chose the 8088 for the PC .
That enabled it to easily use 8-bit peripherals that were common at the time , and made porting CP/M software easy.Hindsight is 20/20 , but it 's easy to forget that many of the things that seem like poor design decisions now , may have been necessary to make the machine popular enough to become the de facto industry standard.Perhaps it was actually the 8086 's compact instruction set that allowed vendors to fit more/better software in the paltry memory that was available back then ( a base model PC shipped with 64k , which is why 640k seemed so immense ) .
A 68000 might have required more RAM for the same program , making the machine less likely to succeed .
Remember , there were * lots * of M68k machines ( IBM was probably the only company that did n't have one ) -- maybe none of those made it because the x86 really has some evolutionary advantages.dom</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First of all, IBM chose the 8088 for the PC.
That enabled it to easily use 8-bit peripherals that were common at the time, and made porting CP/M software easy.Hindsight is 20/20, but it's easy to forget that many of the things that seem like poor design decisions now, may have been necessary to make the machine popular enough to become the de facto industry standard.Perhaps it was actually the 8086's compact instruction set that allowed vendors to fit more/better software in the paltry memory that was available back then (a base model PC shipped with 64k, which is why 640k seemed so immense).
A 68000 might have required more RAM for the same program, making the machine less likely to succeed.
Remember, there were *lots* of M68k machines (IBM was probably the only company that didn't have one) -- maybe none of those made it because the x86 really has some evolutionary advantages.dom</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335445</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336045</id>
	<title>Not so classic design problem</title>
	<author>motherpusbucket</author>
	<datestamp>1245084540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why do so many MOBO's have the SATA connectors behind the PCI Express slots?  It is amazing that this problem is still around.  Do the designer's even do a cursory simulation of SLI boards being installed before finalizing their layouts?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do so many MOBO 's have the SATA connectors behind the PCI Express slots ?
It is amazing that this problem is still around .
Do the designer 's even do a cursory simulation of SLI boards being installed before finalizing their layouts ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why do so many MOBO's have the SATA connectors behind the PCI Express slots?
It is amazing that this problem is still around.
Do the designer's even do a cursory simulation of SLI boards being installed before finalizing their layouts?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337987</id>
	<title>Re:worst: sharp unfinished inside edges in cheap c</title>
	<author>steelfood</author>
	<datestamp>1245093120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>- Beige Only. You can pick any color, as long as it is beige. Why did it take so bloody long to offer any other color then beige? Critical mass?</p></div><p>It took Steve Jobs returning to Apple after having been kicked out previously. The iMac was probably the first line of computers to have colors other than beige and black. You really need to thank Jobs for making people realize that it's nice to have a PC that looks decent.</p><p>As well, normal people started using PC's, or perhaps PC's suddenly catered to normal people. While the technically inclined are purely interested in utility, normal people tend to factor in looks as well as utility.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>- Beige Only .
You can pick any color , as long as it is beige .
Why did it take so bloody long to offer any other color then beige ?
Critical mass ? It took Steve Jobs returning to Apple after having been kicked out previously .
The iMac was probably the first line of computers to have colors other than beige and black .
You really need to thank Jobs for making people realize that it 's nice to have a PC that looks decent.As well , normal people started using PC 's , or perhaps PC 's suddenly catered to normal people .
While the technically inclined are purely interested in utility , normal people tend to factor in looks as well as utility .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>- Beige Only.
You can pick any color, as long as it is beige.
Why did it take so bloody long to offer any other color then beige?
Critical mass?It took Steve Jobs returning to Apple after having been kicked out previously.
The iMac was probably the first line of computers to have colors other than beige and black.
You really need to thank Jobs for making people realize that it's nice to have a PC that looks decent.As well, normal people started using PC's, or perhaps PC's suddenly catered to normal people.
While the technically inclined are purely interested in utility, normal people tend to factor in looks as well as utility.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339971</id>
	<title>Re:#1 failure...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245057480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hate to be nit-picky, but IBM did NOT use an 8086.</p><p>All of the first IBM "PCs", like the 5150 and the XT, were using the 8 bit Intel 8088, NOT the 16 bit 8086.  When IBM went to 16 bit CPUs, it skipped straight to the 80286, then the '386.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hate to be nit-picky , but IBM did NOT use an 8086.All of the first IBM " PCs " , like the 5150 and the XT , were using the 8 bit Intel 8088 , NOT the 16 bit 8086 .
When IBM went to 16 bit CPUs , it skipped straight to the 80286 , then the '386 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hate to be nit-picky, but IBM did NOT use an 8086.All of the first IBM "PCs", like the 5150 and the XT, were using the 8 bit Intel 8088, NOT the 16 bit 8086.
When IBM went to 16 bit CPUs, it skipped straight to the 80286, then the '386.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335445</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337997</id>
	<title>The Apple ][ RESET key above the Return key</title>
	<author>tweedlebait</author>
	<datestamp>1245093120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>is one I'd have to add to the list.  Much anguish was had from that design, and sometimes the keyboard PCB would flex in a way so that pressing Return or another adjacent key would actually reset!</p><p><a href="http://www1.cs.columbia.edu/~sedwards/apple2fpga/Apple-II-Guts.jpg" title="columbia.edu">http://www1.cs.columbia.edu/~sedwards/apple2fpga/Apple-II-Guts.jpg</a> [columbia.edu]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is one I 'd have to add to the list .
Much anguish was had from that design , and sometimes the keyboard PCB would flex in a way so that pressing Return or another adjacent key would actually reset ! http : //www1.cs.columbia.edu/ ~ sedwards/apple2fpga/Apple-II-Guts.jpg [ columbia.edu ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is one I'd have to add to the list.
Much anguish was had from that design, and sometimes the keyboard PCB would flex in a way so that pressing Return or another adjacent key would actually reset!http://www1.cs.columbia.edu/~sedwards/apple2fpga/Apple-II-Guts.jpg [columbia.edu]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338673</id>
	<title>Re: The 15 problems</title>
	<author>that IT girl</author>
	<datestamp>1245096060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ugh, yes. I got blackout curtains to make my room darker, which worked wonders, but it makes this blue blinking light <i>even more noticeable</i>. I took my external Seagate drive and leaned it up against the front of the PC, longways, in an attempt to block the light from the power button itself. Helped a tiny bit, but it's so bright it actually shines through the other holes in the case, around drives and etc, and STILL makes blinky blue patterns on my ceiling all night.
<br> <br>
I'm actually considering the <i>unheard of</i> option of powering it off at night (when I'm not leaving something running or downloading, anyway). Horrors!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ugh , yes .
I got blackout curtains to make my room darker , which worked wonders , but it makes this blue blinking light even more noticeable .
I took my external Seagate drive and leaned it up against the front of the PC , longways , in an attempt to block the light from the power button itself .
Helped a tiny bit , but it 's so bright it actually shines through the other holes in the case , around drives and etc , and STILL makes blinky blue patterns on my ceiling all night .
I 'm actually considering the unheard of option of powering it off at night ( when I 'm not leaving something running or downloading , anyway ) .
Horrors !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ugh, yes.
I got blackout curtains to make my room darker, which worked wonders, but it makes this blue blinking light even more noticeable.
I took my external Seagate drive and leaned it up against the front of the PC, longways, in an attempt to block the light from the power button itself.
Helped a tiny bit, but it's so bright it actually shines through the other holes in the case, around drives and etc, and STILL makes blinky blue patterns on my ceiling all night.
I'm actually considering the unheard of option of powering it off at night (when I'm not leaving something running or downloading, anyway).
Horrors!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339391</id>
	<title>Re:Worst Mistake That Still Needs Fixing</title>
	<author>JStegmaier</author>
	<datestamp>1245098340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>it uses a proprietary mini-displayport connector

I do not think that word means what you think it means.<br> <br>"<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mini\_DisplayPort" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Apple announced that it would license the Mini DisplayPort connector with no fee.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... VESA announced that Mini DisplayPort would be included in the upcoming DisplayPort 1.2 specification.</a> [wikipedia.org]"</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>it uses a proprietary mini-displayport connector I do not think that word means what you think it means .
" Apple announced that it would license the Mini DisplayPort connector with no fee .
... VESA announced that Mini DisplayPort would be included in the upcoming DisplayPort 1.2 specification .
[ wikipedia.org ] "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it uses a proprietary mini-displayport connector

I do not think that word means what you think it means.
"Apple announced that it would license the Mini DisplayPort connector with no fee.
... VESA announced that Mini DisplayPort would be included in the upcoming DisplayPort 1.2 specification.
[wikipedia.org]"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337465</id>
	<title>Re:The 15 problems</title>
	<author>ClosedSource</author>
	<datestamp>1245090780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Xerox's mistake was never releasing a low-cost version of their GUI based computers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Xerox 's mistake was never releasing a low-cost version of their GUI based computers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Xerox's mistake was never releasing a low-cost version of their GUI based computers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335693</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336595</id>
	<title>Re:I don't agree</title>
	<author>Megane</author>
	<datestamp>1245086760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The 68000's real problem was Motorola. The marketing people at Motorola wanted the 68000 to be a low-volume high-margin chip for use in Unix workstations and other $10k+ computers. It took too long for them to get out of that mentality. Read <a href="http://www.easy68k.com/paulrsm/dg/dg.htm" title="easy68k.com">DTACK Grounded</a> [easy68k.com] for more on this. (Yes, I know that's a lot to read.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The 68000 's real problem was Motorola .
The marketing people at Motorola wanted the 68000 to be a low-volume high-margin chip for use in Unix workstations and other $ 10k + computers .
It took too long for them to get out of that mentality .
Read DTACK Grounded [ easy68k.com ] for more on this .
( Yes , I know that 's a lot to read .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The 68000's real problem was Motorola.
The marketing people at Motorola wanted the 68000 to be a low-volume high-margin chip for use in Unix workstations and other $10k+ computers.
It took too long for them to get out of that mentality.
Read DTACK Grounded [easy68k.com] for more on this.
(Yes, I know that's a lot to read.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335749</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338285</id>
	<title>Re:Worst Mistake That Still Needs Fixing</title>
	<author>Huge\_UID</author>
	<datestamp>1245094560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>15 seconds on google.  Search string:  "displayport to mini displayport cable"<br>Then click "Shopping results for displayport to mini displayport cable".<br>$14.95 - <a href="http://www.cpustuff.com/product.php?productid=16240" title="cpustuff.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.cpustuff.com/product.php?productid=16240</a> [cpustuff.com]<br>It took me less time to find that "non-existent" cable than it did for you to write your post.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>15 seconds on google .
Search string : " displayport to mini displayport cable " Then click " Shopping results for displayport to mini displayport cable " . $ 14.95 - http : //www.cpustuff.com/product.php ? productid = 16240 [ cpustuff.com ] It took me less time to find that " non-existent " cable than it did for you to write your post .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>15 seconds on google.
Search string:  "displayport to mini displayport cable"Then click "Shopping results for displayport to mini displayport cable".$14.95 - http://www.cpustuff.com/product.php?productid=16240 [cpustuff.com]It took me less time to find that "non-existent" cable than it did for you to write your post.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336719</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28345673</id>
	<title>The NCR Decision Mate V</title>
	<author>sethstorm</author>
	<datestamp>1245148800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...had options for the dirt-cheap Z80's up to the 68000's, as well as appearing very PC-like.  Additional CPU, serial, rudimentary network cards were installed in the back.</p><p>One huge architectural problem: They in their infinite wisdom forgot to include an interrupt controller of some kind.</p><p>For this and a few other things caused them to dump them at a discount on the order of $3000 to employees.  Not exactly generous in today's terms, but very generous compared to what Nuti's NCR would do.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...had options for the dirt-cheap Z80 's up to the 68000 's , as well as appearing very PC-like .
Additional CPU , serial , rudimentary network cards were installed in the back.One huge architectural problem : They in their infinite wisdom forgot to include an interrupt controller of some kind.For this and a few other things caused them to dump them at a discount on the order of $ 3000 to employees .
Not exactly generous in today 's terms , but very generous compared to what Nuti 's NCR would do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...had options for the dirt-cheap Z80's up to the 68000's, as well as appearing very PC-like.
Additional CPU, serial, rudimentary network cards were installed in the back.One huge architectural problem: They in their infinite wisdom forgot to include an interrupt controller of some kind.For this and a few other things caused them to dump them at a discount on the order of $3000 to employees.
Not exactly generous in today's terms, but very generous compared to what Nuti's NCR would do.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339075</id>
	<title>Re:CapsLock</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245097320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I find the caps lock key useful when trying to determine how dead my computer is, if the caps lock doesn't respond, reset is the only thing that is gonna work. Numlock will also function is this capacity.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I find the caps lock key useful when trying to determine how dead my computer is , if the caps lock does n't respond , reset is the only thing that is gon na work .
Numlock will also function is this capacity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find the caps lock key useful when trying to determine how dead my computer is, if the caps lock doesn't respond, reset is the only thing that is gonna work.
Numlock will also function is this capacity.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28343135</id>
	<title>Remember, Commodore was the world's computer</title>
	<author>smchris</author>
	<datestamp>1245075960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And when they were the most popular computer in the world, they released the Plus/4 with integrated (and quite buggy in ROM) "Productivity software."  And the system's ROM addresses, particularly for the graphics library, were different so virtually all the C64 software was incompatible.  Not only did they release a computer to compete with their own cash cow, they released a computer that was incompatible with their star performer.</p><p>And I think they were in stores for about three months.  Did I pay retail for one?  Of course.  It wasn't all loss because it also had a disassembler in ROM, a person could halt program loading part way, and I learned quite a bit about Commodore disk and program security back in the day -- which could also be thought of as a blunder by Commodore.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And when they were the most popular computer in the world , they released the Plus/4 with integrated ( and quite buggy in ROM ) " Productivity software .
" And the system 's ROM addresses , particularly for the graphics library , were different so virtually all the C64 software was incompatible .
Not only did they release a computer to compete with their own cash cow , they released a computer that was incompatible with their star performer.And I think they were in stores for about three months .
Did I pay retail for one ?
Of course .
It was n't all loss because it also had a disassembler in ROM , a person could halt program loading part way , and I learned quite a bit about Commodore disk and program security back in the day -- which could also be thought of as a blunder by Commodore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And when they were the most popular computer in the world, they released the Plus/4 with integrated (and quite buggy in ROM) "Productivity software.
"  And the system's ROM addresses, particularly for the graphics library, were different so virtually all the C64 software was incompatible.
Not only did they release a computer to compete with their own cash cow, they released a computer that was incompatible with their star performer.And I think they were in stores for about three months.
Did I pay retail for one?
Of course.
It wasn't all loss because it also had a disassembler in ROM, a person could halt program loading part way, and I learned quite a bit about Commodore disk and program security back in the day -- which could also be thought of as a blunder by Commodore.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336943</id>
	<title>Atari ST Mouseports</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245088380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry, just popped up in my head: The totally crap place Atari chose to hide the mouse/joystick ports on the Atari ST-Series.</p><p>Under the computer. In a really narrow inset. With tight fitting ports and plugs.</p><p>The only structural support being the pins of the ports, soldered to a keyboard circuit.</p><p>Well, it was only a matter of time the damn port broke. I remember being really mad at atari for this shit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry , just popped up in my head : The totally crap place Atari chose to hide the mouse/joystick ports on the Atari ST-Series.Under the computer .
In a really narrow inset .
With tight fitting ports and plugs.The only structural support being the pins of the ports , soldered to a keyboard circuit.Well , it was only a matter of time the damn port broke .
I remember being really mad at atari for this shit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry, just popped up in my head: The totally crap place Atari chose to hide the mouse/joystick ports on the Atari ST-Series.Under the computer.
In a really narrow inset.
With tight fitting ports and plugs.The only structural support being the pins of the ports, soldered to a keyboard circuit.Well, it was only a matter of time the damn port broke.
I remember being really mad at atari for this shit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336287</id>
	<title>This is a good opportunity for a new myth</title>
	<author>e9th</author>
	<datestamp>1245085440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>It would go something like this:<br> <br>Well sonny, I remember it was back in the '80s.  There were these guys who loved their Apple IIIs so much that, despite its faults, they kept them running for years beyond their useful lifetimes.  They did this by filling their offices with industrial-strength fans pointed at those Apple IIIs.  Ever since then, we've called people who continue to support obviously flawed products "fanboys"</htmltext>
<tokenext>It would go something like this : Well sonny , I remember it was back in the '80s .
There were these guys who loved their Apple IIIs so much that , despite its faults , they kept them running for years beyond their useful lifetimes .
They did this by filling their offices with industrial-strength fans pointed at those Apple IIIs .
Ever since then , we 've called people who continue to support obviously flawed products " fanboys "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would go something like this: Well sonny, I remember it was back in the '80s.
There were these guys who loved their Apple IIIs so much that, despite its faults, they kept them running for years beyond their useful lifetimes.
They did this by filling their offices with industrial-strength fans pointed at those Apple IIIs.
Ever since then, we've called people who continue to support obviously flawed products "fanboys"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28340503</id>
	<title>Re:A few of my favourite things - from the worksho</title>
	<author>hurfy</author>
	<datestamp>1245059460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"General: USB socket is same width as RJ45 so you can slide a USB plug into the network port and it feels 'right', but gets you nowhere until you look and check!"</p><p>lol, just discovered that the other day trying to reinstall a box under someone desk<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(  Placing them a few millimeters apart was also quite helpful...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" General : USB socket is same width as RJ45 so you can slide a USB plug into the network port and it feels 'right ' , but gets you nowhere until you look and check !
" lol , just discovered that the other day trying to reinstall a box under someone desk : ( Placing them a few millimeters apart was also quite helpful.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"General: USB socket is same width as RJ45 so you can slide a USB plug into the network port and it feels 'right', but gets you nowhere until you look and check!
"lol, just discovered that the other day trying to reinstall a box under someone desk :(  Placing them a few millimeters apart was also quite helpful...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336193</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335509</id>
	<title>Low-tech solution</title>
	<author>Peter Simpson</author>
	<datestamp>1245082500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1 square inch of Scotch brand #33 electrical tape.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 square inch of Scotch brand # 33 electrical tape .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1 square inch of Scotch brand #33 electrical tape.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336029</id>
	<title>TI Sidecars</title>
	<author>orb\_nsc</author>
	<datestamp>1245084480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm glad they mentioned the TI 99/4A sidecars.  I had a couple of these before getting the P-box.  With all the engineers working at Texas Instruments, had none of them heard of "cables"?  With a memory expansion and a floppy drive (which still needed it's own sidecar for the controller) your TI was already taking up the entire desk.  And god forbid you nudge anything accidentally, and cause the whole thing to crash.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm glad they mentioned the TI 99/4A sidecars .
I had a couple of these before getting the P-box .
With all the engineers working at Texas Instruments , had none of them heard of " cables " ?
With a memory expansion and a floppy drive ( which still needed it 's own sidecar for the controller ) your TI was already taking up the entire desk .
And god forbid you nudge anything accidentally , and cause the whole thing to crash .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm glad they mentioned the TI 99/4A sidecars.
I had a couple of these before getting the P-box.
With all the engineers working at Texas Instruments, had none of them heard of "cables"?
With a memory expansion and a floppy drive (which still needed it's own sidecar for the controller) your TI was already taking up the entire desk.
And god forbid you nudge anything accidentally, and cause the whole thing to crash.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337053</id>
	<title>Re: The 15 problems</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245088860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The most brilliant obscure Simpson's reference on all of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.   BRAVO!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The most brilliant obscure Simpson 's reference on all of / .
BRAVO !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The most brilliant obscure Simpson's reference on all of /.
BRAVO!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336719</id>
	<title>Re:Worst Mistake That Still Needs Fixing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245087360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At least you have an adapter you insensitive clod! My monitor has (full-size) display port and there is no such thing as a mini-displayport-to-displayport adapter. I've seen mini-displayport-to-dvi, mini-displayport-to-vga but no mini-displayport-to-displayport.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At least you have an adapter you insensitive clod !
My monitor has ( full-size ) display port and there is no such thing as a mini-displayport-to-displayport adapter .
I 've seen mini-displayport-to-dvi , mini-displayport-to-vga but no mini-displayport-to-displayport .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At least you have an adapter you insensitive clod!
My monitor has (full-size) display port and there is no such thing as a mini-displayport-to-displayport adapter.
I've seen mini-displayport-to-dvi, mini-displayport-to-vga but no mini-displayport-to-displayport.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335589</id>
	<title>Not the Age of Aquarius.</title>
	<author>Mal-2</author>
	<datestamp>1245082860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had one of those rubber-chiclet-keyboard Aquarius machines, as well as many add-ons. The expansion was not as bad as the "sidecar" models (PCjr and 99/4A), but it was still cartridge-based. This was fine if you only wanted one cartridge -- say, the 16k memory expansion -- but if you wanted more you needed an even bigger cartridge that allowed you to plug two cartridges into it (vertically). Ugly, ugly, ugly. The spreadsheet software came on a cartridge, so if you wanted to run that and have a reasonable amount of RAM (if you can call 20k reasonable), you HAD to use the expansion unit. This also is where you connected the Intellivision-style game controllers.</p><p>The printer was thermal and 40 columns, and it printed only in BLUE. Not black, blue. This made it absolutely useless for classwork.</p><p>I learned the rudiments of BASIC on this machine, and wrote a text-mode baseball game, but that's about all it was good for.</p><p>Mal-2</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had one of those rubber-chiclet-keyboard Aquarius machines , as well as many add-ons .
The expansion was not as bad as the " sidecar " models ( PCjr and 99/4A ) , but it was still cartridge-based .
This was fine if you only wanted one cartridge -- say , the 16k memory expansion -- but if you wanted more you needed an even bigger cartridge that allowed you to plug two cartridges into it ( vertically ) .
Ugly , ugly , ugly .
The spreadsheet software came on a cartridge , so if you wanted to run that and have a reasonable amount of RAM ( if you can call 20k reasonable ) , you HAD to use the expansion unit .
This also is where you connected the Intellivision-style game controllers.The printer was thermal and 40 columns , and it printed only in BLUE .
Not black , blue .
This made it absolutely useless for classwork.I learned the rudiments of BASIC on this machine , and wrote a text-mode baseball game , but that 's about all it was good for.Mal-2</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had one of those rubber-chiclet-keyboard Aquarius machines, as well as many add-ons.
The expansion was not as bad as the "sidecar" models (PCjr and 99/4A), but it was still cartridge-based.
This was fine if you only wanted one cartridge -- say, the 16k memory expansion -- but if you wanted more you needed an even bigger cartridge that allowed you to plug two cartridges into it (vertically).
Ugly, ugly, ugly.
The spreadsheet software came on a cartridge, so if you wanted to run that and have a reasonable amount of RAM (if you can call 20k reasonable), you HAD to use the expansion unit.
This also is where you connected the Intellivision-style game controllers.The printer was thermal and 40 columns, and it printed only in BLUE.
Not black, blue.
This made it absolutely useless for classwork.I learned the rudiments of BASIC on this machine, and wrote a text-mode baseball game, but that's about all it was good for.Mal-2</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336799</id>
	<title>Amiga I/O ports</title>
	<author>smellsofbikes</author>
	<datestamp>1245087780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Amiga 1000 had a DB25 serial port and a DB25 parallel port right beside each other.  Same connector.  They thoughtfully provided a bunch of +12V, -12V, and -5V lines on the serial port in case you needed to power external equipment.  So, if you mistakenly plugged your parallel printer cable into the serial port you put +/-12v into the input buffer of your printer.  A lot of people burnt out a lot of printers that way.  The 2000 used the opposite-polarity DB25 and subsequent ones used a DB9, IIRC.

I have a network analyzer that uses a 5 1/2" drive as part of its operating system, so it has to read from the disc every time it boots and every time I do any GPIB access to the machine.  The machine can't copy the disc and it's a non-standard drive hardware so it can't easily be read/written in another 5 1/2" drive.  Sigh.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Amiga 1000 had a DB25 serial port and a DB25 parallel port right beside each other .
Same connector .
They thoughtfully provided a bunch of + 12V , -12V , and -5V lines on the serial port in case you needed to power external equipment .
So , if you mistakenly plugged your parallel printer cable into the serial port you put + /-12v into the input buffer of your printer .
A lot of people burnt out a lot of printers that way .
The 2000 used the opposite-polarity DB25 and subsequent ones used a DB9 , IIRC .
I have a network analyzer that uses a 5 1/2 " drive as part of its operating system , so it has to read from the disc every time it boots and every time I do any GPIB access to the machine .
The machine ca n't copy the disc and it 's a non-standard drive hardware so it ca n't easily be read/written in another 5 1/2 " drive .
Sigh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Amiga 1000 had a DB25 serial port and a DB25 parallel port right beside each other.
Same connector.
They thoughtfully provided a bunch of +12V, -12V, and -5V lines on the serial port in case you needed to power external equipment.
So, if you mistakenly plugged your parallel printer cable into the serial port you put +/-12v into the input buffer of your printer.
A lot of people burnt out a lot of printers that way.
The 2000 used the opposite-polarity DB25 and subsequent ones used a DB9, IIRC.
I have a network analyzer that uses a 5 1/2" drive as part of its operating system, so it has to read from the disc every time it boots and every time I do any GPIB access to the machine.
The machine can't copy the disc and it's a non-standard drive hardware so it can't easily be read/written in another 5 1/2" drive.
Sigh.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336533</id>
	<title>Re:biggest mistake: PC = 8088 not M68000!!!</title>
	<author>jandrese</author>
	<datestamp>1245086460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><ul> <li>Would have cost even more than it already did.</li></ul><p>
People forget that the reason everybody was looking for an alternative to the M68k was that Motorola's chip was quite expensive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Would have cost even more than it already did .
People forget that the reason everybody was looking for an alternative to the M68k was that Motorola 's chip was quite expensive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Would have cost even more than it already did.
People forget that the reason everybody was looking for an alternative to the M68k was that Motorola's chip was quite expensive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335801</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335823</id>
	<title>Re:If we started again, today</title>
	<author>Omniscient Lurker</author>
	<datestamp>1245083700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"no user accessible parts inside"</p></div><p>That's on the current list.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>"machine uniquely identified by MAC address, or something like it"</p></div><p>Why? I don't want my machine uniquely identifiable, I like being anonymous.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" no user accessible parts inside " That 's on the current list .
" machine uniquely identified by MAC address , or something like it " Why ?
I do n't want my machine uniquely identifiable , I like being anonymous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"no user accessible parts inside"That's on the current list.
"machine uniquely identified by MAC address, or something like it"Why?
I don't want my machine uniquely identifiable, I like being anonymous.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335429</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336039</id>
	<title>Re:worst: sharp unfinished inside edges in cheap c</title>
	<author>stevied</author>
	<datestamp>1245084540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was involved in a project about that time to roll out PCs to the all the UK dealerships of a certain Japanese car manufacturer. Every machine that went out had to have certain hardware installed, like ISDN cards and (I think) removable harddisk cages, so we had to open each one up. In the end we  we had to make it part of our standard despatch procedure to check the cases for blood stains before packing them up..</p><p>(This was the same time that PC cases moved away from simply being held together by those terribly user-unfriendly things called screws, and instead had all sorts of cheap and nasty plastic clips that had to be yanked apart with brute force. Our major cause of blood-letting was getting the front panel off, which - I think - was required to get at whatever it was the secured the side panels.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was involved in a project about that time to roll out PCs to the all the UK dealerships of a certain Japanese car manufacturer .
Every machine that went out had to have certain hardware installed , like ISDN cards and ( I think ) removable harddisk cages , so we had to open each one up .
In the end we we had to make it part of our standard despatch procedure to check the cases for blood stains before packing them up.. ( This was the same time that PC cases moved away from simply being held together by those terribly user-unfriendly things called screws , and instead had all sorts of cheap and nasty plastic clips that had to be yanked apart with brute force .
Our major cause of blood-letting was getting the front panel off , which - I think - was required to get at whatever it was the secured the side panels .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was involved in a project about that time to roll out PCs to the all the UK dealerships of a certain Japanese car manufacturer.
Every machine that went out had to have certain hardware installed, like ISDN cards and (I think) removable harddisk cages, so we had to open each one up.
In the end we  we had to make it part of our standard despatch procedure to check the cases for blood stains before packing them up..(This was the same time that PC cases moved away from simply being held together by those terribly user-unfriendly things called screws, and instead had all sorts of cheap and nasty plastic clips that had to be yanked apart with brute force.
Our major cause of blood-letting was getting the front panel off, which - I think - was required to get at whatever it was the secured the side panels.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336135</id>
	<title>"Document Centric" as opposed to "Application Cent</title>
	<author>codewarren</author>
	<datestamp>1245084900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From wikipedia:</p><p>An often overlooked feature the Lisa system used is document-centric[citation needed] computing instead of application-centric computing. On a Macintosh, Windows, or Linux system, a user typically seeks a program. In the Lisa system, users use stationery to begin using an application. Apple attempted to implement this approach on the Mac platform later with OpenDoc, but it did not catch on. Microsoft also later implemented stationery in a limited fashion via the Windows Start menu for Microsoft Office. Document-centric computing is more intuitive for new users because it is task-based[citation needed]. The user needs to knows which task he or she needs to perform, not which program is used to accomplish that task.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From wikipedia : An often overlooked feature the Lisa system used is document-centric [ citation needed ] computing instead of application-centric computing .
On a Macintosh , Windows , or Linux system , a user typically seeks a program .
In the Lisa system , users use stationery to begin using an application .
Apple attempted to implement this approach on the Mac platform later with OpenDoc , but it did not catch on .
Microsoft also later implemented stationery in a limited fashion via the Windows Start menu for Microsoft Office .
Document-centric computing is more intuitive for new users because it is task-based [ citation needed ] .
The user needs to knows which task he or she needs to perform , not which program is used to accomplish that task .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From wikipedia:An often overlooked feature the Lisa system used is document-centric[citation needed] computing instead of application-centric computing.
On a Macintosh, Windows, or Linux system, a user typically seeks a program.
In the Lisa system, users use stationery to begin using an application.
Apple attempted to implement this approach on the Mac platform later with OpenDoc, but it did not catch on.
Microsoft also later implemented stationery in a limited fashion via the Windows Start menu for Microsoft Office.
Document-centric computing is more intuitive for new users because it is task-based[citation needed].
The user needs to knows which task he or she needs to perform, not which program is used to accomplish that task.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335575</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28340513</id>
	<title>Re:Low-tech solution</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245059520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow, I really want to get a computer I have to fix with tape for it to not be annoying as hell<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;P</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , I really want to get a computer I have to fix with tape for it to not be annoying as hell ; P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, I really want to get a computer I have to fix with tape for it to not be annoying as hell ;P</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28341883</id>
	<title>Re:biggest mistake: PC = 8088 not M68000!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245066900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just a few minor points...With the 68k the 16M limit would only be because of the limited number of pins on the packet. You can run the same code on a 32 bit variation like the 68020 and make use of the extra memeory. The only gotcha is that you must not use the high bytes of the address pointer to store other data, which will work on the 68000, but fail when you use an 020. Apple made this mistake I beleive. The reason this works OK is that the 68000 is actually a 32 bit chip internally and is thus only limited by the address pins and the external bus width. When you read a 32 bit wide long word from the bus, on the 68000 it does two bus cycles while on the 68020 it will only do one. There was also a version with an 8 bit wide bus.</p><p>The RISC/CISC thing is just fashion...you build things up and add complication until it starts to get out of hand, then you have the grand simplification, then you start adding features again, eventually we will have another grand simplification and around it will go again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just a few minor points...With the 68k the 16M limit would only be because of the limited number of pins on the packet .
You can run the same code on a 32 bit variation like the 68020 and make use of the extra memeory .
The only gotcha is that you must not use the high bytes of the address pointer to store other data , which will work on the 68000 , but fail when you use an 020 .
Apple made this mistake I beleive .
The reason this works OK is that the 68000 is actually a 32 bit chip internally and is thus only limited by the address pins and the external bus width .
When you read a 32 bit wide long word from the bus , on the 68000 it does two bus cycles while on the 68020 it will only do one .
There was also a version with an 8 bit wide bus.The RISC/CISC thing is just fashion...you build things up and add complication until it starts to get out of hand , then you have the grand simplification , then you start adding features again , eventually we will have another grand simplification and around it will go again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just a few minor points...With the 68k the 16M limit would only be because of the limited number of pins on the packet.
You can run the same code on a 32 bit variation like the 68020 and make use of the extra memeory.
The only gotcha is that you must not use the high bytes of the address pointer to store other data, which will work on the 68000, but fail when you use an 020.
Apple made this mistake I beleive.
The reason this works OK is that the 68000 is actually a 32 bit chip internally and is thus only limited by the address pins and the external bus width.
When you read a 32 bit wide long word from the bus, on the 68000 it does two bus cycles while on the 68020 it will only do one.
There was also a version with an 8 bit wide bus.The RISC/CISC thing is just fashion...you build things up and add complication until it starts to get out of hand, then you have the grand simplification, then you start adding features again, eventually we will have another grand simplification and around it will go again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336227</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337439</id>
	<title>Re:CapsLock</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245090720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can see you do not touch type.</p><p>Try typing your whole paragraph again in all upper text.  You will find it crazy hard to do.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can see you do not touch type.Try typing your whole paragraph again in all upper text .
You will find it crazy hard to do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can see you do not touch type.Try typing your whole paragraph again in all upper text.
You will find it crazy hard to do.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335901</id>
	<title>Re:#1 failure...</title>
	<author>MightyMartian</author>
	<datestamp>1245083940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think you're talking about the 8088.  The 8086 was a true 16bit chip, the 8088 had an 8-bit bus.  The chief reason was, as I understand it, that 16bit hardware was extremely expensive at the time, so IBM went with it to keep the price of the unit lower, and to make it less expensive for expansion hardware to be built.</p><p>And that's the real secret here of the success of the PCs and PC clones.  They were never as good as a number of competitors; Apple had the better GUI, Amigas had the better graphics, the various *nix workstations beat it hands down, but none of them were as open or as easy to build hardware and peripherals for.  The PC was, for all its flaws, a highly implementable open standard.  That's why PCs still dominate, by a wide margin, the industry, and why a number of machines that were superior got left by the wayside.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you 're talking about the 8088 .
The 8086 was a true 16bit chip , the 8088 had an 8-bit bus .
The chief reason was , as I understand it , that 16bit hardware was extremely expensive at the time , so IBM went with it to keep the price of the unit lower , and to make it less expensive for expansion hardware to be built.And that 's the real secret here of the success of the PCs and PC clones .
They were never as good as a number of competitors ; Apple had the better GUI , Amigas had the better graphics , the various * nix workstations beat it hands down , but none of them were as open or as easy to build hardware and peripherals for .
The PC was , for all its flaws , a highly implementable open standard .
That 's why PCs still dominate , by a wide margin , the industry , and why a number of machines that were superior got left by the wayside .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you're talking about the 8088.
The 8086 was a true 16bit chip, the 8088 had an 8-bit bus.
The chief reason was, as I understand it, that 16bit hardware was extremely expensive at the time, so IBM went with it to keep the price of the unit lower, and to make it less expensive for expansion hardware to be built.And that's the real secret here of the success of the PCs and PC clones.
They were never as good as a number of competitors; Apple had the better GUI, Amigas had the better graphics, the various *nix workstations beat it hands down, but none of them were as open or as easy to build hardware and peripherals for.
The PC was, for all its flaws, a highly implementable open standard.
That's why PCs still dominate, by a wide margin, the industry, and why a number of machines that were superior got left by the wayside.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335445</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335519</id>
	<title>Re:Worst Mistake That Still Needs Fixing</title>
	<author>JCSoRocks</author>
	<datestamp>1245082500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>You forgot Apple<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P *ducks fanboys*. Seriously though, I just bought a Mac Mini and I was extremely disappointed to find that it uses a proprietary mini-displayport connector. If you want to use dual link DVI to power a 30" monitor you have to buy a $100 adapter that doesn't even work. Standards are standard for a reason Apple!</htmltext>
<tokenext>You forgot Apple : P * ducks fanboys * .
Seriously though , I just bought a Mac Mini and I was extremely disappointed to find that it uses a proprietary mini-displayport connector .
If you want to use dual link DVI to power a 30 " monitor you have to buy a $ 100 adapter that does n't even work .
Standards are standard for a reason Apple !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You forgot Apple :P *ducks fanboys*.
Seriously though, I just bought a Mac Mini and I was extremely disappointed to find that it uses a proprietary mini-displayport connector.
If you want to use dual link DVI to power a 30" monitor you have to buy a $100 adapter that doesn't even work.
Standards are standard for a reason Apple!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335195</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336987</id>
	<title>Re:Not 'classic', but still...</title>
	<author>DragonWriter</author>
	<datestamp>1245088620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>It isn't really a 'classic' mistake, but the biggest PC design problem today from where I'm standing is over-reliance on fans. High volume fans will result in fuzzy lint growing on the devices which can least afford a layer of fuzzy lint.</p></div></blockquote><p>I don't think fans are the problem. Lots of things that aren't computers use fans to move large volumes of air and have functions that require them <i>not</i> to blow dust, and solve this problem with a novel invention called an "air filter", which allows air to pass through, but not dust.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is n't really a 'classic ' mistake , but the biggest PC design problem today from where I 'm standing is over-reliance on fans .
High volume fans will result in fuzzy lint growing on the devices which can least afford a layer of fuzzy lint.I do n't think fans are the problem .
Lots of things that are n't computers use fans to move large volumes of air and have functions that require them not to blow dust , and solve this problem with a novel invention called an " air filter " , which allows air to pass through , but not dust .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It isn't really a 'classic' mistake, but the biggest PC design problem today from where I'm standing is over-reliance on fans.
High volume fans will result in fuzzy lint growing on the devices which can least afford a layer of fuzzy lint.I don't think fans are the problem.
Lots of things that aren't computers use fans to move large volumes of air and have functions that require them not to blow dust, and solve this problem with a novel invention called an "air filter", which allows air to pass through, but not dust.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336187</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337063</id>
	<title>Re:The 15 problems</title>
	<author>Jeremy Erwin</author>
	<datestamp>1245088920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Karma Whore. Your summary hardly substitutes for the original article.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Karma Whore .
Your summary hardly substitutes for the original article .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Karma Whore.
Your summary hardly substitutes for the original article.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335243</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339469</id>
	<title>Re:PCjr</title>
	<author>Lije Baley</author>
	<datestamp>1245098760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My PCjr was quite satisfactory.  I bought it second-hand with the proceeds from the sale of my beloved Commodore 64 in 1986.  I had done everything possible with the 64 and my "trading" friend had a Compaq.</p><p>It had the normal, though infrared, keyboard, and a Tecmar memory expansion.  I promptly removed all the 4164's and replaced them with sockets and 256K chips, giving me enough memory to run standard PC apps.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My PCjr was quite satisfactory .
I bought it second-hand with the proceeds from the sale of my beloved Commodore 64 in 1986 .
I had done everything possible with the 64 and my " trading " friend had a Compaq.It had the normal , though infrared , keyboard , and a Tecmar memory expansion .
I promptly removed all the 4164 's and replaced them with sockets and 256K chips , giving me enough memory to run standard PC apps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My PCjr was quite satisfactory.
I bought it second-hand with the proceeds from the sale of my beloved Commodore 64 in 1986.
I had done everything possible with the 64 and my "trading" friend had a Compaq.It had the normal, though infrared, keyboard, and a Tecmar memory expansion.
I promptly removed all the 4164's and replaced them with sockets and 256K chips, giving me enough memory to run standard PC apps.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335803</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336543</id>
	<title>Speaking of Apple</title>
	<author>someyob</author>
	<datestamp>1245086520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Proprietary hw interfaces haven't gone away.

I have a dead iPod on my hands, and a couple of peripherals (eg an alarm clock) with interfaces tied to the proprietary iPod connector.  So, now I'm faced with having to buy another iPod, or live with an incompatible collection of stuff.

My own fault I suppose, but it's so very easy to fall into that particular clever pool of quicksand.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Proprietary hw interfaces have n't gone away .
I have a dead iPod on my hands , and a couple of peripherals ( eg an alarm clock ) with interfaces tied to the proprietary iPod connector .
So , now I 'm faced with having to buy another iPod , or live with an incompatible collection of stuff .
My own fault I suppose , but it 's so very easy to fall into that particular clever pool of quicksand .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Proprietary hw interfaces haven't gone away.
I have a dead iPod on my hands, and a couple of peripherals (eg an alarm clock) with interfaces tied to the proprietary iPod connector.
So, now I'm faced with having to buy another iPod, or live with an incompatible collection of stuff.
My own fault I suppose, but it's so very easy to fall into that particular clever pool of quicksand.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337647</id>
	<title>Re:Big ISA bus flaw</title>
	<author>noidentity</author>
	<datestamp>1245091680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>IOCHRDY signal is active high instead of active low. Causes no end of problems.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>An extra inverter, and the engineers having to read the documentation instead of assuming active low?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>IOCHRDY signal is active high instead of active low .
Causes no end of problems .
An extra inverter , and the engineers having to read the documentation instead of assuming active low ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IOCHRDY signal is active high instead of active low.
Causes no end of problems.
An extra inverter, and the engineers having to read the documentation instead of assuming active low?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335323</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28345715</id>
	<title>Re:#1 failure...</title>
	<author>master\_p</author>
	<datestamp>1245149520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not really. In the Mac world, there were no PC compatibles to drive the development of the platform.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not really .
In the Mac world , there were no PC compatibles to drive the development of the platform .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not really.
In the Mac world, there were no PC compatibles to drive the development of the platform.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335629</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391</id>
	<title>CapsLock</title>
	<author>jameson</author>
	<datestamp>1245081840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sun got it right on their keyboard design, but everyone else kept the CapsLock key.  I've been using computers for 21 years, and I use Ctrl constantly.  I do not recall ever having used the CapsLock key (except out of curiousity to see whether it actually does anything.)</p><p>(Well, that's a bit of a lie.  Of course I use it, after reassigning it to Ctrl.  But the point is, having to take that step is a waste of time.)</p><p>CapsLock was useful once upon a time, when there was no \section{} or \textbf{}, and when pressing `shift' actually required strenght.  But those days are gone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sun got it right on their keyboard design , but everyone else kept the CapsLock key .
I 've been using computers for 21 years , and I use Ctrl constantly .
I do not recall ever having used the CapsLock key ( except out of curiousity to see whether it actually does anything .
) ( Well , that 's a bit of a lie .
Of course I use it , after reassigning it to Ctrl .
But the point is , having to take that step is a waste of time .
) CapsLock was useful once upon a time , when there was no \ section { } or \ textbf { } , and when pressing ` shift ' actually required strenght .
But those days are gone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sun got it right on their keyboard design, but everyone else kept the CapsLock key.
I've been using computers for 21 years, and I use Ctrl constantly.
I do not recall ever having used the CapsLock key (except out of curiousity to see whether it actually does anything.
)(Well, that's a bit of a lie.
Of course I use it, after reassigning it to Ctrl.
But the point is, having to take that step is a waste of time.
)CapsLock was useful once upon a time, when there was no \section{} or \textbf{}, and when pressing `shift' actually required strenght.
But those days are gone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335581</id>
	<title>Re: The 15 problems</title>
	<author>Fzz</author>
	<datestamp>1245082800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I had the same problem with the extremely bright LED on my Toshiba 1TB external disk.  At least this problem is easily cured with black electrical tape.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I had the same problem with the extremely bright LED on my Toshiba 1TB external disk .
At least this problem is easily cured with black electrical tape .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had the same problem with the extremely bright LED on my Toshiba 1TB external disk.
At least this problem is easily cured with black electrical tape.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335629</id>
	<title>Re:#1 failure...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245082980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>apple went with the motorola 68000 chip and now macs and PCs are roughly equivalent.  I guess PC's made up for that 2 generation gap by now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>apple went with the motorola 68000 chip and now macs and PCs are roughly equivalent .
I guess PC 's made up for that 2 generation gap by now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>apple went with the motorola 68000 chip and now macs and PCs are roughly equivalent.
I guess PC's made up for that 2 generation gap by now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335445</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28341373</id>
	<title>Re:Not 'classic', but still...</title>
	<author>Pentium100</author>
	<datestamp>1245064020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>TVs and monitors get clogged with dust because they use high voltage (5-30kV) for the anode of the CRT. This high voltage is like static electricity and it attracts dust (usually the dustiest place in a TV is around the flyback transformer).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>TVs and monitors get clogged with dust because they use high voltage ( 5-30kV ) for the anode of the CRT .
This high voltage is like static electricity and it attracts dust ( usually the dustiest place in a TV is around the flyback transformer ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TVs and monitors get clogged with dust because they use high voltage (5-30kV) for the anode of the CRT.
This high voltage is like static electricity and it attracts dust (usually the dustiest place in a TV is around the flyback transformer).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339379</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335243</id>
	<title>The 15 problems</title>
	<author>houghi</author>
	<datestamp>1245081060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Problem  #1: No Power Supply Fan<br>Problem  #2: Limited Apple II Compatibility<br>Problem  #3: No Way to Format Disks<br>Problem  #4: EM Pulse Erases Tapes<br>Problem  #5: Printer Required<br>Problem  #6: Rubber Keyboard<br>Problem  #7: Non-Detachable AC Adapter<br>Problem  #8: Miserable Keyboard<br>Problem #10: Sidecar Expansion<br>Problem #11: No User Expandability<br>Problem #12: Slow BASIC<br>Problem #13: Sidecar Expansion<br>Problem #14: Bulky Expansion Modules<br>Problem #15: Unreliable Proprietary Disk Drives</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Problem # 1 : No Power Supply FanProblem # 2 : Limited Apple II CompatibilityProblem # 3 : No Way to Format DisksProblem # 4 : EM Pulse Erases TapesProblem # 5 : Printer RequiredProblem # 6 : Rubber KeyboardProblem # 7 : Non-Detachable AC AdapterProblem # 8 : Miserable KeyboardProblem # 10 : Sidecar ExpansionProblem # 11 : No User ExpandabilityProblem # 12 : Slow BASICProblem # 13 : Sidecar ExpansionProblem # 14 : Bulky Expansion ModulesProblem # 15 : Unreliable Proprietary Disk Drives</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Problem  #1: No Power Supply FanProblem  #2: Limited Apple II CompatibilityProblem  #3: No Way to Format DisksProblem  #4: EM Pulse Erases TapesProblem  #5: Printer RequiredProblem  #6: Rubber KeyboardProblem  #7: Non-Detachable AC AdapterProblem  #8: Miserable KeyboardProblem #10: Sidecar ExpansionProblem #11: No User ExpandabilityProblem #12: Slow BASICProblem #13: Sidecar ExpansionProblem #14: Bulky Expansion ModulesProblem #15: Unreliable Proprietary Disk Drives</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335709</id>
	<title>Re:#1 failure...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245083220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IBM never used the 8086 CPU.  It used the 8088 CPU because it was cheaper, then skipped the 8086 to go to the 80286.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IBM never used the 8086 CPU .
It used the 8088 CPU because it was cheaper , then skipped the 8086 to go to the 80286 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IBM never used the 8086 CPU.
It used the 8088 CPU because it was cheaper, then skipped the 8086 to go to the 80286.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335445</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338253</id>
	<title>Re:CapsLock</title>
	<author>Mal-2</author>
	<datestamp>1245094380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have made CapsLock difficult but not impossible to use on all my keyboards. I just pop the key off, wrap a dental rubber band around the base of the key, and put the key back on. It then takes a significant amount of pressure to activate it so it almost never happens accidentally, but it's still thee when necessary. On this particular keyboard, I practically have to stand on CapsLock to toggle it, but I use it so infrequently that I've never bothered to swap the rubber band out for a shorter one.</p><p>Mal-2</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have made CapsLock difficult but not impossible to use on all my keyboards .
I just pop the key off , wrap a dental rubber band around the base of the key , and put the key back on .
It then takes a significant amount of pressure to activate it so it almost never happens accidentally , but it 's still thee when necessary .
On this particular keyboard , I practically have to stand on CapsLock to toggle it , but I use it so infrequently that I 've never bothered to swap the rubber band out for a shorter one.Mal-2</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have made CapsLock difficult but not impossible to use on all my keyboards.
I just pop the key off, wrap a dental rubber band around the base of the key, and put the key back on.
It then takes a significant amount of pressure to activate it so it almost never happens accidentally, but it's still thee when necessary.
On this particular keyboard, I practically have to stand on CapsLock to toggle it, but I use it so infrequently that I've never bothered to swap the rubber band out for a shorter one.Mal-2</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336929</id>
	<title>Re:Worst Mistake That Still Needs Fixing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245088320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>DisplayPort IS a standard!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>DisplayPort IS a standard !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DisplayPort IS a standard!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337731</id>
	<title>Re:Apple Lisa</title>
	<author>Pebble</author>
	<datestamp>1245092100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From Wikipedia:</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple\_Lisa" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple\_Lisa</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>"An often overlooked feature the Lisa system used is document-centric[citation needed] computing instead of application-centric computing. On a Macintosh, Windows, or Linux system, a user typically seeks a program. In the Lisa system, users use stationery to begin using an application. Apple attempted to implement this approach on the Mac platform later with OpenDoc, but it did not catch on. Microsoft also later implemented stationery in a limited fashion via the Windows Start menu for Microsoft Office. Document-centric computing is more intuitive for new users because it is task-based[citation needed]. The user needs to knows which task he or she needs to perform, not which program is used to accomplish that task."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From Wikipedia : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple \ _Lisa [ wikipedia.org ] " An often overlooked feature the Lisa system used is document-centric [ citation needed ] computing instead of application-centric computing .
On a Macintosh , Windows , or Linux system , a user typically seeks a program .
In the Lisa system , users use stationery to begin using an application .
Apple attempted to implement this approach on the Mac platform later with OpenDoc , but it did not catch on .
Microsoft also later implemented stationery in a limited fashion via the Windows Start menu for Microsoft Office .
Document-centric computing is more intuitive for new users because it is task-based [ citation needed ] .
The user needs to knows which task he or she needs to perform , not which program is used to accomplish that task .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From Wikipedia:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple\_Lisa [wikipedia.org]"An often overlooked feature the Lisa system used is document-centric[citation needed] computing instead of application-centric computing.
On a Macintosh, Windows, or Linux system, a user typically seeks a program.
In the Lisa system, users use stationery to begin using an application.
Apple attempted to implement this approach on the Mac platform later with OpenDoc, but it did not catch on.
Microsoft also later implemented stationery in a limited fashion via the Windows Start menu for Microsoft Office.
Document-centric computing is more intuitive for new users because it is task-based[citation needed].
The user needs to knows which task he or she needs to perform, not which program is used to accomplish that task.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335575</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336767</id>
	<title>Some things become standard for little reason.</title>
	<author>Zaphod-AVA</author>
	<datestamp>1245087660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For example, why do we use different screws to fasten down hard drives vs. CD-Rom drives?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For example , why do we use different screws to fasten down hard drives vs. CD-Rom drives ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For example, why do we use different screws to fasten down hard drives vs. CD-Rom drives?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336187</id>
	<title>Not 'classic', but still...</title>
	<author>Sj0</author>
	<datestamp>1245085080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It isn't really a 'classic' mistake, but the biggest PC design problem today from where I'm standing is over-reliance on fans. High volume fans will result in fuzzy lint growing on the devices which can least afford a layer of fuzzy lint.</p><p>In the past year, I've revived dozens of computers, and nearly every failure can be directly attributed to lint induced by fans.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is n't really a 'classic ' mistake , but the biggest PC design problem today from where I 'm standing is over-reliance on fans .
High volume fans will result in fuzzy lint growing on the devices which can least afford a layer of fuzzy lint.In the past year , I 've revived dozens of computers , and nearly every failure can be directly attributed to lint induced by fans .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It isn't really a 'classic' mistake, but the biggest PC design problem today from where I'm standing is over-reliance on fans.
High volume fans will result in fuzzy lint growing on the devices which can least afford a layer of fuzzy lint.In the past year, I've revived dozens of computers, and nearly every failure can be directly attributed to lint induced by fans.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28345239</id>
	<title>Re:worst: sharp unfinished inside edges in cheap c</title>
	<author>PAjamian</author>
	<datestamp>1245185160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>- 15 to 10 years ago, you had to be careful when installing drives, or RAM.  You could almost slice your hand on a cheap case that had unfinished and sharp edges.</p></div><p>I have a scar on the back of my thumb from when I used to work in a computer repair shop and my hand slipped when trying to crack loose a particularly stubborn screw one time.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>- Beige Only. You can pick any color, as long as it is beige.</p></div><p>What's wrong with beige?  It matches my beige keyboard, beige monitor, beige speakers and beige mouse<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>- 15 to 10 years ago , you had to be careful when installing drives , or RAM .
You could almost slice your hand on a cheap case that had unfinished and sharp edges.I have a scar on the back of my thumb from when I used to work in a computer repair shop and my hand slipped when trying to crack loose a particularly stubborn screw one time.- Beige Only .
You can pick any color , as long as it is beige.What 's wrong with beige ?
It matches my beige keyboard , beige monitor , beige speakers and beige mouse ; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>- 15 to 10 years ago, you had to be careful when installing drives, or RAM.
You could almost slice your hand on a cheap case that had unfinished and sharp edges.I have a scar on the back of my thumb from when I used to work in a computer repair shop and my hand slipped when trying to crack loose a particularly stubborn screw one time.- Beige Only.
You can pick any color, as long as it is beige.What's wrong with beige?
It matches my beige keyboard, beige monitor, beige speakers and beige mouse ;-)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337501</id>
	<title>Re:Big ISA bus flaw</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245090900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Care to elaborate on what sort of problems are caused and why? I'm sure I'm not the only one who's curious.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Care to elaborate on what sort of problems are caused and why ?
I 'm sure I 'm not the only one who 's curious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Care to elaborate on what sort of problems are caused and why?
I'm sure I'm not the only one who's curious.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335323</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336041</id>
	<title>16 intel GMA video and systems with no agp back wh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245084540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>16 intel GMA video and systems with no agp back when agp was all over place. also at the same time ati and nvida had better on board video at the same price as well.</p><p>too bad apple fell in to this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>16 intel GMA video and systems with no agp back when agp was all over place .
also at the same time ati and nvida had better on board video at the same price as well.too bad apple fell in to this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>16 intel GMA video and systems with no agp back when agp was all over place.
also at the same time ati and nvida had better on board video at the same price as well.too bad apple fell in to this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335195</id>
	<title>Worst Mistake That Still Needs Fixing</title>
	<author>Dystopian Rebel</author>
	<datestamp>1245080880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Patents and proprietary, closed standards -- Open standards lead to innovation and better hardware for consumers. Look at some of the junk in that article... Engineers need the challenge of having other people improve upon their ideas. Open standards and open-source *will* win because people work best working together. Capitalism certainly won't die but it needs to learn this lesson.</p><p>Honourable Mention: Keyboards -- Most computer keyboards are designed for some other lifeform -- one with a single arm bearing 10 or more fingers. Consumers accept the familiar "conventional" keyboard because it's familiar and conventional. The keyboards that are best for human beings have a "split" or curve in the centre. There are many horrible keyboards, so I'd like to mention some excellent ones:<br>GoldTouch<br>Adesso Ergonomic<br>original Microsoft Natural (not the later rubbish that claimed to be "ergonomic" just because it had a fake leather wrist support -- while maintaining the straight-row key configuration that is bad for wrists)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Patents and proprietary , closed standards -- Open standards lead to innovation and better hardware for consumers .
Look at some of the junk in that article... Engineers need the challenge of having other people improve upon their ideas .
Open standards and open-source * will * win because people work best working together .
Capitalism certainly wo n't die but it needs to learn this lesson.Honourable Mention : Keyboards -- Most computer keyboards are designed for some other lifeform -- one with a single arm bearing 10 or more fingers .
Consumers accept the familiar " conventional " keyboard because it 's familiar and conventional .
The keyboards that are best for human beings have a " split " or curve in the centre .
There are many horrible keyboards , so I 'd like to mention some excellent ones : GoldTouchAdesso Ergonomicoriginal Microsoft Natural ( not the later rubbish that claimed to be " ergonomic " just because it had a fake leather wrist support -- while maintaining the straight-row key configuration that is bad for wrists )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Patents and proprietary, closed standards -- Open standards lead to innovation and better hardware for consumers.
Look at some of the junk in that article... Engineers need the challenge of having other people improve upon their ideas.
Open standards and open-source *will* win because people work best working together.
Capitalism certainly won't die but it needs to learn this lesson.Honourable Mention: Keyboards -- Most computer keyboards are designed for some other lifeform -- one with a single arm bearing 10 or more fingers.
Consumers accept the familiar "conventional" keyboard because it's familiar and conventional.
The keyboards that are best for human beings have a "split" or curve in the centre.
There are many horrible keyboards, so I'd like to mention some excellent ones:GoldTouchAdesso Ergonomicoriginal Microsoft Natural (not the later rubbish that claimed to be "ergonomic" just because it had a fake leather wrist support -- while maintaining the straight-row key configuration that is bad for wrists)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337373</id>
	<title>Re:CapsLock</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245090420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>WHAT IS WRONG WITH CAPSLOCK I QUITE LIKE IT</p><p>Just kidding: I held down the shift key.</p><p>Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>WHAT IS WRONG WITH CAPSLOCK I QUITE LIKE ITJust kidding : I held down the shift key.Filter error : Do n't use so many caps .
It 's like YELLING .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WHAT IS WRONG WITH CAPSLOCK I QUITE LIKE ITJust kidding: I held down the shift key.Filter error: Don't use so many caps.
It's like YELLING.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336699</id>
	<title>Re:worst: sharp unfinished inside edges in cheap c</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245087300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>- 15 to 10 years ago, you had to be careful when installing drives, or RAM.  You could almost slice your hand on a cheap case that had unfinished and sharp edges.</p></div><p>10-15 years ago? I still have a scar on my left thumb from losing a fight against a new computer case 2 years ago when trying to install the DVD drive.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>- 15 to 10 years ago , you had to be careful when installing drives , or RAM .
You could almost slice your hand on a cheap case that had unfinished and sharp edges.10-15 years ago ?
I still have a scar on my left thumb from losing a fight against a new computer case 2 years ago when trying to install the DVD drive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>- 15 to 10 years ago, you had to be careful when installing drives, or RAM.
You could almost slice your hand on a cheap case that had unfinished and sharp edges.10-15 years ago?
I still have a scar on my left thumb from losing a fight against a new computer case 2 years ago when trying to install the DVD drive.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335871</id>
	<title>Re:How about</title>
	<author>UnknownSoldier</author>
	<datestamp>1245083820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know, I've tried switching Caps/Ctrl around and I just can't get used to it. I use Caps/Shift/Ctrl in almost all my games.</p><p>I just wish the OS would \_natively\_ support DISABLING the toggling of UPPERCASE, and just treat caps like any other key.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know , I 've tried switching Caps/Ctrl around and I just ca n't get used to it .
I use Caps/Shift/Ctrl in almost all my games.I just wish the OS would \ _natively \ _ support DISABLING the toggling of UPPERCASE , and just treat caps like any other key .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know, I've tried switching Caps/Ctrl around and I just can't get used to it.
I use Caps/Shift/Ctrl in almost all my games.I just wish the OS would \_natively\_ support DISABLING the toggling of UPPERCASE, and just treat caps like any other key.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335701</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339221</id>
	<title>Re:A few of my favourite things - from the worksho</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245097740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sun: removing keyboard halted the machine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sun : removing keyboard halted the machine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sun: removing keyboard halted the machine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336193</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336007</id>
	<title>Re:worst: sharp unfinished inside edges in cheap c</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245084420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>(Thankfully the S3 Virge is gone from desktops, but laptops are still stuck with poor performance unless you pay an arm and a leg.)</p></div></blockquote><p>My Lenovo T61p, now about a year old, was quite cheap (under $1200) and came with an NVIDIA Quadro FX 570M. It doesn't exactly play the latest games on full settings, but it's good enough for most.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>( Thankfully the S3 Virge is gone from desktops , but laptops are still stuck with poor performance unless you pay an arm and a leg .
) My Lenovo T61p , now about a year old , was quite cheap ( under $ 1200 ) and came with an NVIDIA Quadro FX 570M .
It does n't exactly play the latest games on full settings , but it 's good enough for most .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(Thankfully the S3 Virge is gone from desktops, but laptops are still stuck with poor performance unless you pay an arm and a leg.
)My Lenovo T61p, now about a year old, was quite cheap (under $1200) and came with an NVIDIA Quadro FX 570M.
It doesn't exactly play the latest games on full settings, but it's good enough for most.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339583</id>
	<title>Re:In the defense industry...</title>
	<author>calzones</author>
	<datestamp>1245099180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can see how there are niche use cases where caps lock comes in handy.  For most of those, software-powered, post-typed conversion is ideal as it offloads the responsibility from the user and guarantees proper data entry.  Considering js in a browser can handle this easily, there's no reason any executable can't handle it as well.</p><p>For those few cases where software doesn't help, for instance when having to type lots of acronyms alternated with regularly cased type, from my own personal experience, I have found keeping my left pinky held on the shift key while I type with all my other fingers works great.  For me, at least, it works better than alternately engaging and disengaging caps lock.  That said, I can see how for you, who is used to operating in this mode all the time, having a dedicated utility like caps lock is preferable to stressing your pinky.</p><p>But now we're talking about a tiny minority of use cases.  I think either a specialized keyboard, or having caps lock elsewhere (as suggested earlier to place it near num lock et al), or else using a sticky keys approach where rapidly double-clicking the shift key (or both shift keys at once) would be preferable to imposing caps lock on all the other use cases.  I'd much rather have a larger tab key as that is the one key I use quite a lot, and which if you are aiming to avoid the caps lock key causes you to sometimes aim too high and hit the tilde or even the escape key instead.  A big fat tab key I think is something a lot of people would like, a lot of the time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can see how there are niche use cases where caps lock comes in handy .
For most of those , software-powered , post-typed conversion is ideal as it offloads the responsibility from the user and guarantees proper data entry .
Considering js in a browser can handle this easily , there 's no reason any executable ca n't handle it as well.For those few cases where software does n't help , for instance when having to type lots of acronyms alternated with regularly cased type , from my own personal experience , I have found keeping my left pinky held on the shift key while I type with all my other fingers works great .
For me , at least , it works better than alternately engaging and disengaging caps lock .
That said , I can see how for you , who is used to operating in this mode all the time , having a dedicated utility like caps lock is preferable to stressing your pinky.But now we 're talking about a tiny minority of use cases .
I think either a specialized keyboard , or having caps lock elsewhere ( as suggested earlier to place it near num lock et al ) , or else using a sticky keys approach where rapidly double-clicking the shift key ( or both shift keys at once ) would be preferable to imposing caps lock on all the other use cases .
I 'd much rather have a larger tab key as that is the one key I use quite a lot , and which if you are aiming to avoid the caps lock key causes you to sometimes aim too high and hit the tilde or even the escape key instead .
A big fat tab key I think is something a lot of people would like , a lot of the time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can see how there are niche use cases where caps lock comes in handy.
For most of those, software-powered, post-typed conversion is ideal as it offloads the responsibility from the user and guarantees proper data entry.
Considering js in a browser can handle this easily, there's no reason any executable can't handle it as well.For those few cases where software doesn't help, for instance when having to type lots of acronyms alternated with regularly cased type, from my own personal experience, I have found keeping my left pinky held on the shift key while I type with all my other fingers works great.
For me, at least, it works better than alternately engaging and disengaging caps lock.
That said, I can see how for you, who is used to operating in this mode all the time, having a dedicated utility like caps lock is preferable to stressing your pinky.But now we're talking about a tiny minority of use cases.
I think either a specialized keyboard, or having caps lock elsewhere (as suggested earlier to place it near num lock et al), or else using a sticky keys approach where rapidly double-clicking the shift key (or both shift keys at once) would be preferable to imposing caps lock on all the other use cases.
I'd much rather have a larger tab key as that is the one key I use quite a lot, and which if you are aiming to avoid the caps lock key causes you to sometimes aim too high and hit the tilde or even the escape key instead.
A big fat tab key I think is something a lot of people would like, a lot of the time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335753</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28340991</id>
	<title>Re:Apple Lisa</title>
	<author>lazyforker</author>
	<datestamp>1245061680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The real endgame will be context sensitive interfaces that allow the computer to guess what you want to do, with an override for people who prefer to keep menus in the same place.</p></div><p>Didn't Microsoft do this with Bob and Clippy?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The real endgame will be context sensitive interfaces that allow the computer to guess what you want to do , with an override for people who prefer to keep menus in the same place.Did n't Microsoft do this with Bob and Clippy ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The real endgame will be context sensitive interfaces that allow the computer to guess what you want to do, with an override for people who prefer to keep menus in the same place.Didn't Microsoft do this with Bob and Clippy?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336087</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28345331</id>
	<title>Re:Low-tech solution</title>
	<author>CAIMLAS</author>
	<datestamp>1245143400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I swear, the blue LED in my system for the power/sleep must be 2 watts. It's visible even with tape over it, because the front of the case is thin aluminum with acrylic over it, so the sides of the led are 'embedded' within the acrylic. I ended up unplugging it. If it's on, I'll notice it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I swear , the blue LED in my system for the power/sleep must be 2 watts .
It 's visible even with tape over it , because the front of the case is thin aluminum with acrylic over it , so the sides of the led are 'embedded ' within the acrylic .
I ended up unplugging it .
If it 's on , I 'll notice it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I swear, the blue LED in my system for the power/sleep must be 2 watts.
It's visible even with tape over it, because the front of the case is thin aluminum with acrylic over it, so the sides of the led are 'embedded' within the acrylic.
I ended up unplugging it.
If it's on, I'll notice it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335749</id>
	<title>I don't agree</title>
	<author>Kupfernigk</author>
	<datestamp>1245083400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The 8088 (original version) was actually available and had reasonable memory access. The TI 9989 (another option) had a fast, interesting but weird architecture. By the time the 68000 was introduced, the 8086 had been around for a little time and, as a result, was always somewhat ahead down the price and reliability curves. It was also dead easy to lay out motherboards given its simple physical architecture, and important point at the time. From a manufacturing and volume point of view, the 8088 was a logical decision for IBM.<p>Also, the number of people with 68000 experience was limited. Many, many programmers were familiar with the base 8 bit architectures and could easily convert. This was important for a cheap product which, in its early years, was mainly doing 8-bit character based stuff, while the 68000 found a lot of early use in relatively high-end systems like workstations and laser printers where the more efficient 16-bit operations could shine.</p><p>To use the famous car analogy, Ford would not be two vehicle generations ahead had they decided from the outset to use 4 valve per cylinder DOHC fuel injected engines rather than cooking two valve carb engines. They would be a niche manufacturer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The 8088 ( original version ) was actually available and had reasonable memory access .
The TI 9989 ( another option ) had a fast , interesting but weird architecture .
By the time the 68000 was introduced , the 8086 had been around for a little time and , as a result , was always somewhat ahead down the price and reliability curves .
It was also dead easy to lay out motherboards given its simple physical architecture , and important point at the time .
From a manufacturing and volume point of view , the 8088 was a logical decision for IBM.Also , the number of people with 68000 experience was limited .
Many , many programmers were familiar with the base 8 bit architectures and could easily convert .
This was important for a cheap product which , in its early years , was mainly doing 8-bit character based stuff , while the 68000 found a lot of early use in relatively high-end systems like workstations and laser printers where the more efficient 16-bit operations could shine.To use the famous car analogy , Ford would not be two vehicle generations ahead had they decided from the outset to use 4 valve per cylinder DOHC fuel injected engines rather than cooking two valve carb engines .
They would be a niche manufacturer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The 8088 (original version) was actually available and had reasonable memory access.
The TI 9989 (another option) had a fast, interesting but weird architecture.
By the time the 68000 was introduced, the 8086 had been around for a little time and, as a result, was always somewhat ahead down the price and reliability curves.
It was also dead easy to lay out motherboards given its simple physical architecture, and important point at the time.
From a manufacturing and volume point of view, the 8088 was a logical decision for IBM.Also, the number of people with 68000 experience was limited.
Many, many programmers were familiar with the base 8 bit architectures and could easily convert.
This was important for a cheap product which, in its early years, was mainly doing 8-bit character based stuff, while the 68000 found a lot of early use in relatively high-end systems like workstations and laser printers where the more efficient 16-bit operations could shine.To use the famous car analogy, Ford would not be two vehicle generations ahead had they decided from the outset to use 4 valve per cylinder DOHC fuel injected engines rather than cooking two valve carb engines.
They would be a niche manufacturer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335445</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338727</id>
	<title>Re:This is a good opportunity for a new myth</title>
	<author>that IT girl</author>
	<datestamp>1245096240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is <i>awesome</i>. I literally laughed aloud, making my coworkers give me the O\_o face. Oh well... nice.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is awesome .
I literally laughed aloud , making my coworkers give me the O \ _o face .
Oh well... nice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is awesome.
I literally laughed aloud, making my coworkers give me the O\_o face.
Oh well... nice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336287</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335301</id>
	<title>General trend</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245081420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The general trend from the article seems to be when you try to make things "easier" for your users, you end up failing. And even though its not classic, I think the "underpowered" Vista machines deserve at least a mention.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The general trend from the article seems to be when you try to make things " easier " for your users , you end up failing .
And even though its not classic , I think the " underpowered " Vista machines deserve at least a mention .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The general trend from the article seems to be when you try to make things "easier" for your users, you end up failing.
And even though its not classic, I think the "underpowered" Vista machines deserve at least a mention.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335587</id>
	<title>Re: The 15 problems</title>
	<author>hattig</author>
	<datestamp>1245082800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, my HP netbook has one of this, and it blinks away quite merrily and annoyingly, until you cover it with clothes. Even with your eyes closed looking away from the LED you can detect when it is blinking. It's far worse than sleeping in a room with a video record blinking "12:00" all night.</p><p>My old iBook has a pulsating white LED, it is far less annoying than the blinking blue LED though.</p><p>Standby LEDs are also annoying.</p><p>None of these are as annoying as background electronics hum when you have a less-than-perfect transformer in some product in the room doing that buzzy-hum.</p><p>Damn all of this, I'm going to live in a cave in the woods. Might get a good night's sleep finally!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , my HP netbook has one of this , and it blinks away quite merrily and annoyingly , until you cover it with clothes .
Even with your eyes closed looking away from the LED you can detect when it is blinking .
It 's far worse than sleeping in a room with a video record blinking " 12 : 00 " all night.My old iBook has a pulsating white LED , it is far less annoying than the blinking blue LED though.Standby LEDs are also annoying.None of these are as annoying as background electronics hum when you have a less-than-perfect transformer in some product in the room doing that buzzy-hum.Damn all of this , I 'm going to live in a cave in the woods .
Might get a good night 's sleep finally !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, my HP netbook has one of this, and it blinks away quite merrily and annoyingly, until you cover it with clothes.
Even with your eyes closed looking away from the LED you can detect when it is blinking.
It's far worse than sleeping in a room with a video record blinking "12:00" all night.My old iBook has a pulsating white LED, it is far less annoying than the blinking blue LED though.Standby LEDs are also annoying.None of these are as annoying as background electronics hum when you have a less-than-perfect transformer in some product in the room doing that buzzy-hum.Damn all of this, I'm going to live in a cave in the woods.
Might get a good night's sleep finally!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28342185</id>
	<title>design failure?</title>
	<author>doom</author>
	<datestamp>1245068640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Monday June 15, 2009   3:50 PM

<p>
Um.  Design failures?  How about moving the control key down
below the shift?  How about the introduction of the clumsy, RSI
inducing mouse?
</p><p>
Let me guess: a "design failure" is by definition something that
didn't make money, right?
</p><p>The original model Macintosh was indeed severely
flawed (e.g. it had no good way of adding a hard-drive).  You
might make the point that the Macintosh line as a whole suceeded
because they quickly fixed this problem; but there were similar
issues with the original model NeXt machines which were also
relatively quickly fixed, and yet the the NeXt despite being very
impressive for their day, never really did take off.
</p><p>
One can discuss design independently of financial success (which
may, after all be due to tricks of marketing or just plain luck...).
</p><p>
A machine like the Atari 800 had a number of interesting features
that were oriented toward making the machine more of a consumer
appliance: software was burned onto ROM cartridges that the user
could swap easily, add-ons such as memory expansion were packaged
up into their own easily pluggable cases, and so on.  These
features still don't seem like particularly dumb ideas to me: they
wouldn't deserve to be called "design failures", it just happens
that the market went in a different direction -- people
apparently liked the cheaper bare boards approach of the IBM PC
and friends rather than the neatly packaged up Atari add-on
boards; the ROM cartridges were difficult to update, and the
flexibility of system software on floppies was a bigger draw than
the idiot-friendly pluggable cartridges.
</p><p>
If I had to pick one single example of computer design idiocy,
I think it might be the babble-of-scsi.  Multiple signal
standards, and multiple connector standards, but no coordination
between the two... constant mysterious questions about cable
length and termination, with no obvious way of debugging the
problems (in contrast, the green status lights of ethernet are
totally brilliant).  SCSI *should* have ruled the earth, but
instead we had to make do with IDE hacks...
</p><p>
(By the way: the DEC Rainbow had no ESC key.  I saw a bunch of
them in use as VT-100 terminals at Stanford... every one of them
had "ESC" scribbled in magic marker, just above the F11 keys.)
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Monday June 15 , 2009 3 : 50 PM Um .
Design failures ?
How about moving the control key down below the shift ?
How about the introduction of the clumsy , RSI inducing mouse ?
Let me guess : a " design failure " is by definition something that did n't make money , right ?
The original model Macintosh was indeed severely flawed ( e.g .
it had no good way of adding a hard-drive ) .
You might make the point that the Macintosh line as a whole suceeded because they quickly fixed this problem ; but there were similar issues with the original model NeXt machines which were also relatively quickly fixed , and yet the the NeXt despite being very impressive for their day , never really did take off .
One can discuss design independently of financial success ( which may , after all be due to tricks of marketing or just plain luck... ) .
A machine like the Atari 800 had a number of interesting features that were oriented toward making the machine more of a consumer appliance : software was burned onto ROM cartridges that the user could swap easily , add-ons such as memory expansion were packaged up into their own easily pluggable cases , and so on .
These features still do n't seem like particularly dumb ideas to me : they would n't deserve to be called " design failures " , it just happens that the market went in a different direction -- people apparently liked the cheaper bare boards approach of the IBM PC and friends rather than the neatly packaged up Atari add-on boards ; the ROM cartridges were difficult to update , and the flexibility of system software on floppies was a bigger draw than the idiot-friendly pluggable cartridges .
If I had to pick one single example of computer design idiocy , I think it might be the babble-of-scsi .
Multiple signal standards , and multiple connector standards , but no coordination between the two... constant mysterious questions about cable length and termination , with no obvious way of debugging the problems ( in contrast , the green status lights of ethernet are totally brilliant ) .
SCSI * should * have ruled the earth , but instead we had to make do with IDE hacks.. . ( By the way : the DEC Rainbow had no ESC key .
I saw a bunch of them in use as VT-100 terminals at Stanford... every one of them had " ESC " scribbled in magic marker , just above the F11 keys .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Monday June 15, 2009   3:50 PM


Um.
Design failures?
How about moving the control key down
below the shift?
How about the introduction of the clumsy, RSI
inducing mouse?
Let me guess: a "design failure" is by definition something that
didn't make money, right?
The original model Macintosh was indeed severely
flawed (e.g.
it had no good way of adding a hard-drive).
You
might make the point that the Macintosh line as a whole suceeded
because they quickly fixed this problem; but there were similar
issues with the original model NeXt machines which were also
relatively quickly fixed, and yet the the NeXt despite being very
impressive for their day, never really did take off.
One can discuss design independently of financial success (which
may, after all be due to tricks of marketing or just plain luck...).
A machine like the Atari 800 had a number of interesting features
that were oriented toward making the machine more of a consumer
appliance: software was burned onto ROM cartridges that the user
could swap easily, add-ons such as memory expansion were packaged
up into their own easily pluggable cases, and so on.
These
features still don't seem like particularly dumb ideas to me: they
wouldn't deserve to be called "design failures", it just happens
that the market went in a different direction -- people
apparently liked the cheaper bare boards approach of the IBM PC
and friends rather than the neatly packaged up Atari add-on
boards; the ROM cartridges were difficult to update, and the
flexibility of system software on floppies was a bigger draw than
the idiot-friendly pluggable cartridges.
If I had to pick one single example of computer design idiocy,
I think it might be the babble-of-scsi.
Multiple signal
standards, and multiple connector standards, but no coordination
between the two... constant mysterious questions about cable
length and termination, with no obvious way of debugging the
problems (in contrast, the green status lights of ethernet are
totally brilliant).
SCSI *should* have ruled the earth, but
instead we had to make do with IDE hacks...

(By the way: the DEC Rainbow had no ESC key.
I saw a bunch of
them in use as VT-100 terminals at Stanford... every one of them
had "ESC" scribbled in magic marker, just above the F11 keys.
)
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336191</id>
	<title>Re:CapsLock</title>
	<author>TeknoHog</author>
	<datestamp>1245085080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My non-solar keyboard has two Ctrl keys. They are placed symmetrically, much like the two Shift keys. Swapping the left Ctrl with Caps Lock would break this symmetry.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My non-solar keyboard has two Ctrl keys .
They are placed symmetrically , much like the two Shift keys .
Swapping the left Ctrl with Caps Lock would break this symmetry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My non-solar keyboard has two Ctrl keys.
They are placed symmetrically, much like the two Shift keys.
Swapping the left Ctrl with Caps Lock would break this symmetry.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337887</id>
	<title>Re:General trend</title>
	<author>Jeremy Erwin</author>
	<datestamp>1245092640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>. Did we go around formatting disks in the early 80's. I don't think so. Most of the disks I bought were pre-formatted. That was the norm. I believe it was the norm from 8" to 3.5" disks. I do know that I did order some unformatted bulk disks in the mid 80's, at the bargain basement price of $2 each, in current dollars.</p></div><p>Yep. We did . Pre formatted disks came a bit later (and usually for non-niche machines, like the IBM PC). If they were incorrectly formatted, you could always format them for the correct machine, assuming that you didn't own a DEC Rainbow.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>.
Did we go around formatting disks in the early 80 's .
I do n't think so .
Most of the disks I bought were pre-formatted .
That was the norm .
I believe it was the norm from 8 " to 3.5 " disks .
I do know that I did order some unformatted bulk disks in the mid 80 's , at the bargain basement price of $ 2 each , in current dollars.Yep .
We did .
Pre formatted disks came a bit later ( and usually for non-niche machines , like the IBM PC ) .
If they were incorrectly formatted , you could always format them for the correct machine , assuming that you did n't own a DEC Rainbow .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>.
Did we go around formatting disks in the early 80's.
I don't think so.
Most of the disks I bought were pre-formatted.
That was the norm.
I believe it was the norm from 8" to 3.5" disks.
I do know that I did order some unformatted bulk disks in the mid 80's, at the bargain basement price of $2 each, in current dollars.Yep.
We did .
Pre formatted disks came a bit later (and usually for non-niche machines, like the IBM PC).
If they were incorrectly formatted, you could always format them for the correct machine, assuming that you didn't own a DEC Rainbow.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336339</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339379</id>
	<title>Re:Not 'classic', but still...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245098280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think by "lint" you mean dust...</p><p>And dust would occur regardless of the fans. The reason is simple; and electric current creates a magnetic feild (and vice versa) and a lot of dust contains iron in some fashion ( a fair amount of it is dead skin cells).</p><p>My point is that, just like the old tube tv's, your going to get it clogged no matter if you have fans or not. You can buy filters for most pc fans now, and would be nice to see them standardized, to make things easier, 'though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think by " lint " you mean dust...And dust would occur regardless of the fans .
The reason is simple ; and electric current creates a magnetic feild ( and vice versa ) and a lot of dust contains iron in some fashion ( a fair amount of it is dead skin cells ) .My point is that , just like the old tube tv 's , your going to get it clogged no matter if you have fans or not .
You can buy filters for most pc fans now , and would be nice to see them standardized , to make things easier , 'though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think by "lint" you mean dust...And dust would occur regardless of the fans.
The reason is simple; and electric current creates a magnetic feild (and vice versa) and a lot of dust contains iron in some fashion ( a fair amount of it is dead skin cells).My point is that, just like the old tube tv's, your going to get it clogged no matter if you have fans or not.
You can buy filters for most pc fans now, and would be nice to see them standardized, to make things easier, 'though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336187</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336293</id>
	<title>Atari 400:</title>
	<author>mikeasu</author>
	<datestamp>1245085440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Anyone remember the Atari 400?  The budget version of the Atari 800.  Had some sort of acrylic keyboard with pads that you really had to apply some pressure to for the press to register.  Also had a lovely feature in the cartridge slot cover - spring loaded, and took several tries to make it latch.  If the latch isn't engaged, the system wouldn't function.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone remember the Atari 400 ?
The budget version of the Atari 800 .
Had some sort of acrylic keyboard with pads that you really had to apply some pressure to for the press to register .
Also had a lovely feature in the cartridge slot cover - spring loaded , and took several tries to make it latch .
If the latch is n't engaged , the system would n't function .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone remember the Atari 400?
The budget version of the Atari 800.
Had some sort of acrylic keyboard with pads that you really had to apply some pressure to for the press to register.
Also had a lovely feature in the cartridge slot cover - spring loaded, and took several tries to make it latch.
If the latch isn't engaged, the system wouldn't function.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28345187</id>
	<title>nobody for the PSII and the MCA?</title>
	<author>kubitus</author>
	<datestamp>1245184620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>MCA, PSII and its Config.<p>

the MCA was quite advanced, but proprietary. It failed to win a significant market share.</p><p>
Also the Configuration system: a locked up thing. </p><p>
IBM attempt to reconquer the PC monopoly bunked!</p><p>
the 8088 decisison kept 8 bit SW for 2 decades longer than necessary</p><p>
the segemnting of memory of this CPU design cost programmers and programs &gt; 20\% efficiency</p><p>
which was remedied only by the 386.

Then QDOS and Windows 1. At a time when Unix and even ROMable versions like OS9 were available to bet on this indicates what IBM thought of the PC:</p><p> a toy for managers and freaks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>MCA , PSII and its Config .
the MCA was quite advanced , but proprietary .
It failed to win a significant market share .
Also the Configuration system : a locked up thing .
IBM attempt to reconquer the PC monopoly bunked !
the 8088 decisison kept 8 bit SW for 2 decades longer than necessary the segemnting of memory of this CPU design cost programmers and programs &gt; 20 \ % efficiency which was remedied only by the 386 .
Then QDOS and Windows 1 .
At a time when Unix and even ROMable versions like OS9 were available to bet on this indicates what IBM thought of the PC : a toy for managers and freaks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MCA, PSII and its Config.
the MCA was quite advanced, but proprietary.
It failed to win a significant market share.
Also the Configuration system: a locked up thing.
IBM attempt to reconquer the PC monopoly bunked!
the 8088 decisison kept 8 bit SW for 2 decades longer than necessary
the segemnting of memory of this CPU design cost programmers and programs &gt; 20\% efficiency
which was remedied only by the 386.
Then QDOS and Windows 1.
At a time when Unix and even ROMable versions like OS9 were available to bet on this indicates what IBM thought of the PC: a toy for managers and freaks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28352221</id>
	<title>Re:CapsLock</title>
	<author>dossen</author>
	<datestamp>1245184440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>One useful thing to do with the CapsLock key: Compose key! I happen to live in Denmark, but find my native keyboard layout rather less than ideal for programming - there are however a number of characters, that are needed to type in danish and not present on a standard us layout (e.g. &aelig;, &oslash;, and &aring;). But using the CapsLock as compose key, I can have a us layout keyboard and lots of special characters take only three keypresses to produce.<br>Since I spent by far too long tracking it down - if you need this on Windows, AllChars (http://allchars.zwolnet.com/) does the job nicely.</htmltext>
<tokenext>One useful thing to do with the CapsLock key : Compose key !
I happen to live in Denmark , but find my native keyboard layout rather less than ideal for programming - there are however a number of characters , that are needed to type in danish and not present on a standard us layout ( e.g .
  ,   , and   ) .
But using the CapsLock as compose key , I can have a us layout keyboard and lots of special characters take only three keypresses to produce.Since I spent by far too long tracking it down - if you need this on Windows , AllChars ( http : //allchars.zwolnet.com/ ) does the job nicely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One useful thing to do with the CapsLock key: Compose key!
I happen to live in Denmark, but find my native keyboard layout rather less than ideal for programming - there are however a number of characters, that are needed to type in danish and not present on a standard us layout (e.g.
æ, ø, and å).
But using the CapsLock as compose key, I can have a us layout keyboard and lots of special characters take only three keypresses to produce.Since I spent by far too long tracking it down - if you need this on Windows, AllChars (http://allchars.zwolnet.com/) does the job nicely.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28344993</id>
	<title>Re:Big ISA bus flaw</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245095460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is another serious related problem with the IBM PC's ISA bus.  The engineer that wrote the bios configured the interrupt controller to use edge sensitive interrupts instead of level sensitive interrupts. This caused no end of problems because you couldn't chain interrupts and thus every card on the ISA bus had to use a separate interrupt.  Which meant that it would fall on the end user to try and sort them out if he wanted to expand the system.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is another serious related problem with the IBM PC 's ISA bus .
The engineer that wrote the bios configured the interrupt controller to use edge sensitive interrupts instead of level sensitive interrupts .
This caused no end of problems because you could n't chain interrupts and thus every card on the ISA bus had to use a separate interrupt .
Which meant that it would fall on the end user to try and sort them out if he wanted to expand the system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is another serious related problem with the IBM PC's ISA bus.
The engineer that wrote the bios configured the interrupt controller to use edge sensitive interrupts instead of level sensitive interrupts.
This caused no end of problems because you couldn't chain interrupts and thus every card on the ISA bus had to use a separate interrupt.
Which meant that it would fall on the end user to try and sort them out if he wanted to expand the system.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335323</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335511</id>
	<title>Sony VAIO desktop problem...</title>
	<author>Bagels</author>
	<datestamp>1245082500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Our family once owned an old Sony VAIO desktop.  It came with a floppy drive, but as it was the year 2000, floppies were quickly becoming unfashionable.  Because of this, Sony hid the floppy drive behind a small plastic hatch.  The problem?  The hatch attached to the case with a small but fairly powerful magnet... which corrupted every single disk inserted into the drive.  To this day I'm wary of Sony products (and VAIOs in particular) because of that little screw-up.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Our family once owned an old Sony VAIO desktop .
It came with a floppy drive , but as it was the year 2000 , floppies were quickly becoming unfashionable .
Because of this , Sony hid the floppy drive behind a small plastic hatch .
The problem ?
The hatch attached to the case with a small but fairly powerful magnet... which corrupted every single disk inserted into the drive .
To this day I 'm wary of Sony products ( and VAIOs in particular ) because of that little screw-up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Our family once owned an old Sony VAIO desktop.
It came with a floppy drive, but as it was the year 2000, floppies were quickly becoming unfashionable.
Because of this, Sony hid the floppy drive behind a small plastic hatch.
The problem?
The hatch attached to the case with a small but fairly powerful magnet... which corrupted every single disk inserted into the drive.
To this day I'm wary of Sony products (and VAIOs in particular) because of that little screw-up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339749</id>
	<title>Re: The 15 problems</title>
	<author>Ant P.</author>
	<datestamp>1245056580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The only thing worse than blue LEDs is blue LEDs that blink on and off. I've got a wireless keyboard that does exactly that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The only thing worse than blue LEDs is blue LEDs that blink on and off .
I 've got a wireless keyboard that does exactly that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only thing worse than blue LEDs is blue LEDs that blink on and off.
I've got a wireless keyboard that does exactly that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339191</id>
	<title>RE:CAPSLOCK</title>
	<author>Khashishi</author>
	<datestamp>1245097620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>WUT R U TALKING ABOUT NOOB! CapsLock is still "useful" to a lot of people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>WUT R U TALKING ABOUT NOOB !
CapsLock is still " useful " to a lot of people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WUT R U TALKING ABOUT NOOB!
CapsLock is still "useful" to a lot of people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28344731</id>
	<title>Re:Not really</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245091680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you had a PC that required you to purchase formatted floppies, and you DIDN'T write your own (or at least trade for one), the you probably shouldn't have had the PC to begin with.</p><p>Ahhhh, the old days...writing your own assembler, building a jig to turn SS-DD disks into DD-DD disks....back when real men were real men</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you had a PC that required you to purchase formatted floppies , and you DID N'T write your own ( or at least trade for one ) , the you probably should n't have had the PC to begin with.Ahhhh , the old days...writing your own assembler , building a jig to turn SS-DD disks into DD-DD disks....back when real men were real men</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you had a PC that required you to purchase formatted floppies, and you DIDN'T write your own (or at least trade for one), the you probably shouldn't have had the PC to begin with.Ahhhh, the old days...writing your own assembler, building a jig to turn SS-DD disks into DD-DD disks....back when real men were real men</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335921</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28347641</id>
	<title>Re: The 15 problems</title>
	<author>splutty</author>
	<datestamp>1245167580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's there so you can find the dvd player in the dark to insert your porn DVDs. I thought that was blindingly obvious!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's there so you can find the dvd player in the dark to insert your porn DVDs .
I thought that was blindingly obvious !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's there so you can find the dvd player in the dark to insert your porn DVDs.
I thought that was blindingly obvious!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336883</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337093</id>
	<title>Re:biggest mistake: PC = 8088 not M68000!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245089160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ah but the cheap, simplistic MS-DOS and the abundance of assembly-programmed software were two of the things that made the IBM PC successful at a time when myriad other PCs failed to sell. Of all the expensive machines that were programmed in high level languages, thus being no faster (or sometimes much slower!) than the cheap 8-bitters, the Mac is probably the only one that succeeded.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah but the cheap , simplistic MS-DOS and the abundance of assembly-programmed software were two of the things that made the IBM PC successful at a time when myriad other PCs failed to sell .
Of all the expensive machines that were programmed in high level languages , thus being no faster ( or sometimes much slower !
) than the cheap 8-bitters , the Mac is probably the only one that succeeded .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah but the cheap, simplistic MS-DOS and the abundance of assembly-programmed software were two of the things that made the IBM PC successful at a time when myriad other PCs failed to sell.
Of all the expensive machines that were programmed in high level languages, thus being no faster (or sometimes much slower!
) than the cheap 8-bitters, the Mac is probably the only one that succeeded.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335801</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335785</id>
	<title>And a summary</title>
	<author>Chas</author>
	<datestamp>1245083520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A: No PSU fan (leading to thermal warping of internal components)<br>B: Limited Apple II Compatibility (Limited Compatibility)<br>C: No way to format disks<br>D: EM Pulse Erases tapes (unreliable media)<br>E: Printer required<br>F: Lousy Keyboard (#6 and #8)<br>G: Non-detachable AC adapter<br>H: Ridiculous external expansion options (10, 13, and technically 14)<br>I: No user expandability<br>J: Slow BASIC<br>K: Unreliable disk drives</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A : No PSU fan ( leading to thermal warping of internal components ) B : Limited Apple II Compatibility ( Limited Compatibility ) C : No way to format disksD : EM Pulse Erases tapes ( unreliable media ) E : Printer requiredF : Lousy Keyboard ( # 6 and # 8 ) G : Non-detachable AC adapterH : Ridiculous external expansion options ( 10 , 13 , and technically 14 ) I : No user expandabilityJ : Slow BASICK : Unreliable disk drives</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A: No PSU fan (leading to thermal warping of internal components)B: Limited Apple II Compatibility (Limited Compatibility)C: No way to format disksD: EM Pulse Erases tapes (unreliable media)E: Printer requiredF: Lousy Keyboard (#6 and #8)G: Non-detachable AC adapterH: Ridiculous external expansion options (10, 13, and technically 14)I: No user expandabilityJ: Slow BASICK: Unreliable disk drives</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335243</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28342159</id>
	<title>Re:worst: sharp unfinished inside edges in cheap c</title>
	<author>Spike15</author>
	<datestamp>1245068520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>- Power hunger systems.  2 molex connections for a GPU ?!</p></div><p>I hate to break it to you dude, but video cards still require two power connections, just they're not molex anymore!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>- Power hunger systems .
2 molex connections for a GPU ?
! I hate to break it to you dude , but video cards still require two power connections , just they 're not molex anymore !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>- Power hunger systems.
2 molex connections for a GPU ?
!I hate to break it to you dude, but video cards still require two power connections, just they're not molex anymore!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337975</id>
	<title>High-tech solution</title>
	<author>lobiusmoop</author>
	<datestamp>1245093060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When in doubt, dike it out. Saves some juice as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When in doubt , dike it out .
Saves some juice as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When in doubt, dike it out.
Saves some juice as well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336849</id>
	<title>Re:worst: sharp unfinished inside edges in cheap c</title>
	<author>story645</author>
	<datestamp>1245087960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>- 15 to 10 years ago, you had to be careful when installing drives, or RAM.  You could almost slice your hand on a cheap case that had unfinished and sharp edges.</p></div><p>I got cut up 2 or 3 years ago, and I'm sure cases of equally bad quality are still on the market.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>- 15 to 10 years ago , you had to be careful when installing drives , or RAM .
You could almost slice your hand on a cheap case that had unfinished and sharp edges.I got cut up 2 or 3 years ago , and I 'm sure cases of equally bad quality are still on the market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>- 15 to 10 years ago, you had to be careful when installing drives, or RAM.
You could almost slice your hand on a cheap case that had unfinished and sharp edges.I got cut up 2 or 3 years ago, and I'm sure cases of equally bad quality are still on the market.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335705</id>
	<title>Re:#1 failure...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245083220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually it was the 8088 CPU which had an 8 bit I/O bus (the 8086 had a 16 bit I/O bus).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually it was the 8088 CPU which had an 8 bit I/O bus ( the 8086 had a 16 bit I/O bus ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually it was the 8088 CPU which had an 8 bit I/O bus (the 8086 had a 16 bit I/O bus).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335445</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336901</id>
	<title>Re:Not 'classic', but still...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245088200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good cases have a filter on the air intake.</p><p>Unfortunately there aren't many good cases on the market.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good cases have a filter on the air intake.Unfortunately there are n't many good cases on the market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good cases have a filter on the air intake.Unfortunately there aren't many good cases on the market.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336187</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335693</id>
	<title>Re:The 15 problems</title>
	<author>falconwolf</author>
	<datestamp>1245083160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where's #9?<br>
Oh, instead of releasing their own GUI based PC, Xerox <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PARC\_(company)" title="wikipedia.org">PARC</a> [wikipedia.org] had Apple do it.</p><p>

Falcon</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where 's # 9 ?
Oh , instead of releasing their own GUI based PC , Xerox PARC [ wikipedia.org ] had Apple do it .
Falcon</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where's #9?
Oh, instead of releasing their own GUI based PC, Xerox PARC [wikipedia.org] had Apple do it.
Falcon</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335243</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28341797</id>
	<title>Re:The 15 problems</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245066420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>About #6, I find it intriguing that apparently rubber buttons is so stupidly backwards on a keyboard that, of all the problems listed, it's the one with no explanation, i.e. "rubber buttons, 'nuff said".</p><p>And it's true, rubber buttons is a stupid idea. Do you see rubber buttons on your phone? No. Your cell phone? No. Your car radio? No. Elevators? No. Vending machines? No. Set-top boxes of all kinds? No. Portable electronics of all kinds? No.</p><p>Clearly, rubber buttons are universally recognized as a stupid idea... except by makers of TV remotes.</p><p>Can somebody explain why the fuck why? Honestly. Nobody on this planet is tired of mashing unresponsive buttons every single time they want to switch channels? Really? No one?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>About # 6 , I find it intriguing that apparently rubber buttons is so stupidly backwards on a keyboard that , of all the problems listed , it 's the one with no explanation , i.e .
" rubber buttons , 'nuff said " .And it 's true , rubber buttons is a stupid idea .
Do you see rubber buttons on your phone ?
No. Your cell phone ?
No. Your car radio ?
No. Elevators ?
No. Vending machines ?
No. Set-top boxes of all kinds ?
No. Portable electronics of all kinds ?
No.Clearly , rubber buttons are universally recognized as a stupid idea... except by makers of TV remotes.Can somebody explain why the fuck why ?
Honestly. Nobody on this planet is tired of mashing unresponsive buttons every single time they want to switch channels ?
Really ? No one ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>About #6, I find it intriguing that apparently rubber buttons is so stupidly backwards on a keyboard that, of all the problems listed, it's the one with no explanation, i.e.
"rubber buttons, 'nuff said".And it's true, rubber buttons is a stupid idea.
Do you see rubber buttons on your phone?
No. Your cell phone?
No. Your car radio?
No. Elevators?
No. Vending machines?
No. Set-top boxes of all kinds?
No. Portable electronics of all kinds?
No.Clearly, rubber buttons are universally recognized as a stupid idea... except by makers of TV remotes.Can somebody explain why the fuck why?
Honestly. Nobody on this planet is tired of mashing unresponsive buttons every single time they want to switch channels?
Really? No one?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335243</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336935</id>
	<title>The C64 didn't make the list?!?</title>
	<author>agnosticanarch</author>
	<datestamp>1245088320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I mean... uhm... YAY! The C64 didn't make the list!!</p><p>w&#195;&#195;t! (Just imagine those zeroes that have little slashes through them are light blue... if they show up correctly!)</p><p>~AA</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean... uhm... YAY !
The C64 did n't make the list ! ! w     t !
( Just imagine those zeroes that have little slashes through them are light blue... if they show up correctly !
) ~ AA</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean... uhm... YAY!
The C64 didn't make the list!!wÃÃt!
(Just imagine those zeroes that have little slashes through them are light blue... if they show up correctly!
)~AA</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336343</id>
	<title>Re:#1 failure...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245085680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is no basis for your theory.</p><p>One could just as easily argue that IF the 80xx assembler hadn't sucked so badly, or if the Motorola 68k everyone was so in love with doing assembler on had emerged victorious, we would not have had compilers and higher level languages that speed up development nearly as early as we did. Being stuck in assembler land is not the way forward. Thus, by sucking as badly as it did, it actually helped speeding up progress.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no basis for your theory.One could just as easily argue that IF the 80xx assembler had n't sucked so badly , or if the Motorola 68k everyone was so in love with doing assembler on had emerged victorious , we would not have had compilers and higher level languages that speed up development nearly as early as we did .
Being stuck in assembler land is not the way forward .
Thus , by sucking as badly as it did , it actually helped speeding up progress .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no basis for your theory.One could just as easily argue that IF the 80xx assembler hadn't sucked so badly, or if the Motorola 68k everyone was so in love with doing assembler on had emerged victorious, we would not have had compilers and higher level languages that speed up development nearly as early as we did.
Being stuck in assembler land is not the way forward.
Thus, by sucking as badly as it did, it actually helped speeding up progress.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335445</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337111</id>
	<title>Re:Not 'classic', but still...</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1245089220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The only other options are water cooling or passive cooling, and passive cooling isn't acceptable for a machine faster than 800MHz unless you've got a heatsink that looks like Laurelin or Telperion (a big metal tree).  So, people just need to be taught to vacuum out their heatsinks once a year.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The only other options are water cooling or passive cooling , and passive cooling is n't acceptable for a machine faster than 800MHz unless you 've got a heatsink that looks like Laurelin or Telperion ( a big metal tree ) .
So , people just need to be taught to vacuum out their heatsinks once a year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only other options are water cooling or passive cooling, and passive cooling isn't acceptable for a machine faster than 800MHz unless you've got a heatsink that looks like Laurelin or Telperion (a big metal tree).
So, people just need to be taught to vacuum out their heatsinks once a year.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336187</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336925</id>
	<title>Re:CapsLock</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245088320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>WHAT IS THE CAPSLOCK KEY?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>WHAT IS THE CAPSLOCK KEY ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WHAT IS THE CAPSLOCK KEY?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28341097</id>
	<title>Murphy's Law</title>
	<author>200\_success</author>
	<datestamp>1245062280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
You have just reminded me of a stupid design problem: PC parallel ports and Mac SCSI ports used the same DB25 connector.  My friend once plugged a PC printer into a Mac, and immediately fried the motherboard.
</p><p>
The funny thing is, several years after the incident, I happened to run into this friend while he was working as a salesman at CompUSA.  A couple looking to buy a computer was concerned that they wouldn't be able to figure out how to put it together, to which he replied, "Don't worry, every cable can only be plugged into one place.  It will be obvious."
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You have just reminded me of a stupid design problem : PC parallel ports and Mac SCSI ports used the same DB25 connector .
My friend once plugged a PC printer into a Mac , and immediately fried the motherboard .
The funny thing is , several years after the incident , I happened to run into this friend while he was working as a salesman at CompUSA .
A couple looking to buy a computer was concerned that they would n't be able to figure out how to put it together , to which he replied , " Do n't worry , every cable can only be plugged into one place .
It will be obvious .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
You have just reminded me of a stupid design problem: PC parallel ports and Mac SCSI ports used the same DB25 connector.
My friend once plugged a PC printer into a Mac, and immediately fried the motherboard.
The funny thing is, several years after the incident, I happened to run into this friend while he was working as a salesman at CompUSA.
A couple looking to buy a computer was concerned that they wouldn't be able to figure out how to put it together, to which he replied, "Don't worry, every cable can only be plugged into one place.
It will be obvious.
"
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336193</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336173</id>
	<title>Re:Apple Lisa</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245085020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They might be referring to the Canon Cat (code for which was developed on Apple hardware) by Jef Raskin.  See<br><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon\_Cat" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon\_Cat</a> [wikipedia.org].  This was a pretty unique way of viewing files</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They might be referring to the Canon Cat ( code for which was developed on Apple hardware ) by Jef Raskin .
Seehttp : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon \ _Cat [ wikipedia.org ] .
This was a pretty unique way of viewing files</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They might be referring to the Canon Cat (code for which was developed on Apple hardware) by Jef Raskin.
Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon\_Cat [wikipedia.org].
This was a pretty unique way of viewing files</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335575</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336945</id>
	<title>CRT drivers factory set to "Headache"</title>
	<author>Fantastic Lad</author>
	<datestamp>1245088440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I cannot count the number of times I've been using somebody's home or office computer for a few minutes only to stop whatever I was doing to ask if I could fix their screen properties so that the bloody thing would stop flickering at 10 htz or whatever the slowest out of the box refresh rate happened to be when their machine was first installed a decade earlier.</p><p>Actually, I quite enjoy it now.  --I say, "Okay, seriously.  You're going to love this!  --Check it out. .<nobr> <wbr></nobr>."</p><p>Then I set the screen to its highest available frequency and the image turns rock-steady.  The owner/user, (depending on how long they've been sitting in front of the offending CRT perhaps?), will either shrug and say, "Yeah, that looks better, I guess."  Or they will drop their jaw and say, "Oh my god!  It could have <i>always</i> been like that?!"</p><p>I KNOW most of you have run into this exact same scenario at least once before.  If that isn't a huge design flaw, then I don't know what is.  It only seems to have been solved by the advent of flat-screen technology.</p><p>-FL</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can not count the number of times I 've been using somebody 's home or office computer for a few minutes only to stop whatever I was doing to ask if I could fix their screen properties so that the bloody thing would stop flickering at 10 htz or whatever the slowest out of the box refresh rate happened to be when their machine was first installed a decade earlier.Actually , I quite enjoy it now .
--I say , " Okay , seriously .
You 're going to love this !
--Check it out .
. .
" Then I set the screen to its highest available frequency and the image turns rock-steady .
The owner/user , ( depending on how long they 've been sitting in front of the offending CRT perhaps ?
) , will either shrug and say , " Yeah , that looks better , I guess .
" Or they will drop their jaw and say , " Oh my god !
It could have always been like that ? !
" I KNOW most of you have run into this exact same scenario at least once before .
If that is n't a huge design flaw , then I do n't know what is .
It only seems to have been solved by the advent of flat-screen technology.-FL</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I cannot count the number of times I've been using somebody's home or office computer for a few minutes only to stop whatever I was doing to ask if I could fix their screen properties so that the bloody thing would stop flickering at 10 htz or whatever the slowest out of the box refresh rate happened to be when their machine was first installed a decade earlier.Actually, I quite enjoy it now.
--I say, "Okay, seriously.
You're going to love this!
--Check it out.
. .
"Then I set the screen to its highest available frequency and the image turns rock-steady.
The owner/user, (depending on how long they've been sitting in front of the offending CRT perhaps?
), will either shrug and say, "Yeah, that looks better, I guess.
"  Or they will drop their jaw and say, "Oh my god!
It could have always been like that?!
"I KNOW most of you have run into this exact same scenario at least once before.
If that isn't a huge design flaw, then I don't know what is.
It only seems to have been solved by the advent of flat-screen technology.-FL</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337981</id>
	<title>Re:Worst Mistake That Still Needs Fixing</title>
	<author>solios</author>
	<datestamp>1245093060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Two points:</p><p>1. Every mini before the current revision has a single DVI port.  The new machines can do dual displays - I'm thankful for that, even if it comes at a price.  (wonky adapters)</p><p>2. If you're trying to use a dual-link display with the mini, you're obviously <i>not</i> the target market.  Apple's gotta justify the price of the Power Mac <i>somehow</i>...</p><p>Apple is <i>no</i> stranger to the adapter boondoggle - DB-25, Applevision, the proprietary Apple Cinema Display connector, non-standardized "mini" monitor outputs across the iMac and laptop lines...</p><p>The Mini is there for people who need a desktop but lack the disposable income to buy the Power Mac.  Pity the entire iMac (and laptop) lines sit between the two for price points.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Two points : 1 .
Every mini before the current revision has a single DVI port .
The new machines can do dual displays - I 'm thankful for that , even if it comes at a price .
( wonky adapters ) 2 .
If you 're trying to use a dual-link display with the mini , you 're obviously not the target market .
Apple 's got ta justify the price of the Power Mac somehow...Apple is no stranger to the adapter boondoggle - DB-25 , Applevision , the proprietary Apple Cinema Display connector , non-standardized " mini " monitor outputs across the iMac and laptop lines...The Mini is there for people who need a desktop but lack the disposable income to buy the Power Mac .
Pity the entire iMac ( and laptop ) lines sit between the two for price points .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Two points:1.
Every mini before the current revision has a single DVI port.
The new machines can do dual displays - I'm thankful for that, even if it comes at a price.
(wonky adapters)2.
If you're trying to use a dual-link display with the mini, you're obviously not the target market.
Apple's gotta justify the price of the Power Mac somehow...Apple is no stranger to the adapter boondoggle - DB-25, Applevision, the proprietary Apple Cinema Display connector, non-standardized "mini" monitor outputs across the iMac and laptop lines...The Mini is there for people who need a desktop but lack the disposable income to buy the Power Mac.
Pity the entire iMac (and laptop) lines sit between the two for price points.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337031</id>
	<title>Re:Big ISA bus flaw</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245088800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why does it matter? I honestly don't understand why this is a problem. Is the rest of the bus active high or something and this signal is bucking the normal convention? It's not like fast inverters are hard to come by.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does it matter ?
I honestly do n't understand why this is a problem .
Is the rest of the bus active high or something and this signal is bucking the normal convention ?
It 's not like fast inverters are hard to come by .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why does it matter?
I honestly don't understand why this is a problem.
Is the rest of the bus active high or something and this signal is bucking the normal convention?
It's not like fast inverters are hard to come by.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335323</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337619</id>
	<title>Re: The 15 problems</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245091440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe it's because I'm fortunate enough to have a bigger place than a 1-bedroom apartment, but I can't see why anyone would want to have a whole computer system in their room.  When I had the opportunity, I off-loaded all my major media (modulo an old CRT television and an NES) into a different room.  Heck, even a 1-bedroom apartment would allow you to put all your media devices and PC in the "living room" and just keep your bedroom as a... well... "bed room".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe it 's because I 'm fortunate enough to have a bigger place than a 1-bedroom apartment , but I ca n't see why anyone would want to have a whole computer system in their room .
When I had the opportunity , I off-loaded all my major media ( modulo an old CRT television and an NES ) into a different room .
Heck , even a 1-bedroom apartment would allow you to put all your media devices and PC in the " living room " and just keep your bedroom as a... well... " bed room " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe it's because I'm fortunate enough to have a bigger place than a 1-bedroom apartment, but I can't see why anyone would want to have a whole computer system in their room.
When I had the opportunity, I off-loaded all my major media (modulo an old CRT television and an NES) into a different room.
Heck, even a 1-bedroom apartment would allow you to put all your media devices and PC in the "living room" and just keep your bedroom as a... well... "bed room".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339259</id>
	<title>Re:CapsLock</title>
	<author>Daravon</author>
	<datestamp>1245097860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.bash.org/?835030" title="bash.org">Not really</a> [bash.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not really [ bash.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not really [bash.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335791</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335801</id>
	<title>biggest mistake: PC = 8088 not M68000!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245083580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I believe the biggest mistake was IBM using an Intel8088, instead of a Motorola68000.

</p><p>Imagine for a moment what would have happened if IBM choose in the early 1980s a 32 bits processor for the first successful Personal Computer!

</p><ul>

<li>no infamous 640k memory limit</li>

<li>probably no MSDOS (or QDOS), and a real operating system instead</li>

<li>32 bits computing would have become mainstream a decade earlier at least!</li>

<li>much less assembly written software</li>

</ul></htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe the biggest mistake was IBM using an Intel8088 , instead of a Motorola68000 .
Imagine for a moment what would have happened if IBM choose in the early 1980s a 32 bits processor for the first successful Personal Computer !
no infamous 640k memory limit probably no MSDOS ( or QDOS ) , and a real operating system instead 32 bits computing would have become mainstream a decade earlier at least !
much less assembly written software</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe the biggest mistake was IBM using an Intel8088, instead of a Motorola68000.
Imagine for a moment what would have happened if IBM choose in the early 1980s a 32 bits processor for the first successful Personal Computer!
no infamous 640k memory limit

probably no MSDOS (or QDOS), and a real operating system instead

32 bits computing would have become mainstream a decade earlier at least!
much less assembly written software

</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338215</id>
	<title>Re:CapsLock</title>
	<author>calzones</author>
	<datestamp>1245094200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>how is the parent a troll??  that's some pretty harsh modding</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>how is the parent a troll ? ?
that 's some pretty harsh modding</tokentext>
<sentencetext>how is the parent a troll??
that's some pretty harsh modding</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335683</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338293</id>
	<title>Packard Bell?</title>
	<author>cyberworm</author>
	<datestamp>1245094560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm surprised their crap design decisions didn't make the list.  I remember a time when I'd see 3 or 4 of those come across my work bench at the store I worked in during their heyday.  Up until this point I think I had almost purged the experience from my mind, but if I recall correctly quite a few machines would completely stop functioning if the modem died, was removed, or replaced.  Generally it had something to do with swapping a jumper to reconfigure a COM port.  Combined with other horrible "features" of those machines it's hard to believe they were left off the list.

Perhaps the article writers were sparing us from painul memories.....</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm surprised their crap design decisions did n't make the list .
I remember a time when I 'd see 3 or 4 of those come across my work bench at the store I worked in during their heyday .
Up until this point I think I had almost purged the experience from my mind , but if I recall correctly quite a few machines would completely stop functioning if the modem died , was removed , or replaced .
Generally it had something to do with swapping a jumper to reconfigure a COM port .
Combined with other horrible " features " of those machines it 's hard to believe they were left off the list .
Perhaps the article writers were sparing us from painul memories.... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm surprised their crap design decisions didn't make the list.
I remember a time when I'd see 3 or 4 of those come across my work bench at the store I worked in during their heyday.
Up until this point I think I had almost purged the experience from my mind, but if I recall correctly quite a few machines would completely stop functioning if the modem died, was removed, or replaced.
Generally it had something to do with swapping a jumper to reconfigure a COM port.
Combined with other horrible "features" of those machines it's hard to believe they were left off the list.
Perhaps the article writers were sparing us from painul memories.....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335825</id>
	<title>Re:CapsLock</title>
	<author>vonhammer</author>
	<datestamp>1245083700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Funnily enough, I found this useful exactly once - on a C64.  A game I was playing (forget which one) used the shift key to pause.  A way to pause for long time, while you got something to eat, etc, was to use the caps-lock.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Funnily enough , I found this useful exactly once - on a C64 .
A game I was playing ( forget which one ) used the shift key to pause .
A way to pause for long time , while you got something to eat , etc , was to use the caps-lock .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Funnily enough, I found this useful exactly once - on a C64.
A game I was playing (forget which one) used the shift key to pause.
A way to pause for long time, while you got something to eat, etc, was to use the caps-lock.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336615</id>
	<title>Re:The 15 problems</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245086880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Problem #8: Miserable Keyboard</p><p>did anyone else read this and think of Marvin from Hitchhikers Guide?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Problem # 8 : Miserable Keyboarddid anyone else read this and think of Marvin from Hitchhikers Guide ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Problem #8: Miserable Keyboarddid anyone else read this and think of Marvin from Hitchhikers Guide?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335243</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336787</id>
	<title>Re:The 15 problems</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245087720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...but a bitch ain't one</p><p>Woo, geek stereotypes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...but a bitch ai n't oneWoo , geek stereotypes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...but a bitch ain't oneWoo, geek stereotypes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335243</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336299</id>
	<title>Re:General trend</title>
	<author>clone53421</author>
	<datestamp>1245085500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Underpowered" Vista machines? I think you mean "bundling Vista with two dozen bloated, proprietary apps that either won't be used or <em>shouldn't</em> be used (media players, photo organizers, CD/DVD burners...), all of which load on startup and run in the system tray". But yeah, it's the same thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Underpowered " Vista machines ?
I think you mean " bundling Vista with two dozen bloated , proprietary apps that either wo n't be used or should n't be used ( media players , photo organizers , CD/DVD burners... ) , all of which load on startup and run in the system tray " .
But yeah , it 's the same thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Underpowered" Vista machines?
I think you mean "bundling Vista with two dozen bloated, proprietary apps that either won't be used or shouldn't be used (media players, photo organizers, CD/DVD burners...), all of which load on startup and run in the system tray".
But yeah, it's the same thing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335301</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28340921</id>
	<title>Biggest Mistake that nobody notices</title>
	<author>espiesp</author>
	<datestamp>1245061260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why in the HELL did they create the USB specification to have a 2 dimensionally symmetric socket without making it a ambidextrious connector design? I don't know how many times I've gone to blindly plug in USB only to have to flip it around because you can't 'feel' the correct orientation like you can with virtually every other connector design.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why in the HELL did they create the USB specification to have a 2 dimensionally symmetric socket without making it a ambidextrious connector design ?
I do n't know how many times I 've gone to blindly plug in USB only to have to flip it around because you ca n't 'feel ' the correct orientation like you can with virtually every other connector design .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why in the HELL did they create the USB specification to have a 2 dimensionally symmetric socket without making it a ambidextrious connector design?
I don't know how many times I've gone to blindly plug in USB only to have to flip it around because you can't 'feel' the correct orientation like you can with virtually every other connector design.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336683</id>
	<title>Re:Worst Mistake That Still Needs Fixing</title>
	<author>Jeremy Erwin</author>
	<datestamp>1245087240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you want to use dual link DVI to power a 30" monitor</p></div><p>DVI doesn't power monitors. You must be thinking of ADC, which incorporates two 25V pins.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want to use dual link DVI to power a 30 " monitorDVI does n't power monitors .
You must be thinking of ADC , which incorporates two 25V pins .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want to use dual link DVI to power a 30" monitorDVI doesn't power monitors.
You must be thinking of ADC, which incorporates two 25V pins.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338911</id>
	<title>modern laptop flaws :</title>
	<author>stkpogo</author>
	<datestamp>1245096780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Laptop battery doesn't hold charge one month before warranty is up :<br>Look up replacement battery specs on manufacturers site online, buy battery, CMOS flashes improper battery message, contact support,<br>their solution : 'ship laptop in for repairs', my solution : return battery, search online using ID number off old battery.<br>Buy identical battery +extra.</p><p>Laptop CMOS / BIOS battery might be dead (when swapping out laptop batteries, CMOS settings are lost)<br>contact support, their solution : 'ship laptop in for repairs', my solution : plug in AC power before swapping batteries.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Laptop battery does n't hold charge one month before warranty is up : Look up replacement battery specs on manufacturers site online , buy battery , CMOS flashes improper battery message , contact support,their solution : 'ship laptop in for repairs ' , my solution : return battery , search online using ID number off old battery.Buy identical battery + extra.Laptop CMOS / BIOS battery might be dead ( when swapping out laptop batteries , CMOS settings are lost ) contact support , their solution : 'ship laptop in for repairs ' , my solution : plug in AC power before swapping batteries .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Laptop battery doesn't hold charge one month before warranty is up :Look up replacement battery specs on manufacturers site online, buy battery, CMOS flashes improper battery message, contact support,their solution : 'ship laptop in for repairs', my solution : return battery, search online using ID number off old battery.Buy identical battery +extra.Laptop CMOS / BIOS battery might be dead (when swapping out laptop batteries, CMOS settings are lost)contact support, their solution : 'ship laptop in for repairs', my solution : plug in AC power before swapping batteries.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337065</id>
	<title>Re:worst: sharp unfinished inside edges in cheap c</title>
	<author>DragonWriter</author>
	<datestamp>1245088920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>15 to 10 years ago, you had to be careful when installing drives, or RAM. You could almost slice your hand on a cheap case that had unfinished and sharp edges.</p></div></blockquote><p>I have a scar from slicing a knuckle to the bone that indicates that the word "almost" should be removed from this description.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>15 to 10 years ago , you had to be careful when installing drives , or RAM .
You could almost slice your hand on a cheap case that had unfinished and sharp edges.I have a scar from slicing a knuckle to the bone that indicates that the word " almost " should be removed from this description .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>15 to 10 years ago, you had to be careful when installing drives, or RAM.
You could almost slice your hand on a cheap case that had unfinished and sharp edges.I have a scar from slicing a knuckle to the bone that indicates that the word "almost" should be removed from this description.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339799</id>
	<title>Re:worst: sharp unfinished inside edges in cheap c</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1245056760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Crap 3D Video cards in laptops....</p></div><p>Related issue: zero standardization of laptop components. Very few laptops are so amazingly unique that they justify having anything but standard innards. Were they standardized at least to a degree, swapping out crappy video controllers would be easy enough.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Crap 3D Video cards in laptops....Related issue : zero standardization of laptop components .
Very few laptops are so amazingly unique that they justify having anything but standard innards .
Were they standardized at least to a degree , swapping out crappy video controllers would be easy enough .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Crap 3D Video cards in laptops....Related issue: zero standardization of laptop components.
Very few laptops are so amazingly unique that they justify having anything but standard innards.
Were they standardized at least to a degree, swapping out crappy video controllers would be easy enough.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339625</id>
	<title>Re: The 15 problems</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245099360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can envision situations where it's off but the LED isn't lit.</p><p>E.g. the AC adapter dies / power goes out / thrown circuit breaker / tripped GFCI /<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>Or, more practically speaking, if it won't turn on, check the LED. If it's not lit, check the AC. If it is, check the DVD player.</p><p>And if it's the remote, check the batteries.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can envision situations where it 's off but the LED is n't lit.E.g .
the AC adapter dies / power goes out / thrown circuit breaker / tripped GFCI / ...Or , more practically speaking , if it wo n't turn on , check the LED .
If it 's not lit , check the AC .
If it is , check the DVD player.And if it 's the remote , check the batteries .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can envision situations where it's off but the LED isn't lit.E.g.
the AC adapter dies / power goes out / thrown circuit breaker / tripped GFCI / ...Or, more practically speaking, if it won't turn on, check the LED.
If it's not lit, check the AC.
If it is, check the DVD player.And if it's the remote, check the batteries.
;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336883</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339083</id>
	<title>Re:Low-tech solution</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245097320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just detached the connector from the mainboard. Not that street-nerdy, I know, but it worked.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just detached the connector from the mainboard .
Not that street-nerdy , I know , but it worked .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just detached the connector from the mainboard.
Not that street-nerdy, I know, but it worked.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335429</id>
	<title>If we started again, today</title>
	<author>petes\_PoV</author>
	<datestamp>1245082080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd suggest<p>O/S in flash (possibly upgradable / patchable from BIOS)</p><p>Integral flat screen</p><p>no user accessible parts inside</p><p>LCD monitor form factor, not desktop box with screen on top</p><p>machine uniquely identified by MAC address, or something like it</p><p>
This sounds a lot like a loptop - I wonder how many of these points would make 2019's list of greatest design mistakes?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd suggestO/S in flash ( possibly upgradable / patchable from BIOS ) Integral flat screenno user accessible parts insideLCD monitor form factor , not desktop box with screen on topmachine uniquely identified by MAC address , or something like it This sounds a lot like a loptop - I wonder how many of these points would make 2019 's list of greatest design mistakes ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd suggestO/S in flash (possibly upgradable / patchable from BIOS)Integral flat screenno user accessible parts insideLCD monitor form factor, not desktop box with screen on topmachine uniquely identified by MAC address, or something like it
This sounds a lot like a loptop - I wonder how many of these points would make 2019's list of greatest design mistakes?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28341201</id>
	<title>Re:#1 failure...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245062880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>... but none of them were as open or as easy to build hardware and peripherals for.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.</p></div><p>Not true. I still have a copy of the specs for the Amiga "Zorro" bus interface. An open auto-configuring hardware standard from the days when people were still manually attempting to find free ports, DMAs and IRQs on the IBM PC. Until EISA came along, only the proprietary (and doomed) IBM Micro-channel architecture compared.</p><p>But "Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM" as they used to say.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... but none of them were as open or as easy to build hardware and peripherals for .
.Not true .
I still have a copy of the specs for the Amiga " Zorro " bus interface .
An open auto-configuring hardware standard from the days when people were still manually attempting to find free ports , DMAs and IRQs on the IBM PC .
Until EISA came along , only the proprietary ( and doomed ) IBM Micro-channel architecture compared.But " Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM " as they used to say .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... but none of them were as open or as easy to build hardware and peripherals for.
.Not true.
I still have a copy of the specs for the Amiga "Zorro" bus interface.
An open auto-configuring hardware standard from the days when people were still manually attempting to find free ports, DMAs and IRQs on the IBM PC.
Until EISA came along, only the proprietary (and doomed) IBM Micro-channel architecture compared.But "Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM" as they used to say.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335901</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336395</id>
	<title>After a while, you see the same mistakes made over</title>
	<author>lee n. field</author>
	<datestamp>1245085920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>After a while, you see it all, repeated every few years.
</p><p>I've been in the field almost 20 years, and I've seen all-in-one computers be the latest wonderful idea, about every few years.  Apple's the only company to really make it work.

</p><p>Ditto tablets.  They're only really starting to be useful now.

</p><p>Oh, and how about this for a questionable design decision?  Two common peripherals.  They use the same plugs, they're not interchangeable, and not hot pluggable.  And often not clearly labeled (only in recent years have they been color coded).  Swapping them with the computer on, while it usually works, actually can damage the port.  It's called PS/2.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>After a while , you see it all , repeated every few years .
I 've been in the field almost 20 years , and I 've seen all-in-one computers be the latest wonderful idea , about every few years .
Apple 's the only company to really make it work .
Ditto tablets .
They 're only really starting to be useful now .
Oh , and how about this for a questionable design decision ?
Two common peripherals .
They use the same plugs , they 're not interchangeable , and not hot pluggable .
And often not clearly labeled ( only in recent years have they been color coded ) .
Swapping them with the computer on , while it usually works , actually can damage the port .
It 's called PS/2 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After a while, you see it all, repeated every few years.
I've been in the field almost 20 years, and I've seen all-in-one computers be the latest wonderful idea, about every few years.
Apple's the only company to really make it work.
Ditto tablets.
They're only really starting to be useful now.
Oh, and how about this for a questionable design decision?
Two common peripherals.
They use the same plugs, they're not interchangeable, and not hot pluggable.
And often not clearly labeled (only in recent years have they been color coded).
Swapping them with the computer on, while it usually works, actually can damage the port.
It's called PS/2.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336487</id>
	<title>Re:biggest mistake: PC = 8088 not M68000!!!</title>
	<author>nojayuk</author>
	<datestamp>1245086280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext> The MC68000 was not available in production quantities at the time the IBM PC design was being finalised. The chip was late and buggy -- I used a dev board with a pre-production version of the chip clocked at half-speed, 4MHz, in 1982. Attempts to run it at 8MHz (the datasheet spec speed) were a failure.

<p> There were other reasons for IBM to go with the 8086-family chipsets:

</p><p>   1) the 8086/8088's bus could easily drive the 8080-family support chips such as the 8251, 8255, 8259 etc. to build a complete system. The MC68k family support chips were even later than the release of the CPU itself (in some cases like the MMU several years late) and the MC68k bus could not be easily interfaced with the Intel family chips which were cheap and in plentiful supply.

</p><p>   2) the 8086 family's internal data registers and addressing modes were designed to simplify conversion of existing 8080 code to run on the new 16-bit CPUs. The 68k, although a superior CPU in all respects to the 8086 family, had no tools available to make code conversion from the 6800 or other sibling CPU family (6809, 6502 etc.) simple -- all 68k code had to be written from scratch.

</p><p>  3) the 68k was an expensive chip, not suprising as it was complex and required a large die, necessitating a 0.6" wide 68-pin DIL ceramic package. Motorola's target market for the chip was $10,000 workstations, not "toy" desktop computers only costing $2,000. By comparison the 8088 was cheap as chips.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The MC68000 was not available in production quantities at the time the IBM PC design was being finalised .
The chip was late and buggy -- I used a dev board with a pre-production version of the chip clocked at half-speed , 4MHz , in 1982 .
Attempts to run it at 8MHz ( the datasheet spec speed ) were a failure .
There were other reasons for IBM to go with the 8086-family chipsets : 1 ) the 8086/8088 's bus could easily drive the 8080-family support chips such as the 8251 , 8255 , 8259 etc .
to build a complete system .
The MC68k family support chips were even later than the release of the CPU itself ( in some cases like the MMU several years late ) and the MC68k bus could not be easily interfaced with the Intel family chips which were cheap and in plentiful supply .
2 ) the 8086 family 's internal data registers and addressing modes were designed to simplify conversion of existing 8080 code to run on the new 16-bit CPUs .
The 68k , although a superior CPU in all respects to the 8086 family , had no tools available to make code conversion from the 6800 or other sibling CPU family ( 6809 , 6502 etc .
) simple -- all 68k code had to be written from scratch .
3 ) the 68k was an expensive chip , not suprising as it was complex and required a large die , necessitating a 0.6 " wide 68-pin DIL ceramic package .
Motorola 's target market for the chip was $ 10,000 workstations , not " toy " desktop computers only costing $ 2,000 .
By comparison the 8088 was cheap as chips .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> The MC68000 was not available in production quantities at the time the IBM PC design was being finalised.
The chip was late and buggy -- I used a dev board with a pre-production version of the chip clocked at half-speed, 4MHz, in 1982.
Attempts to run it at 8MHz (the datasheet spec speed) were a failure.
There were other reasons for IBM to go with the 8086-family chipsets:

   1) the 8086/8088's bus could easily drive the 8080-family support chips such as the 8251, 8255, 8259 etc.
to build a complete system.
The MC68k family support chips were even later than the release of the CPU itself (in some cases like the MMU several years late) and the MC68k bus could not be easily interfaced with the Intel family chips which were cheap and in plentiful supply.
2) the 8086 family's internal data registers and addressing modes were designed to simplify conversion of existing 8080 code to run on the new 16-bit CPUs.
The 68k, although a superior CPU in all respects to the 8086 family, had no tools available to make code conversion from the 6800 or other sibling CPU family (6809, 6502 etc.
) simple -- all 68k code had to be written from scratch.
3) the 68k was an expensive chip, not suprising as it was complex and required a large die, necessitating a 0.6" wide 68-pin DIL ceramic package.
Motorola's target market for the chip was $10,000 workstations, not "toy" desktop computers only costing $2,000.
By comparison the 8088 was cheap as chips.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335801</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337541</id>
	<title>Re: The 15 problems</title>
	<author>Changa\_MC</author>
	<datestamp>1245091080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You say this because you're not colorblind.  Green LEDs that turn amber when something breaks are absolutely the worst part of any project for me.  Blue LEDs are simply wonderful.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You say this because you 're not colorblind .
Green LEDs that turn amber when something breaks are absolutely the worst part of any project for me .
Blue LEDs are simply wonderful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You say this because you're not colorblind.
Green LEDs that turn amber when something breaks are absolutely the worst part of any project for me.
Blue LEDs are simply wonderful.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335789</id>
	<title>Re: The 15 problems</title>
	<author>Minwee</author>
	<datestamp>1245083520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>All night long the computer constantly warns me: "I'm asleep. I'm asleep. I'm asleep."</p></div></blockquote><p>It's not saying "I'm asleep", it's saying "Fix me!"
</p><p>If you don't want to disconnect the errant LEDs themselves, then just cover them up with your standard issue, which-side-of-the-force-are-you electrical tape.  If you're particularly inventive you can even channel the light out side so that you can still see the LEDs without them lighting up the entire room.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>All night long the computer constantly warns me : " I 'm asleep .
I 'm asleep .
I 'm asleep .
" It 's not saying " I 'm asleep " , it 's saying " Fix me !
" If you do n't want to disconnect the errant LEDs themselves , then just cover them up with your standard issue , which-side-of-the-force-are-you electrical tape .
If you 're particularly inventive you can even channel the light out side so that you can still see the LEDs without them lighting up the entire room .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All night long the computer constantly warns me: "I'm asleep.
I'm asleep.
I'm asleep.
"It's not saying "I'm asleep", it's saying "Fix me!
"
If you don't want to disconnect the errant LEDs themselves, then just cover them up with your standard issue, which-side-of-the-force-are-you electrical tape.
If you're particularly inventive you can even channel the light out side so that you can still see the LEDs without them lighting up the entire room.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337207</id>
	<title>Re:biggest mistake: PC = 8088 not M68000!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245089700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And today, we'd be using the Motorslowa 68080 at a whopping<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.875 gigahertz.</p><p>How soon we forget.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And today , we 'd be using the Motorslowa 68080 at a whopping .875 gigahertz.How soon we forget .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And today, we'd be using the Motorslowa 68080 at a whopping .875 gigahertz.How soon we forget.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335801</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336141</id>
	<title>Re:#1 failure...</title>
	<author>chrysrobyn</author>
	<datestamp>1245084900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>the choice of IBM to use the 8086 CPU. It set back the computer industry several years. The PC would now be at least 2 generations ahead if IBM did not use the retarded 8086 design.</p></div></blockquote><p>Choosing 8086 as a CPU seems to have obviously proven the value of a system is not in the power of the CPU, but in the ease of programming good programs, reasonable enough expandability and in killer applications.  A powerful CPU alone isn't enough, and in fact seems irrelevant if the whole system won't do what you want.</p><p>The victory going to a platform that featured 8086 seems to be a good lesson to every engineer out there in "cost/benefit analysis".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>the choice of IBM to use the 8086 CPU .
It set back the computer industry several years .
The PC would now be at least 2 generations ahead if IBM did not use the retarded 8086 design.Choosing 8086 as a CPU seems to have obviously proven the value of a system is not in the power of the CPU , but in the ease of programming good programs , reasonable enough expandability and in killer applications .
A powerful CPU alone is n't enough , and in fact seems irrelevant if the whole system wo n't do what you want.The victory going to a platform that featured 8086 seems to be a good lesson to every engineer out there in " cost/benefit analysis " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the choice of IBM to use the 8086 CPU.
It set back the computer industry several years.
The PC would now be at least 2 generations ahead if IBM did not use the retarded 8086 design.Choosing 8086 as a CPU seems to have obviously proven the value of a system is not in the power of the CPU, but in the ease of programming good programs, reasonable enough expandability and in killer applications.
A powerful CPU alone isn't enough, and in fact seems irrelevant if the whole system won't do what you want.The victory going to a platform that featured 8086 seems to be a good lesson to every engineer out there in "cost/benefit analysis".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335445</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335921</id>
	<title>Not really</title>
	<author>Moraelin</author>
	<datestamp>1245084000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, way I see it, not really. At \_least\_ half the mistakes there are about cutting corners (e.g., the crappy cheap keyboards, an ultra-expensive computer shoved out the door with an unreliable floppy drive, etc), and most of the rest are about blatantly trying to nickel-and-dime the users (e.g., the lack of a format command so they have to buy their floppies from you only, or all the connectors on the PC Jr being incompatible with the standard PC ones, etc.)</p><p>Unfortunately both types of failures are standard stapples of capitalism, so don't expect them to go away any time soon. Even though those particular 15 manifestations of them might not happen again,  we're just seeing new and innovative ways to do the same two things. E.g., when EA cuts costs on testing their new game, \_and\_ launches a new game with over half the content sold separately (check out The Sims 3: from day 1 there was more virtual furniture for sale for real money on their site than included with the game)... I'm sure you can see the same two things at work.</p><p>E.g., for hardware, when as you correctly mention a system that's waay underpowered for Vista is sold as Vista ready, you have the first failure mode in action: they wanted to sell a system as Vista ready, without actually including the expensive hardware needed to actually be ready. It's just cutting corners.</p><p>E.g., nickel-and-diming... well, let's just say HP's whole printer ink business is based on that. It recently even reached such absurdity as including chips to make the ink or toner cartridge artifficially "expire" after a while, even if there's actually plenty of ink left inside. For some users that already was the straw that broke the camel's back, but I expect some bright MBA to try something even more ham-fisted soon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , way I see it , not really .
At \ _least \ _ half the mistakes there are about cutting corners ( e.g. , the crappy cheap keyboards , an ultra-expensive computer shoved out the door with an unreliable floppy drive , etc ) , and most of the rest are about blatantly trying to nickel-and-dime the users ( e.g. , the lack of a format command so they have to buy their floppies from you only , or all the connectors on the PC Jr being incompatible with the standard PC ones , etc .
) Unfortunately both types of failures are standard stapples of capitalism , so do n't expect them to go away any time soon .
Even though those particular 15 manifestations of them might not happen again , we 're just seeing new and innovative ways to do the same two things .
E.g. , when EA cuts costs on testing their new game , \ _and \ _ launches a new game with over half the content sold separately ( check out The Sims 3 : from day 1 there was more virtual furniture for sale for real money on their site than included with the game ) ... I 'm sure you can see the same two things at work.E.g. , for hardware , when as you correctly mention a system that 's waay underpowered for Vista is sold as Vista ready , you have the first failure mode in action : they wanted to sell a system as Vista ready , without actually including the expensive hardware needed to actually be ready .
It 's just cutting corners.E.g. , nickel-and-diming... well , let 's just say HP 's whole printer ink business is based on that .
It recently even reached such absurdity as including chips to make the ink or toner cartridge artifficially " expire " after a while , even if there 's actually plenty of ink left inside .
For some users that already was the straw that broke the camel 's back , but I expect some bright MBA to try something even more ham-fisted soon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, way I see it, not really.
At \_least\_ half the mistakes there are about cutting corners (e.g., the crappy cheap keyboards, an ultra-expensive computer shoved out the door with an unreliable floppy drive, etc), and most of the rest are about blatantly trying to nickel-and-dime the users (e.g., the lack of a format command so they have to buy their floppies from you only, or all the connectors on the PC Jr being incompatible with the standard PC ones, etc.
)Unfortunately both types of failures are standard stapples of capitalism, so don't expect them to go away any time soon.
Even though those particular 15 manifestations of them might not happen again,  we're just seeing new and innovative ways to do the same two things.
E.g., when EA cuts costs on testing their new game, \_and\_ launches a new game with over half the content sold separately (check out The Sims 3: from day 1 there was more virtual furniture for sale for real money on their site than included with the game)... I'm sure you can see the same two things at work.E.g., for hardware, when as you correctly mention a system that's waay underpowered for Vista is sold as Vista ready, you have the first failure mode in action: they wanted to sell a system as Vista ready, without actually including the expensive hardware needed to actually be ready.
It's just cutting corners.E.g., nickel-and-diming... well, let's just say HP's whole printer ink business is based on that.
It recently even reached such absurdity as including chips to make the ink or toner cartridge artifficially "expire" after a while, even if there's actually plenty of ink left inside.
For some users that already was the straw that broke the camel's back, but I expect some bright MBA to try something even more ham-fisted soon.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335301</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337963</id>
	<title>Re:How about</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245092940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why?  Do your dopey fingers mash it too often?</p><p>I can easily say I have never accidentally pressed the CapsLock key.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why ?
Do your dopey fingers mash it too often ? I can easily say I have never accidentally pressed the CapsLock key .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why?
Do your dopey fingers mash it too often?I can easily say I have never accidentally pressed the CapsLock key.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335701</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335525</id>
	<title>The Amiga</title>
	<author>bl8n8r</author>
	<datestamp>1245082560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It amazes me how advanced this system* was for it's time and that it didn't catch on better than it did.  The graphics and sound (just for starters) was many years ahead of it's time; x86 was still in EGA and speaker beeps at the time.</p><p>[*] - <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amiga#Graphics" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amiga#Graphics</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It amazes me how advanced this system * was for it 's time and that it did n't catch on better than it did .
The graphics and sound ( just for starters ) was many years ahead of it 's time ; x86 was still in EGA and speaker beeps at the time .
[ * ] - http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amiga # Graphics [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It amazes me how advanced this system* was for it's time and that it didn't catch on better than it did.
The graphics and sound (just for starters) was many years ahead of it's time; x86 was still in EGA and speaker beeps at the time.
[*] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amiga#Graphics [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336735</id>
	<title>Re:If we started again, today</title>
	<author>spire3661</author>
	<datestamp>1245087420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Steve Jobs is that you???</p><p>Honestly your post sounds a bit short sighted. Why do we need uniquely identified machines? Why no user upgradeable parts? Why do you want everyone to have the Imac style?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Steve Jobs is that you ? ?
? Honestly your post sounds a bit short sighted .
Why do we need uniquely identified machines ?
Why no user upgradeable parts ?
Why do you want everyone to have the Imac style ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Steve Jobs is that you??
?Honestly your post sounds a bit short sighted.
Why do we need uniquely identified machines?
Why no user upgradeable parts?
Why do you want everyone to have the Imac style?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335429</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335865</id>
	<title>Re:#1 failure...</title>
	<author>WeatherServo9</author>
	<datestamp>1245083820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The original PC used an 8088, not the 8086 (which first appeared in the XT I believe). Remember, this is 1981! What processor would you have preferred? The 4.77 Mhz 8088 was faster than the 1-2Mhz processors found in most (all?) other desktop computers at the time and could address up to 640K memory, also far more than most other desktops then. If I recall there were some better choices available but at a much higher cost. I always thought the 8088 to be a lower cost option that was still reasonably competitive with what was out there.
<br> <br>
And how do you know we'd be so much farther ahead with another cpu? You don't think there'd be plenty of opportunity to slow down progress while trying to maintain bizarre backwards compatibility with the other cpu's available in 1981?
<br> <br>
It is true that many at IBM didn't think desktop PC's would take off. But I think the PC was an overall solid machine, I'd say those early versions of DOS were a bigger problem than anything hardware wise.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The original PC used an 8088 , not the 8086 ( which first appeared in the XT I believe ) .
Remember , this is 1981 !
What processor would you have preferred ?
The 4.77 Mhz 8088 was faster than the 1-2Mhz processors found in most ( all ?
) other desktop computers at the time and could address up to 640K memory , also far more than most other desktops then .
If I recall there were some better choices available but at a much higher cost .
I always thought the 8088 to be a lower cost option that was still reasonably competitive with what was out there .
And how do you know we 'd be so much farther ahead with another cpu ?
You do n't think there 'd be plenty of opportunity to slow down progress while trying to maintain bizarre backwards compatibility with the other cpu 's available in 1981 ?
It is true that many at IBM did n't think desktop PC 's would take off .
But I think the PC was an overall solid machine , I 'd say those early versions of DOS were a bigger problem than anything hardware wise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The original PC used an 8088, not the 8086 (which first appeared in the XT I believe).
Remember, this is 1981!
What processor would you have preferred?
The 4.77 Mhz 8088 was faster than the 1-2Mhz processors found in most (all?
) other desktop computers at the time and could address up to 640K memory, also far more than most other desktops then.
If I recall there were some better choices available but at a much higher cost.
I always thought the 8088 to be a lower cost option that was still reasonably competitive with what was out there.
And how do you know we'd be so much farther ahead with another cpu?
You don't think there'd be plenty of opportunity to slow down progress while trying to maintain bizarre backwards compatibility with the other cpu's available in 1981?
It is true that many at IBM didn't think desktop PC's would take off.
But I think the PC was an overall solid machine, I'd say those early versions of DOS were a bigger problem than anything hardware wise.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335445</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335931</id>
	<title>What , you mean like the Mac , Amiga, Atari ST?</title>
	<author>Viol8</author>
	<datestamp>1245084060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Mac started out on the 68K. Ok it was more advanced than the PC to start but I think its fair to say that the only thing (arguably) slightly more advanced about Macs these days (and certainly not 2 generations ahead) is the OS. The hardware is commodity PC.</p><p>As for commodore and atari, well, we know how well using the 68K panned out for them. Just proves that ultimately marketing wins and technological ingenuity comes a poor second.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Mac started out on the 68K .
Ok it was more advanced than the PC to start but I think its fair to say that the only thing ( arguably ) slightly more advanced about Macs these days ( and certainly not 2 generations ahead ) is the OS .
The hardware is commodity PC.As for commodore and atari , well , we know how well using the 68K panned out for them .
Just proves that ultimately marketing wins and technological ingenuity comes a poor second .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Mac started out on the 68K.
Ok it was more advanced than the PC to start but I think its fair to say that the only thing (arguably) slightly more advanced about Macs these days (and certainly not 2 generations ahead) is the OS.
The hardware is commodity PC.As for commodore and atari, well, we know how well using the 68K panned out for them.
Just proves that ultimately marketing wins and technological ingenuity comes a poor second.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335445</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335681</id>
	<title>Re:Worst Mistake That Still Needs Fixing</title>
	<author>Darkness404</author>
	<datestamp>1245083160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually Mini-Displayport is actually rather open, and while not a standard (yet) you can get the specs from Apple for nothing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually Mini-Displayport is actually rather open , and while not a standard ( yet ) you can get the specs from Apple for nothing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually Mini-Displayport is actually rather open, and while not a standard (yet) you can get the specs from Apple for nothing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336665</id>
	<title>Troll article</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245087120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh noes, they forgot XML! In all seriousness though, I don't see how the mistakes listed are anymore classic, canonical or severe than any other set of 15 problems that you could list. So the article is essentially just a piece of flamebait, a troll article.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh noes , they forgot XML !
In all seriousness though , I do n't see how the mistakes listed are anymore classic , canonical or severe than any other set of 15 problems that you could list .
So the article is essentially just a piece of flamebait , a troll article .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh noes, they forgot XML!
In all seriousness though, I don't see how the mistakes listed are anymore classic, canonical or severe than any other set of 15 problems that you could list.
So the article is essentially just a piece of flamebait, a troll article.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335243</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338025</id>
	<title>Re:worst: sharp unfinished inside edges in cheap c</title>
	<author>eth1</author>
	<datestamp>1245093300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>- 15 to 10 years ago, you had to be careful when installing drives, or RAM.  You could almost slice your hand on a cheap case that had unfinished and sharp edges.</p></div><p>The operative words here are "cheap case," not "10-15 years go." This is still a problem (although even cheap cases are getting better.)</p><p><div class="quote"><p>- LOUD systems.  Have to thank George for showing me just how nice a quiet system is.</p></div><p>My personal peeve. Fast/Cheap/Quiet. Pick any two.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:( </p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>- 15 to 10 years ago , you had to be careful when installing drives , or RAM .
You could almost slice your hand on a cheap case that had unfinished and sharp edges.The operative words here are " cheap case , " not " 10-15 years go .
" This is still a problem ( although even cheap cases are getting better .
) - LOUD systems .
Have to thank George for showing me just how nice a quiet system is.My personal peeve .
Fast/Cheap/Quiet. Pick any two .
: (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>- 15 to 10 years ago, you had to be careful when installing drives, or RAM.
You could almost slice your hand on a cheap case that had unfinished and sharp edges.The operative words here are "cheap case," not "10-15 years go.
" This is still a problem (although even cheap cases are getting better.
)- LOUD systems.
Have to thank George for showing me just how nice a quiet system is.My personal peeve.
Fast/Cheap/Quiet. Pick any two.
:( 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335851</id>
	<title>CapsLock was useful once upon a time</title>
	<author>falconwolf</author>
	<datestamp>1245083760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>when there was no \section{} or \textbf{}, and when pressing `shift' actually required strenght. But those days are gone.</i></p><p>Don't you ever, no I won't do it that way, <b>shout</b>?  If it only prevented people from shouting so much, I think getting rid of the caps lock would be great.</p><p>

Falcon</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>when there was no \ section { } or \ textbf { } , and when pressing ` shift ' actually required strenght .
But those days are gone.Do n't you ever , no I wo n't do it that way , shout ?
If it only prevented people from shouting so much , I think getting rid of the caps lock would be great .
Falcon</tokentext>
<sentencetext>when there was no \section{} or \textbf{}, and when pressing `shift' actually required strenght.
But those days are gone.Don't you ever, no I won't do it that way, shout?
If it only prevented people from shouting so much, I think getting rid of the caps lock would be great.
Falcon</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338763</id>
	<title>XBOX 360 heat issues?</title>
	<author>BcNexus</author>
	<datestamp>1245096360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19640784/" title="msn.com">I've heard they overheat and cause solder joints to fail.</a> [msn.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've heard they overheat and cause solder joints to fail .
[ msn.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've heard they overheat and cause solder joints to fail.
[msn.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28340065</id>
	<title>Re: The 15 problems</title>
	<author>hurfy</author>
	<datestamp>1245057840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Paint it white</p><p>Seems to reduce the glare but still allow the color.</p><p>I have a fan control unit that can light up the room with the damn LED. It is NOT a reading light you #$\%$# manufacturers! Had to paint the LEDs white for fear of blinding myself looking at the front of the computer with the fans on.</p><p>Ditto for the (newer) Crucial memory with the LED lights. Brightest damn thing in the room<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:/ Had to cover them up which defeats the purpose of spending extra on blinking memory for a clear case<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:( The previous (multicolor) ones were not so bad but the newer 4GB set i got is extremely obnoxious.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Paint it whiteSeems to reduce the glare but still allow the color.I have a fan control unit that can light up the room with the damn LED .
It is NOT a reading light you # $ \ % $ # manufacturers !
Had to paint the LEDs white for fear of blinding myself looking at the front of the computer with the fans on.Ditto for the ( newer ) Crucial memory with the LED lights .
Brightest damn thing in the room : / Had to cover them up which defeats the purpose of spending extra on blinking memory for a clear case : ( The previous ( multicolor ) ones were not so bad but the newer 4GB set i got is extremely obnoxious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Paint it whiteSeems to reduce the glare but still allow the color.I have a fan control unit that can light up the room with the damn LED.
It is NOT a reading light you #$\%$# manufacturers!
Had to paint the LEDs white for fear of blinding myself looking at the front of the computer with the fans on.Ditto for the (newer) Crucial memory with the LED lights.
Brightest damn thing in the room :/ Had to cover them up which defeats the purpose of spending extra on blinking memory for a clear case :( The previous (multicolor) ones were not so bad but the newer 4GB set i got is extremely obnoxious.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28340927</id>
	<title>Re:A few of my favourite things - from the worksho</title>
	<author>mce</author>
	<datestamp>1245061320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <em>General: USB socket is same width as RJ45 so you can slide a USB plug into the network port and it feels 'right', but gets you nowhere until you look and check!
</em>
</p><p>Indeed. that's how I destroyed the (in addition badly positioned) RJ45 of the laptop that I'm typing this on.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>General : USB socket is same width as RJ45 so you can slide a USB plug into the network port and it feels 'right ' , but gets you nowhere until you look and check !
Indeed. that 's how I destroyed the ( in addition badly positioned ) RJ45 of the laptop that I 'm typing this on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> General: USB socket is same width as RJ45 so you can slide a USB plug into the network port and it feels 'right', but gets you nowhere until you look and check!
Indeed. that's how I destroyed the (in addition badly positioned) RJ45 of the laptop that I'm typing this on.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336193</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335635</id>
	<title>yoU fail it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245082980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>it wiil be among</htmltext>
<tokenext>it wiil be among</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it wiil be among</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336009</id>
	<title>Re:The 15 problems</title>
	<author>AKAImBatman</author>
	<datestamp>1245084420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Problem #4: EM Pulse Erases Tapes</p><p>Hardly a design mistake. Its more a lack of testing mistake.</p></div></blockquote><p>It was a design mistake because the system's own power supply generated the EMP when the switch was flipped. More testing could have caught the issue, but it was a critical flaw in the component choices and board layout of the system.</p><blockquote><div><p>How is that any different to the Ipod coming without a user replacable battery?</p></div></blockquote><p>The iPod battery is lightweight and generally easy to forget about. The power bricks were heavier and bulkier than real bricks. Computers of the day were often stored when not in use (they had to be hooked up to a television), which made this mis-feature a real PITA.</p><blockquote><div><p>Problem #6: Rubber Keyboard</p><p>It didn't hurt the Sinclair ZX Spectrum's sales too much.</p></div></blockquote><p>This one I agree with you on. Users of the day were willing to overlook issues like this if the system was otherwise solid. The problem with the Aquarius was not the keyboard, but rather that it was an uninspired machine. Mattel had failed to produce the promised keyboard expansion for the Intellivison, so they released the Aquarius instead. Support consisted of a few quick ports of older Intellivision software and that was it. There was no real reason for anyone to purchase the computer. So no one did.</p><blockquote><div><p>I'd say all disk drives are proprietary until they become a standard.</p></div></blockquote><p>It wasn't the proprietary part that was the problem, it was the unreliable part. Disks in the day were almost always tied to the computer that used them. But if they were unreliable and you couldn't even get a drive replacement, that made the machine outright useless. Think of it like your hard drive failing every few months. That's about what losing a floppy was like back then.</p><p>It only got worse when you tried to keep disk backups. Since most machines had only one drive, you had to swap disks back and forth for every few KB of data transferred. An 800KB disk would take a LOT of swaps. In that time, you spent a lot of time praying that the original disk wouldn't fail during the backup.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Problem # 4 : EM Pulse Erases TapesHardly a design mistake .
Its more a lack of testing mistake.It was a design mistake because the system 's own power supply generated the EMP when the switch was flipped .
More testing could have caught the issue , but it was a critical flaw in the component choices and board layout of the system.How is that any different to the Ipod coming without a user replacable battery ? The iPod battery is lightweight and generally easy to forget about .
The power bricks were heavier and bulkier than real bricks .
Computers of the day were often stored when not in use ( they had to be hooked up to a television ) , which made this mis-feature a real PITA.Problem # 6 : Rubber KeyboardIt did n't hurt the Sinclair ZX Spectrum 's sales too much.This one I agree with you on .
Users of the day were willing to overlook issues like this if the system was otherwise solid .
The problem with the Aquarius was not the keyboard , but rather that it was an uninspired machine .
Mattel had failed to produce the promised keyboard expansion for the Intellivison , so they released the Aquarius instead .
Support consisted of a few quick ports of older Intellivision software and that was it .
There was no real reason for anyone to purchase the computer .
So no one did.I 'd say all disk drives are proprietary until they become a standard.It was n't the proprietary part that was the problem , it was the unreliable part .
Disks in the day were almost always tied to the computer that used them .
But if they were unreliable and you could n't even get a drive replacement , that made the machine outright useless .
Think of it like your hard drive failing every few months .
That 's about what losing a floppy was like back then.It only got worse when you tried to keep disk backups .
Since most machines had only one drive , you had to swap disks back and forth for every few KB of data transferred .
An 800KB disk would take a LOT of swaps .
In that time , you spent a lot of time praying that the original disk would n't fail during the backup .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Problem #4: EM Pulse Erases TapesHardly a design mistake.
Its more a lack of testing mistake.It was a design mistake because the system's own power supply generated the EMP when the switch was flipped.
More testing could have caught the issue, but it was a critical flaw in the component choices and board layout of the system.How is that any different to the Ipod coming without a user replacable battery?The iPod battery is lightweight and generally easy to forget about.
The power bricks were heavier and bulkier than real bricks.
Computers of the day were often stored when not in use (they had to be hooked up to a television), which made this mis-feature a real PITA.Problem #6: Rubber KeyboardIt didn't hurt the Sinclair ZX Spectrum's sales too much.This one I agree with you on.
Users of the day were willing to overlook issues like this if the system was otherwise solid.
The problem with the Aquarius was not the keyboard, but rather that it was an uninspired machine.
Mattel had failed to produce the promised keyboard expansion for the Intellivison, so they released the Aquarius instead.
Support consisted of a few quick ports of older Intellivision software and that was it.
There was no real reason for anyone to purchase the computer.
So no one did.I'd say all disk drives are proprietary until they become a standard.It wasn't the proprietary part that was the problem, it was the unreliable part.
Disks in the day were almost always tied to the computer that used them.
But if they were unreliable and you couldn't even get a drive replacement, that made the machine outright useless.
Think of it like your hard drive failing every few months.
That's about what losing a floppy was like back then.It only got worse when you tried to keep disk backups.
Since most machines had only one drive, you had to swap disks back and forth for every few KB of data transferred.
An 800KB disk would take a LOT of swaps.
In that time, you spent a lot of time praying that the original disk wouldn't fail during the backup.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335485</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28341453</id>
	<title>Re:What , you mean like the Mac , Amiga, Atari ST?</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1245064380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Surely that just confirms the point he was making? If PCs had gone the 68K route, we'd have had decent PCs comparable to the other platforms like the Amiga etc, without the hiccup of the platform ending because of companies going bust, or the problem of Motorola ending the 68K line (if PCs were using it, there'd have been more incentive to continue developing it, or rather, maintain backwards compatibility with whatever they moved onto). It would've been the best of both worlds. But as it was, computing went stagnant when all the 68K platforms died, and we had to wait for PCs to catch up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Surely that just confirms the point he was making ?
If PCs had gone the 68K route , we 'd have had decent PCs comparable to the other platforms like the Amiga etc , without the hiccup of the platform ending because of companies going bust , or the problem of Motorola ending the 68K line ( if PCs were using it , there 'd have been more incentive to continue developing it , or rather , maintain backwards compatibility with whatever they moved onto ) .
It would 've been the best of both worlds .
But as it was , computing went stagnant when all the 68K platforms died , and we had to wait for PCs to catch up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Surely that just confirms the point he was making?
If PCs had gone the 68K route, we'd have had decent PCs comparable to the other platforms like the Amiga etc, without the hiccup of the platform ending because of companies going bust, or the problem of Motorola ending the 68K line (if PCs were using it, there'd have been more incentive to continue developing it, or rather, maintain backwards compatibility with whatever they moved onto).
It would've been the best of both worlds.
But as it was, computing went stagnant when all the 68K platforms died, and we had to wait for PCs to catch up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335931</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336501</id>
	<title>Re:worst: sharp unfinished inside edges in cheap c</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245086340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You could almost slice your hand on a cheap case that had unfinished and sharp edges.</p></div><p>Almost? I used to cut the shit out of my hands on those things. Still have some of the scars.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Why did it take so bloody long to offer any other color then beige?</p></div><p>Apparently nobody bothered to read up on the Henry Ford's Model T and why sales went in the crapper when the competition started offering colors other than black. The primary difference being, that at least the Model T was <i>black</i> and not beige. You'd think the PC sector would have learned the lesson that was nearly 100 years old. It's not that much better now, but at least now most cases are black, grey, or silver instead of a sickly flesh-color that turns snot-yellow in the sunlight.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You could almost slice your hand on a cheap case that had unfinished and sharp edges.Almost ?
I used to cut the shit out of my hands on those things .
Still have some of the scars.Why did it take so bloody long to offer any other color then beige ? Apparently nobody bothered to read up on the Henry Ford 's Model T and why sales went in the crapper when the competition started offering colors other than black .
The primary difference being , that at least the Model T was black and not beige .
You 'd think the PC sector would have learned the lesson that was nearly 100 years old .
It 's not that much better now , but at least now most cases are black , grey , or silver instead of a sickly flesh-color that turns snot-yellow in the sunlight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You could almost slice your hand on a cheap case that had unfinished and sharp edges.Almost?
I used to cut the shit out of my hands on those things.
Still have some of the scars.Why did it take so bloody long to offer any other color then beige?Apparently nobody bothered to read up on the Henry Ford's Model T and why sales went in the crapper when the competition started offering colors other than black.
The primary difference being, that at least the Model T was black and not beige.
You'd think the PC sector would have learned the lesson that was nearly 100 years old.
It's not that much better now, but at least now most cases are black, grey, or silver instead of a sickly flesh-color that turns snot-yellow in the sunlight.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335701</id>
	<title>How about</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245083220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Putting CAPS LOCK key next to 'A' on the keyboard?  It was the first thing I thought of.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Putting CAPS LOCK key next to 'A ' on the keyboard ?
It was the first thing I thought of .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Putting CAPS LOCK key next to 'A' on the keyboard?
It was the first thing I thought of.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335555</id>
	<title>Re:The 15 problems</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245082680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I want the list of examples and how the problem manifested itself and the results, with perhaps some humour and trivia too (i.e. an entertaining article), not a literal list of 15 design mistakes verbatim. But thanks for the effort.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I want the list of examples and how the problem manifested itself and the results , with perhaps some humour and trivia too ( i.e .
an entertaining article ) , not a literal list of 15 design mistakes verbatim .
But thanks for the effort .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I want the list of examples and how the problem manifested itself and the results, with perhaps some humour and trivia too (i.e.
an entertaining article), not a literal list of 15 design mistakes verbatim.
But thanks for the effort.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335243</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336457</id>
	<title>Re:Low-tech solution</title>
	<author>j\_sp\_r</author>
	<datestamp>1245086220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've screwed my laptop open, taped some yellow tape on it and screwed it back together. now it's a green light that is hardly visible at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've screwed my laptop open , taped some yellow tape on it and screwed it back together .
now it 's a green light that is hardly visible at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've screwed my laptop open, taped some yellow tape on it and screwed it back together.
now it's a green light that is hardly visible at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335791</id>
	<title>Re:CapsLock</title>
	<author>theinvisibleguy</author>
	<datestamp>1245083580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I whole heartedly agree, imagine a forum where there was no such thing as capslock, it would be beautiful.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I whole heartedly agree , imagine a forum where there was no such thing as capslock , it would be beautiful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I whole heartedly agree, imagine a forum where there was no such thing as capslock, it would be beautiful.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28343069</id>
	<title>Mistake #16 : Manufacturing in China</title>
	<author>sethstorm</author>
	<datestamp>1245075300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While that bit of hardware may have been dirt-cheap, it's flimsy and cannot take the stresses of properly manufactured gear.  Second, it's probably a knockoff or will become one shortly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While that bit of hardware may have been dirt-cheap , it 's flimsy and can not take the stresses of properly manufactured gear .
Second , it 's probably a knockoff or will become one shortly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While that bit of hardware may have been dirt-cheap, it's flimsy and cannot take the stresses of properly manufactured gear.
Second, it's probably a knockoff or will become one shortly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338695</id>
	<title>Re:biggest mistake: PC = 8088 not M68000!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245096120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>much less assembly written software</p></div></blockquote><p>Hm, I remember switching from programming in C to programming in assembler on my Atari ST (which had a M68000 processor) because the assembler code seemed about as readable as the C code.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>much less assembly written softwareHm , I remember switching from programming in C to programming in assembler on my Atari ST ( which had a M68000 processor ) because the assembler code seemed about as readable as the C code .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>much less assembly written softwareHm, I remember switching from programming in C to programming in assembler on my Atari ST (which had a M68000 processor) because the assembler code seemed about as readable as the C code.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335801</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399</id>
	<title>worst: sharp unfinished inside edges in cheap case</title>
	<author>UnknownSoldier</author>
	<datestamp>1245081900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My personal list...</p><p>- 15 to 10 years ago, you had to be careful when installing drives, or RAM.  You could almost slice your hand on a cheap case that had unfinished and sharp edges.</p><p>- Beige Only. You can pick any color, as long as it is beige. Why did it take so bloody long to offer any other color then beige? Critical mass?</p><p>- LOUD systems.  Have to thank George for showing me just how nice a quiet system is.</p><p>- Power hunger systems.  2 molex connections for a GPU ?!</p><p>- Crap 3D Video cards in laptops, and almost no benchmarks from the "classic" hardware review sites so you know how bad it sucks compared to a "real" GPU. (Thankfully the S3 Virge is gone from desktops, but laptops are still stuck with poor performance unless you pay an arm and a leg.)</p><p>--<br>"<i>World of Warcraft</i> (TM) is the <b>McDonalds</b> (TM) of MMOs."<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; -- Michaelangel007</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My personal list...- 15 to 10 years ago , you had to be careful when installing drives , or RAM .
You could almost slice your hand on a cheap case that had unfinished and sharp edges.- Beige Only .
You can pick any color , as long as it is beige .
Why did it take so bloody long to offer any other color then beige ?
Critical mass ? - LOUD systems .
Have to thank George for showing me just how nice a quiet system is.- Power hunger systems .
2 molex connections for a GPU ?
! - Crap 3D Video cards in laptops , and almost no benchmarks from the " classic " hardware review sites so you know how bad it sucks compared to a " real " GPU .
( Thankfully the S3 Virge is gone from desktops , but laptops are still stuck with poor performance unless you pay an arm and a leg .
) -- " World of Warcraft ( TM ) is the McDonalds ( TM ) of MMOs .
"     -- Michaelangel007</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My personal list...- 15 to 10 years ago, you had to be careful when installing drives, or RAM.
You could almost slice your hand on a cheap case that had unfinished and sharp edges.- Beige Only.
You can pick any color, as long as it is beige.
Why did it take so bloody long to offer any other color then beige?
Critical mass?- LOUD systems.
Have to thank George for showing me just how nice a quiet system is.- Power hunger systems.
2 molex connections for a GPU ?
!- Crap 3D Video cards in laptops, and almost no benchmarks from the "classic" hardware review sites so you know how bad it sucks compared to a "real" GPU.
(Thankfully the S3 Virge is gone from desktops, but laptops are still stuck with poor performance unless you pay an arm and a leg.
)--"World of Warcraft (TM) is the McDonalds (TM) of MMOs.
"
    -- Michaelangel007</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338533</id>
	<title>Re:CapsLock</title>
	<author>careysub</author>
	<datestamp>1245095580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On Windows systems CapsLock doesn't even "caps lock" it is instead really "invert case", a feature that never existed on any typewriter. I have never in my life <i>wanted</i> to "invert case" while typing. Has anyone else?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On Windows systems CapsLock does n't even " caps lock " it is instead really " invert case " , a feature that never existed on any typewriter .
I have never in my life wanted to " invert case " while typing .
Has anyone else ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On Windows systems CapsLock doesn't even "caps lock" it is instead really "invert case", a feature that never existed on any typewriter.
I have never in my life wanted to "invert case" while typing.
Has anyone else?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338201</id>
	<title>Re:Worst Mistake That Still Needs Fixing</title>
	<author>Anubis IV</author>
	<datestamp>1245094140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Mini DisplayPort is not proprietary, as someone else already mentioned.  DisplayPort is a standard being pushed by VESA, and Mini DisplayPort was recently added to the standard.  In addition to what was already said, I'd also like to add that Apple did jump the gun a bit, by adding Mini DisplayPort ports before they had been officially added to the standard, but they were already planned additions to the standard at that point, so anyone else could create peripherals or what-have-you at that time as well.
<br>
<br>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort</a> [wikipedia.org]
<br>
<br>
Also...<p><div class="quote"><p>If you want to use dual link DVI to power a 30" monitor you have to buy a $100 adapter that doesn't even work.</p></div><p>
I know I can't speak for everyone here, but if I want to power a 30" monitor, I try to make a point of buying adapters that DO work.  Why you'd knowingly spend $100 to do otherwise is beyond me.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mini DisplayPort is not proprietary , as someone else already mentioned .
DisplayPort is a standard being pushed by VESA , and Mini DisplayPort was recently added to the standard .
In addition to what was already said , I 'd also like to add that Apple did jump the gun a bit , by adding Mini DisplayPort ports before they had been officially added to the standard , but they were already planned additions to the standard at that point , so anyone else could create peripherals or what-have-you at that time as well .
http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort [ wikipedia.org ] Also...If you want to use dual link DVI to power a 30 " monitor you have to buy a $ 100 adapter that does n't even work .
I know I ca n't speak for everyone here , but if I want to power a 30 " monitor , I try to make a point of buying adapters that DO work .
Why you 'd knowingly spend $ 100 to do otherwise is beyond me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mini DisplayPort is not proprietary, as someone else already mentioned.
DisplayPort is a standard being pushed by VESA, and Mini DisplayPort was recently added to the standard.
In addition to what was already said, I'd also like to add that Apple did jump the gun a bit, by adding Mini DisplayPort ports before they had been officially added to the standard, but they were already planned additions to the standard at that point, so anyone else could create peripherals or what-have-you at that time as well.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort [wikipedia.org]


Also...If you want to use dual link DVI to power a 30" monitor you have to buy a $100 adapter that doesn't even work.
I know I can't speak for everyone here, but if I want to power a 30" monitor, I try to make a point of buying adapters that DO work.
Why you'd knowingly spend $100 to do otherwise is beyond me.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337223</id>
	<title>Re:If we started again, today</title>
	<author>ForAllTheFish</author>
	<datestamp>1245089760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>My favorite from just last week: I opened up a brand new HP Vista box of someone I know that they got on air miles to install a TV tuner card, only to find that there were no expansion slots at all, except for the one AGP slot the graphics card was already filling.  At least it had a graphics card; the on-board video was crap and even had plastic covers screwed over the connectors just in case someone might accidentally try to use it.  The plastic covers and the expansion slot cover used star screws.  How badly do you not want people to upgrade?  This enforces my mantra "Never buy an assembled computer when you know how to build one from parts."</htmltext>
<tokenext>My favorite from just last week : I opened up a brand new HP Vista box of someone I know that they got on air miles to install a TV tuner card , only to find that there were no expansion slots at all , except for the one AGP slot the graphics card was already filling .
At least it had a graphics card ; the on-board video was crap and even had plastic covers screwed over the connectors just in case someone might accidentally try to use it .
The plastic covers and the expansion slot cover used star screws .
How badly do you not want people to upgrade ?
This enforces my mantra " Never buy an assembled computer when you know how to build one from parts .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My favorite from just last week: I opened up a brand new HP Vista box of someone I know that they got on air miles to install a TV tuner card, only to find that there were no expansion slots at all, except for the one AGP slot the graphics card was already filling.
At least it had a graphics card; the on-board video was crap and even had plastic covers screwed over the connectors just in case someone might accidentally try to use it.
The plastic covers and the expansion slot cover used star screws.
How badly do you not want people to upgrade?
This enforces my mantra "Never buy an assembled computer when you know how to build one from parts.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335429</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336455</id>
	<title>Re:The Amiga</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245086220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>As was the case of many systems that were ahead of their time, they were competing with an established player that already had tons of lock in from software vendors, peripheral manufacturers, and the like.  Worse, when a system is "ahead of it's time", that's often forgetting that it was considerably more expensive than the competition and quite possibly outside of the price range of most consumers.  Good engineering isn't only about being the "best", but it's also about knowing what to cut to keep the price in line.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As was the case of many systems that were ahead of their time , they were competing with an established player that already had tons of lock in from software vendors , peripheral manufacturers , and the like .
Worse , when a system is " ahead of it 's time " , that 's often forgetting that it was considerably more expensive than the competition and quite possibly outside of the price range of most consumers .
Good engineering is n't only about being the " best " , but it 's also about knowing what to cut to keep the price in line .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As was the case of many systems that were ahead of their time, they were competing with an established player that already had tons of lock in from software vendors, peripheral manufacturers, and the like.
Worse, when a system is "ahead of it's time", that's often forgetting that it was considerably more expensive than the competition and quite possibly outside of the price range of most consumers.
Good engineering isn't only about being the "best", but it's also about knowing what to cut to keep the price in line.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337865</id>
	<title>Re:worst: sharp unfinished inside edges in cheap c</title>
	<author>inject\_hotmail.com</author>
	<datestamp>1245092580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's a reason for the crappy video in laptops as a general rule:</p><p>Heat.</p><p>I doubt you want that much heat energy in such a small space...unfortunately, that's reality.  And even "fast" video in a laptop is slow.</p><p>I think the beige thing was because historically they were business machines...black is far too radical.  Maybe beige paint is cheap cheap...not a lot of dye...not a lot of bleach?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a reason for the crappy video in laptops as a general rule : Heat.I doubt you want that much heat energy in such a small space...unfortunately , that 's reality .
And even " fast " video in a laptop is slow.I think the beige thing was because historically they were business machines...black is far too radical .
Maybe beige paint is cheap cheap...not a lot of dye...not a lot of bleach ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a reason for the crappy video in laptops as a general rule:Heat.I doubt you want that much heat energy in such a small space...unfortunately, that's reality.
And even "fast" video in a laptop is slow.I think the beige thing was because historically they were business machines...black is far too radical.
Maybe beige paint is cheap cheap...not a lot of dye...not a lot of bleach?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335575</id>
	<title>Apple Lisa</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245082800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>From the Fancy Article:<blockquote><div><p>Still, Lisa OS sported a unique document management metaphor that has yet to be replicated in a mainstream OS. Had the Lisa been cheaper and faster, it might have set a new standard in computing.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Does anybody know what the "unique document management metaphor that has yet to be replicated in a mainstream OS" is, and why it might have set a new standard in computing?  It sounds terribly intriguing.   Might this be something that could/should be added to Linux?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From the Fancy Article : Still , Lisa OS sported a unique document management metaphor that has yet to be replicated in a mainstream OS .
Had the Lisa been cheaper and faster , it might have set a new standard in computing .
Does anybody know what the " unique document management metaphor that has yet to be replicated in a mainstream OS " is , and why it might have set a new standard in computing ?
It sounds terribly intriguing .
Might this be something that could/should be added to Linux ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the Fancy Article:Still, Lisa OS sported a unique document management metaphor that has yet to be replicated in a mainstream OS.
Had the Lisa been cheaper and faster, it might have set a new standard in computing.
Does anybody know what the "unique document management metaphor that has yet to be replicated in a mainstream OS" is, and why it might have set a new standard in computing?
It sounds terribly intriguing.
Might this be something that could/should be added to Linux?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336227</id>
	<title>Re:biggest mistake: PC = 8088 not M68000!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245085260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hindsight is usually 20/20. But in this case maybe not. Here's what an M68000 would have brought to the table:</p><p>1) Higher costs - the reason IBM went with the 8088 is because it was less expensive.</p><p>2) No 640k memory limit - okay, but then we'd have the issue of 16MB memory limit a few years later since the M68k had a 16 bit external bus. BTW, the 640k limit was particular to IBM's implementation, not necessarily a limitation of the 8088. Because everyone else copied that implementation, we have the 640k limit.</p><p>3) 8-bit and 16-bit mainstream computing - why do I say that? Because memory cost a lot of money back then. Even though the M68k can use 32-bit code, the first computers would have come with miniscule amounts of memory. 32-bit code would not be a good idea then.</p><p>4) continuation of CISC architecture - I personally don't think this is much of an issue, but some people do contending that the current CISC-to-RISC translation still takes up significant silicon real-estate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hindsight is usually 20/20 .
But in this case maybe not .
Here 's what an M68000 would have brought to the table : 1 ) Higher costs - the reason IBM went with the 8088 is because it was less expensive.2 ) No 640k memory limit - okay , but then we 'd have the issue of 16MB memory limit a few years later since the M68k had a 16 bit external bus .
BTW , the 640k limit was particular to IBM 's implementation , not necessarily a limitation of the 8088 .
Because everyone else copied that implementation , we have the 640k limit.3 ) 8-bit and 16-bit mainstream computing - why do I say that ?
Because memory cost a lot of money back then .
Even though the M68k can use 32-bit code , the first computers would have come with miniscule amounts of memory .
32-bit code would not be a good idea then.4 ) continuation of CISC architecture - I personally do n't think this is much of an issue , but some people do contending that the current CISC-to-RISC translation still takes up significant silicon real-estate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hindsight is usually 20/20.
But in this case maybe not.
Here's what an M68000 would have brought to the table:1) Higher costs - the reason IBM went with the 8088 is because it was less expensive.2) No 640k memory limit - okay, but then we'd have the issue of 16MB memory limit a few years later since the M68k had a 16 bit external bus.
BTW, the 640k limit was particular to IBM's implementation, not necessarily a limitation of the 8088.
Because everyone else copied that implementation, we have the 640k limit.3) 8-bit and 16-bit mainstream computing - why do I say that?
Because memory cost a lot of money back then.
Even though the M68k can use 32-bit code, the first computers would have come with miniscule amounts of memory.
32-bit code would not be a good idea then.4) continuation of CISC architecture - I personally don't think this is much of an issue, but some people do contending that the current CISC-to-RISC translation still takes up significant silicon real-estate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335801</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336193</id>
	<title>A few of my favourite things - from the workshop</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245085080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><ul> <li>Olivetti/AT&amp;T: On the M24-M280 series' used a 9-pin D connector for keyboard. If you plugged keyboard into your EGA port you blew a diode and lost (ISTR) green.</li>
<li>Olivetti/AT&amp;T: (See above). M290 model - putting the EGA and keyboard connectors NEXT TO EACH OTHER! (WTF).</li>
<li>Olivetti/AT&amp;T: (See above). If you killed your keyboard (coffee spill etc.), a new one was &pound;160 ('no discount') and nothing else fitted. We actually used to repair these keyboards as they cost so much.</li>
<li>Olivetti/AT&amp;T: Low cost (M200 ?) series - no cover on PSU and integrated power switch on left side of case - when you slid off the case top without unplugging, there was a better than even chance one of your fingers would touch the live switch contacts - saw an engineer do this and then proceed to throw the system unit across the workshop while yelping in pain.</li>
<li>Olivetti/AT&amp;T: 'Integrated' UPS that slid into the bottom of some of their servers. NO covering on bottom circuit board and so if you didn't get the unit into its rails properly, the board would touch the bottom inside of the case and short out the batteries/weld itself to the case, leaving you tugging for all your might to break the contact before the batteries (or something else) exploded.</li>
<li>IBM: Micro Channel Architecture's lousy licencing terms.</li>
<li>Tulip: 'Fault tolerant' server with active pull-up on the SCSI bus powered from ONE of the 'redundant' PSUs - so if *that* PSU blew you lost your disk data and command channels even though the other PSU kept everything else running.</li>
<li>General: Plastic clips on early SIMM sockets that snapped when you sneezed near them</li>
<li>General: USB socket is same width as RJ45 so you can slide a USB plug into the network port and it feels 'right', but gets you nowhere until you look and check!</li>
</ul><p>

I could go on...!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Olivetti/AT&amp;T : On the M24-M280 series ' used a 9-pin D connector for keyboard .
If you plugged keyboard into your EGA port you blew a diode and lost ( ISTR ) green .
Olivetti/AT&amp;T : ( See above ) .
M290 model - putting the EGA and keyboard connectors NEXT TO EACH OTHER !
( WTF ) . Olivetti/AT&amp;T : ( See above ) .
If you killed your keyboard ( coffee spill etc .
) , a new one was   160 ( 'no discount ' ) and nothing else fitted .
We actually used to repair these keyboards as they cost so much .
Olivetti/AT&amp;T : Low cost ( M200 ?
) series - no cover on PSU and integrated power switch on left side of case - when you slid off the case top without unplugging , there was a better than even chance one of your fingers would touch the live switch contacts - saw an engineer do this and then proceed to throw the system unit across the workshop while yelping in pain .
Olivetti/AT&amp;T : 'Integrated ' UPS that slid into the bottom of some of their servers .
NO covering on bottom circuit board and so if you did n't get the unit into its rails properly , the board would touch the bottom inside of the case and short out the batteries/weld itself to the case , leaving you tugging for all your might to break the contact before the batteries ( or something else ) exploded .
IBM : Micro Channel Architecture 's lousy licencing terms .
Tulip : 'Fault tolerant ' server with active pull-up on the SCSI bus powered from ONE of the 'redundant ' PSUs - so if * that * PSU blew you lost your disk data and command channels even though the other PSU kept everything else running .
General : Plastic clips on early SIMM sockets that snapped when you sneezed near them General : USB socket is same width as RJ45 so you can slide a USB plug into the network port and it feels 'right ' , but gets you nowhere until you look and check !
I could go on... !</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Olivetti/AT&amp;T: On the M24-M280 series' used a 9-pin D connector for keyboard.
If you plugged keyboard into your EGA port you blew a diode and lost (ISTR) green.
Olivetti/AT&amp;T: (See above).
M290 model - putting the EGA and keyboard connectors NEXT TO EACH OTHER!
(WTF).
Olivetti/AT&amp;T: (See above).
If you killed your keyboard (coffee spill etc.
), a new one was £160 ('no discount') and nothing else fitted.
We actually used to repair these keyboards as they cost so much.
Olivetti/AT&amp;T: Low cost (M200 ?
) series - no cover on PSU and integrated power switch on left side of case - when you slid off the case top without unplugging, there was a better than even chance one of your fingers would touch the live switch contacts - saw an engineer do this and then proceed to throw the system unit across the workshop while yelping in pain.
Olivetti/AT&amp;T: 'Integrated' UPS that slid into the bottom of some of their servers.
NO covering on bottom circuit board and so if you didn't get the unit into its rails properly, the board would touch the bottom inside of the case and short out the batteries/weld itself to the case, leaving you tugging for all your might to break the contact before the batteries (or something else) exploded.
IBM: Micro Channel Architecture's lousy licencing terms.
Tulip: 'Fault tolerant' server with active pull-up on the SCSI bus powered from ONE of the 'redundant' PSUs - so if *that* PSU blew you lost your disk data and command channels even though the other PSU kept everything else running.
General: Plastic clips on early SIMM sockets that snapped when you sneezed near them
General: USB socket is same width as RJ45 so you can slide a USB plug into the network port and it feels 'right', but gets you nowhere until you look and check!
I could go on...!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28345141</id>
	<title>Re:biggest mistake: PC = 8088 not M68000!!!</title>
	<author>kubitus</author>
	<datestamp>1245184200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>rumors have it, that the DoD wanted IBM to use the Intel CPU. <p>This to allow Intel to recover development cost for the 8087 which was required for the terrain following function of cruise missiles.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>rumors have it , that the DoD wanted IBM to use the Intel CPU .
This to allow Intel to recover development cost for the 8087 which was required for the terrain following function of cruise missiles .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>rumors have it, that the DoD wanted IBM to use the Intel CPU.
This to allow Intel to recover development cost for the 8087 which was required for the terrain following function of cruise missiles.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335801</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336875</id>
	<title>PCjr</title>
	<author>MaWeiTao</author>
	<datestamp>1245088080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't understand why the PCjr is bashed so much. We had one and I thought it was pretty damn good. Granted I was quite young, but we did put that machine to good use for quite a few years. We did get the chiclet keyboard, but by that point IBM was already including a similar keyboard with conventional keys so it was a moot point. I actually thought the keyboard was pretty cool. It wasn't the best for typing, but I think it was more a consequence of the technology available at the time and the size of the buttons than anything else. I'd like to think that current Apple keyboards are a spiritual successor and show that the concept wasn't necessarily a bad one. As for the IR, certainly you had to be careful with anything getting in between the keyboard and the machine, but generally it was excellent and we never ran into problems. I must preferred that to having to deal with a cable.</p><p>As for the sidecars, it's not like people at the time were upgrading machines anywhere near as frequently as they do now. And there were tons of clumsy upgrade solutions for many computers at the time. When a 128K memory card was as large, if not larger, than most video cards today there aren't many options for efficient packaging. Actually, the upgrade we got was from a company called Legacy and it pretty much was a whole other case, the size of the PCjr which added 512K of ram and added a second floppy drive. It doubled the size of the machine, but that's just how things were back then; it never bothered us.</p><p>The PCjr was a better machine than pretty much anything else I encountered through much of elementary school. It was far superior than the crappy Apple IIs we had in school. It offered better resolution and 16 colors. What did suck, however, was that it was somewhat less powerful than the IBM PCs available then and later on. While it supported CGA, it's 16 color format was proprietary and not compatible at all with EGA. But regardless, for $1000 it was a great deal and generally compatible with most IBM PC applications.</p><p>I haven't gone through all the "mistakes", but it seems like this article is written from a modern-day perspective which is inappropriate given the era when these machines were designed and manufactured.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't understand why the PCjr is bashed so much .
We had one and I thought it was pretty damn good .
Granted I was quite young , but we did put that machine to good use for quite a few years .
We did get the chiclet keyboard , but by that point IBM was already including a similar keyboard with conventional keys so it was a moot point .
I actually thought the keyboard was pretty cool .
It was n't the best for typing , but I think it was more a consequence of the technology available at the time and the size of the buttons than anything else .
I 'd like to think that current Apple keyboards are a spiritual successor and show that the concept was n't necessarily a bad one .
As for the IR , certainly you had to be careful with anything getting in between the keyboard and the machine , but generally it was excellent and we never ran into problems .
I must preferred that to having to deal with a cable.As for the sidecars , it 's not like people at the time were upgrading machines anywhere near as frequently as they do now .
And there were tons of clumsy upgrade solutions for many computers at the time .
When a 128K memory card was as large , if not larger , than most video cards today there are n't many options for efficient packaging .
Actually , the upgrade we got was from a company called Legacy and it pretty much was a whole other case , the size of the PCjr which added 512K of ram and added a second floppy drive .
It doubled the size of the machine , but that 's just how things were back then ; it never bothered us.The PCjr was a better machine than pretty much anything else I encountered through much of elementary school .
It was far superior than the crappy Apple IIs we had in school .
It offered better resolution and 16 colors .
What did suck , however , was that it was somewhat less powerful than the IBM PCs available then and later on .
While it supported CGA , it 's 16 color format was proprietary and not compatible at all with EGA .
But regardless , for $ 1000 it was a great deal and generally compatible with most IBM PC applications.I have n't gone through all the " mistakes " , but it seems like this article is written from a modern-day perspective which is inappropriate given the era when these machines were designed and manufactured .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't understand why the PCjr is bashed so much.
We had one and I thought it was pretty damn good.
Granted I was quite young, but we did put that machine to good use for quite a few years.
We did get the chiclet keyboard, but by that point IBM was already including a similar keyboard with conventional keys so it was a moot point.
I actually thought the keyboard was pretty cool.
It wasn't the best for typing, but I think it was more a consequence of the technology available at the time and the size of the buttons than anything else.
I'd like to think that current Apple keyboards are a spiritual successor and show that the concept wasn't necessarily a bad one.
As for the IR, certainly you had to be careful with anything getting in between the keyboard and the machine, but generally it was excellent and we never ran into problems.
I must preferred that to having to deal with a cable.As for the sidecars, it's not like people at the time were upgrading machines anywhere near as frequently as they do now.
And there were tons of clumsy upgrade solutions for many computers at the time.
When a 128K memory card was as large, if not larger, than most video cards today there aren't many options for efficient packaging.
Actually, the upgrade we got was from a company called Legacy and it pretty much was a whole other case, the size of the PCjr which added 512K of ram and added a second floppy drive.
It doubled the size of the machine, but that's just how things were back then; it never bothered us.The PCjr was a better machine than pretty much anything else I encountered through much of elementary school.
It was far superior than the crappy Apple IIs we had in school.
It offered better resolution and 16 colors.
What did suck, however, was that it was somewhat less powerful than the IBM PCs available then and later on.
While it supported CGA, it's 16 color format was proprietary and not compatible at all with EGA.
But regardless, for $1000 it was a great deal and generally compatible with most IBM PC applications.I haven't gone through all the "mistakes", but it seems like this article is written from a modern-day perspective which is inappropriate given the era when these machines were designed and manufactured.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336979</id>
	<title>NeXT's magneto-optical drive...</title>
	<author>MojoRilla</author>
	<datestamp>1245088560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Anyone remember the NeXT's magneto-optical drive?  At a time when floppy disks were at their zenith, and everyone used them, the NeXT shipped in 1990 with no floppy drive.  Instead, storage was on a 256 megabyte magneto-optical drive, which was totally unreliable.  The NeXTstation (pizza box) finally got a floppy (though a 2.88 meg one) in 1992.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone remember the NeXT 's magneto-optical drive ?
At a time when floppy disks were at their zenith , and everyone used them , the NeXT shipped in 1990 with no floppy drive .
Instead , storage was on a 256 megabyte magneto-optical drive , which was totally unreliable .
The NeXTstation ( pizza box ) finally got a floppy ( though a 2.88 meg one ) in 1992 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone remember the NeXT's magneto-optical drive?
At a time when floppy disks were at their zenith, and everyone used them, the NeXT shipped in 1990 with no floppy drive.
Instead, storage was on a 256 megabyte magneto-optical drive, which was totally unreliable.
The NeXTstation (pizza box) finally got a floppy (though a 2.88 meg one) in 1992.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335475</id>
	<title>Re:The 15 problems</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1245082320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This looks to me like 10 actual problems, with multiple examples of crappy keyboards and bulky shit stuck to your computer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This looks to me like 10 actual problems , with multiple examples of crappy keyboards and bulky shit stuck to your computer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This looks to me like 10 actual problems, with multiple examples of crappy keyboards and bulky shit stuck to your computer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335243</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336201</id>
	<title>Re:Worst Mistake That Still Needs Fixing</title>
	<author>QuantumRiff</author>
	<datestamp>1245085140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm not sure you can call the MiniDisplay port proprietary when Apple has published the specs for them so that anyone can use them.  The cost is cause nobody uses DisplayPort yet.  Lenovo has 1 freakin monitor that has a display port plug, and its about $700.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure you can call the MiniDisplay port proprietary when Apple has published the specs for them so that anyone can use them .
The cost is cause nobody uses DisplayPort yet .
Lenovo has 1 freakin monitor that has a display port plug , and its about $ 700 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure you can call the MiniDisplay port proprietary when Apple has published the specs for them so that anyone can use them.
The cost is cause nobody uses DisplayPort yet.
Lenovo has 1 freakin monitor that has a display port plug, and its about $700.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337051</id>
	<title>Re:Worst Mistake That Still Needs Fixing</title>
	<author>DJRumpy</author>
	<datestamp>1245088860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Considering you can get them for $14 - $25 dollars, I might consider your $100 boast a bit hard to believe. A simple search on Google or even Amazon should have netted you a much better price.<br> <br>

<a href="http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&amp;rls=en-us&amp;q=mini+display+port+adapter&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;oe=UTF-8" title="google.com">http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&amp;rls=en-us&amp;q=mini+display+port+adapter&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;oe=UTF-8</a> [google.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering you can get them for $ 14 - $ 25 dollars , I might consider your $ 100 boast a bit hard to believe .
A simple search on Google or even Amazon should have netted you a much better price .
http : //www.google.com/search ? client = safari&amp;rls = en-us&amp;q = mini + display + port + adapter&amp;ie = UTF-8&amp;oe = UTF-8 [ google.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Considering you can get them for $14 - $25 dollars, I might consider your $100 boast a bit hard to believe.
A simple search on Google or even Amazon should have netted you a much better price.
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&amp;rls=en-us&amp;q=mini+display+port+adapter&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;oe=UTF-8 [google.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339457</id>
	<title>Re:A few of my favourite things - from the worksho</title>
	<author>RDW</author>
	<datestamp>1245098700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>'General: USB socket is same width as RJ45 so you can slide a USB plug into the network port and it feels 'right', but gets you nowhere until you look and check!'</p><p>The design of the standard USB 'A' connector has got a lot to answer for, even when you use the correct socket! Just by making the design more obviously asymmetric, they could have avoided millions of attempted mis-insertions, especially when the socket is hard to see properly. A few years back, some of Dell's standard office mini-towers had, for no good reason, front USB sockets angled downwards at about 45 degrees and concealed under a flap hinged at the top, which only opened halfway. This seemed deliberately designed to make inserting a USB plug as difficult as possible, as the flap effectively blocked your view of the two pointlessly angled, annoyingly closely spaced sockets.</p><p>However, one of my personal 'favourites' goes back to the 8-bit era - the infamous Sinclair ZX81 RAM pack wobble. For about 30 GBP you could buy an external RAM expansion box with the huge capacity of 16kb that slotted into an edge connector at the back in a rather precarious way. Nudge the computer, sneeze, or look at it in the wrong way, and bang goes the current contents of RAM (well, '3D Monster Maze', anyway).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>'General : USB socket is same width as RJ45 so you can slide a USB plug into the network port and it feels 'right ' , but gets you nowhere until you look and check !
'The design of the standard USB 'A ' connector has got a lot to answer for , even when you use the correct socket !
Just by making the design more obviously asymmetric , they could have avoided millions of attempted mis-insertions , especially when the socket is hard to see properly .
A few years back , some of Dell 's standard office mini-towers had , for no good reason , front USB sockets angled downwards at about 45 degrees and concealed under a flap hinged at the top , which only opened halfway .
This seemed deliberately designed to make inserting a USB plug as difficult as possible , as the flap effectively blocked your view of the two pointlessly angled , annoyingly closely spaced sockets.However , one of my personal 'favourites ' goes back to the 8-bit era - the infamous Sinclair ZX81 RAM pack wobble .
For about 30 GBP you could buy an external RAM expansion box with the huge capacity of 16kb that slotted into an edge connector at the back in a rather precarious way .
Nudge the computer , sneeze , or look at it in the wrong way , and bang goes the current contents of RAM ( well , '3D Monster Maze ' , anyway ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'General: USB socket is same width as RJ45 so you can slide a USB plug into the network port and it feels 'right', but gets you nowhere until you look and check!
'The design of the standard USB 'A' connector has got a lot to answer for, even when you use the correct socket!
Just by making the design more obviously asymmetric, they could have avoided millions of attempted mis-insertions, especially when the socket is hard to see properly.
A few years back, some of Dell's standard office mini-towers had, for no good reason, front USB sockets angled downwards at about 45 degrees and concealed under a flap hinged at the top, which only opened halfway.
This seemed deliberately designed to make inserting a USB plug as difficult as possible, as the flap effectively blocked your view of the two pointlessly angled, annoyingly closely spaced sockets.However, one of my personal 'favourites' goes back to the 8-bit era - the infamous Sinclair ZX81 RAM pack wobble.
For about 30 GBP you could buy an external RAM expansion box with the huge capacity of 16kb that slotted into an edge connector at the back in a rather precarious way.
Nudge the computer, sneeze, or look at it in the wrong way, and bang goes the current contents of RAM (well, '3D Monster Maze', anyway).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336193</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336329</id>
	<title>Re:Low-tech solution</title>
	<author>Spatial</author>
	<datestamp>1245085620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A black marker works too.  Bonus: they're translucent so it only dims the light rather than blocking it.  Depends on the marker of course.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A black marker works too .
Bonus : they 're translucent so it only dims the light rather than blocking it .
Depends on the marker of course .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A black marker works too.
Bonus: they're translucent so it only dims the light rather than blocking it.
Depends on the marker of course.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335485</id>
	<title>Re:The 15 problems</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245082380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Problem #4: EM Pulse Erases Tapes</i></p><p>Hardly a design mistake.  Its more a lack of testing mistake.</p><p><i>Problem #7: Non-Detachable AC Adapter</i></p><p>How is that any different to the Ipod coming without a user replacable battery?</p><p><i>Problem #6: Rubber Keyboard</i></p><p>It didn't hurt the Sinclair ZX Spectrum's sales too much.  I'd say the same thing about most PC keyboards sold today but it comes down to money.  $6 for a cheap rubbery key keyboard or $75 for a clicky microswitch keyboard.. most people aren't prepared to pay the extra.</p><p><i>Problem #15: Unreliable Proprietary Disk Drives</i></p><p>I'd say all disk drives are proprietary until they become a standard.  If the machine had been a success i'm sure everyone would have licensed it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Problem # 4 : EM Pulse Erases TapesHardly a design mistake .
Its more a lack of testing mistake.Problem # 7 : Non-Detachable AC AdapterHow is that any different to the Ipod coming without a user replacable battery ? Problem # 6 : Rubber KeyboardIt did n't hurt the Sinclair ZX Spectrum 's sales too much .
I 'd say the same thing about most PC keyboards sold today but it comes down to money .
$ 6 for a cheap rubbery key keyboard or $ 75 for a clicky microswitch keyboard.. most people are n't prepared to pay the extra.Problem # 15 : Unreliable Proprietary Disk DrivesI 'd say all disk drives are proprietary until they become a standard .
If the machine had been a success i 'm sure everyone would have licensed it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Problem #4: EM Pulse Erases TapesHardly a design mistake.
Its more a lack of testing mistake.Problem #7: Non-Detachable AC AdapterHow is that any different to the Ipod coming without a user replacable battery?Problem #6: Rubber KeyboardIt didn't hurt the Sinclair ZX Spectrum's sales too much.
I'd say the same thing about most PC keyboards sold today but it comes down to money.
$6 for a cheap rubbery key keyboard or $75 for a clicky microswitch keyboard.. most people aren't prepared to pay the extra.Problem #15: Unreliable Proprietary Disk DrivesI'd say all disk drives are proprietary until they become a standard.
If the machine had been a success i'm sure everyone would have licensed it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335243</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336555</id>
	<title>Re:CapsLock</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245086580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bloomberg anyone?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bloomberg anyone ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bloomberg anyone?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339887</id>
	<title>Re:biggest mistake: PC = 8088 not M68000!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245057120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I believe the biggest mistake was IBM using an Intel8088, instead of a Motorola68000.</p><p>Imagine for a moment what would have happened if IBM choose in the early 1980s a 32 bits processor for the first successful Personal Computer!</p><ul><li>no infamous 640k memory limit</li><li>probably no MSDOS (or QDOS), and a real operating system instead</li><li>32 bits computing would have become mainstream a decade earlier at least!</li><li>much less assembly written software</li></ul></div><p>Two comments:</p><p>1) Memory was VERY EXPENSIVE back then.<br>2) Saving space was not the only reason for using assembly lanuage.  Speed was another reason.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe the biggest mistake was IBM using an Intel8088 , instead of a Motorola68000.Imagine for a moment what would have happened if IBM choose in the early 1980s a 32 bits processor for the first successful Personal Computer ! no infamous 640k memory limitprobably no MSDOS ( or QDOS ) , and a real operating system instead32 bits computing would have become mainstream a decade earlier at least ! much less assembly written softwareTwo comments : 1 ) Memory was VERY EXPENSIVE back then.2 ) Saving space was not the only reason for using assembly lanuage .
Speed was another reason .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe the biggest mistake was IBM using an Intel8088, instead of a Motorola68000.Imagine for a moment what would have happened if IBM choose in the early 1980s a 32 bits processor for the first successful Personal Computer!no infamous 640k memory limitprobably no MSDOS (or QDOS), and a real operating system instead32 bits computing would have become mainstream a decade earlier at least!much less assembly written softwareTwo comments:1) Memory was VERY EXPENSIVE back then.2) Saving space was not the only reason for using assembly lanuage.
Speed was another reason.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335801</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336541</id>
	<title>Re:CapsLock</title>
	<author>infamous\_blah</author>
	<datestamp>1245086520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I do not recall ever having used the CapsLock key (except out of curiousity to see whether it actually does anything.)<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... CapsLock was useful once upon a time, when there was no \section{} or \textbf{}, and when pressing `shift' actually required strenght.  But those days are gone.</p></div><p>As a programmer, I use it all the time.  It's common convention in many programming languages for CONSTANT\_VARIABLES to be in all caps.  It may not take much for one press of the Shift key, but having to hold it down while typing words with letters from both sides of the keyboard multiplied by the number of times I need to do that in a day will cause strain in my hands.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do not recall ever having used the CapsLock key ( except out of curiousity to see whether it actually does anything .
) ... CapsLock was useful once upon a time , when there was no \ section { } or \ textbf { } , and when pressing ` shift ' actually required strenght .
But those days are gone.As a programmer , I use it all the time .
It 's common convention in many programming languages for CONSTANT \ _VARIABLES to be in all caps .
It may not take much for one press of the Shift key , but having to hold it down while typing words with letters from both sides of the keyboard multiplied by the number of times I need to do that in a day will cause strain in my hands .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I do not recall ever having used the CapsLock key (except out of curiousity to see whether it actually does anything.
) ... CapsLock was useful once upon a time, when there was no \section{} or \textbf{}, and when pressing `shift' actually required strenght.
But those days are gone.As a programmer, I use it all the time.
It's common convention in many programming languages for CONSTANT\_VARIABLES to be in all caps.
It may not take much for one press of the Shift key, but having to hold it down while typing words with letters from both sides of the keyboard multiplied by the number of times I need to do that in a day will cause strain in my hands.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335763</id>
	<title>Re: The 15 problems</title>
	<author>Dan667</author>
	<datestamp>1245083460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That has got to be one of the most annoying things I have ever seen on a laptop.  Who ever thought this was a good idea at Dell should be forced to have 20 of these laptops asleep in his room at night while he tries to sleep.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That has got to be one of the most annoying things I have ever seen on a laptop .
Who ever thought this was a good idea at Dell should be forced to have 20 of these laptops asleep in his room at night while he tries to sleep .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That has got to be one of the most annoying things I have ever seen on a laptop.
Who ever thought this was a good idea at Dell should be forced to have 20 of these laptops asleep in his room at night while he tries to sleep.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337645</id>
	<title>Ongoing: Laptop box</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245091680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>There should be a standard laptop box, similar to a PC box.  There are many standardized components, even tiny processor/motherboards, but not a standard laptop holder to put them in.  If I need little CPU and long battery life, I'd build a machine with a low-power CPU and put an additional battery in a battery/disk bay.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There should be a standard laptop box , similar to a PC box .
There are many standardized components , even tiny processor/motherboards , but not a standard laptop holder to put them in .
If I need little CPU and long battery life , I 'd build a machine with a low-power CPU and put an additional battery in a battery/disk bay .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There should be a standard laptop box, similar to a PC box.
There are many standardized components, even tiny processor/motherboards, but not a standard laptop holder to put them in.
If I need little CPU and long battery life, I'd build a machine with a low-power CPU and put an additional battery in a battery/disk bay.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339285</id>
	<title>Re:worst: sharp unfinished inside edges in cheap c</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245097920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>- Power hunger systems. 2 molex connections for a GPU ?!<br>- Crap 3D Video cards in laptops</p></div><p>Sigh. Pick one.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>- Power hunger systems .
2 molex connections for a GPU ?
! - Crap 3D Video cards in laptopsSigh .
Pick one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>- Power hunger systems.
2 molex connections for a GPU ?
!- Crap 3D Video cards in laptopsSigh.
Pick one.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337095</id>
	<title>Re:deja vue all over again in smart phones</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245089160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Windows ME,</p></div><p>*runs in circles yelling GOD HELP US ALLL!!*</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows ME , * runs in circles yelling GOD HELP US ALLL ! !
*</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows ME,*runs in circles yelling GOD HELP US ALLL!!
*
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335585</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336813</id>
	<title>Re:deja vue all over again in smart phones</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245087840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Windows CE*</p><p>Sounds like the ending of some TV show episode. Kinda like Cartman's mom is a slut (or the intro of the next episode, i don't quite remember)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows CE * Sounds like the ending of some TV show episode .
Kinda like Cartman 's mom is a slut ( or the intro of the next episode , i do n't quite remember )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows CE*Sounds like the ending of some TV show episode.
Kinda like Cartman's mom is a slut (or the intro of the next episode, i don't quite remember)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335585</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338345</id>
	<title>Re:Worst Mistake That Still Needs Fixing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245094860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Think mini-display port is a problem?  Try ADC (Apple Display Connector).  Power, USB, and video signal through one cable.</p><p>Introduced at the same time as the G4 Cube, I managed to end up with a beautiful 17" CRT display that's completely incompatible with just about any other computer.  (An ADC/DVI adapter exists -- but only works with the LCD Apple Cinema displays -- the CRT uses an analog signal.  Adapters that connect an ADC-equipped computer to a VGA monitor used to be fairly readily accessible.  But adapters that connect an ADC monitor to a computer's VGA port?  Very rare, and expensive enough that I could buy a VGA monitor for cheaper.)</p><p>Both the cube and monitor have given me a lot of mileage, but now that the cube is maxed out and well into partial retirement, I sure wish I could use the perfectly good monitor on my desk with another computer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Think mini-display port is a problem ?
Try ADC ( Apple Display Connector ) .
Power , USB , and video signal through one cable.Introduced at the same time as the G4 Cube , I managed to end up with a beautiful 17 " CRT display that 's completely incompatible with just about any other computer .
( An ADC/DVI adapter exists -- but only works with the LCD Apple Cinema displays -- the CRT uses an analog signal .
Adapters that connect an ADC-equipped computer to a VGA monitor used to be fairly readily accessible .
But adapters that connect an ADC monitor to a computer 's VGA port ?
Very rare , and expensive enough that I could buy a VGA monitor for cheaper .
) Both the cube and monitor have given me a lot of mileage , but now that the cube is maxed out and well into partial retirement , I sure wish I could use the perfectly good monitor on my desk with another computer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Think mini-display port is a problem?
Try ADC (Apple Display Connector).
Power, USB, and video signal through one cable.Introduced at the same time as the G4 Cube, I managed to end up with a beautiful 17" CRT display that's completely incompatible with just about any other computer.
(An ADC/DVI adapter exists -- but only works with the LCD Apple Cinema displays -- the CRT uses an analog signal.
Adapters that connect an ADC-equipped computer to a VGA monitor used to be fairly readily accessible.
But adapters that connect an ADC monitor to a computer's VGA port?
Very rare, and expensive enough that I could buy a VGA monitor for cheaper.
)Both the cube and monitor have given me a lot of mileage, but now that the cube is maxed out and well into partial retirement, I sure wish I could use the perfectly good monitor on my desk with another computer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28342591</id>
	<title>Re:Not 'classic', but still...</title>
	<author>El\_Oscuro</author>
	<datestamp>1245071460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The problem with air filters is that most PC fans blow air out of the case, not in.  So, if you put a filter near your fan, all of the dust will still be inside your case.  Unless you did like the Ghost busters and reversed the flow.  Not sure what it would do to the cooling of the components though...</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with air filters is that most PC fans blow air out of the case , not in .
So , if you put a filter near your fan , all of the dust will still be inside your case .
Unless you did like the Ghost busters and reversed the flow .
Not sure what it would do to the cooling of the components though.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with air filters is that most PC fans blow air out of the case, not in.
So, if you put a filter near your fan, all of the dust will still be inside your case.
Unless you did like the Ghost busters and reversed the flow.
Not sure what it would do to the cooling of the components though...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336987</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336335</id>
	<title>Re:Apple Lisa</title>
	<author>stevied</author>
	<datestamp>1245085620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As mentioned by others, document-centric computing:</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple\_Lisa#Historical\_importance" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple\_Lisa#Historical\_importance</a> [wikipedia.org]<br><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerox\_Star#User\_interface" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerox\_Star#User\_interface</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>People keep having stabs at it, and to give MS their due they did try pretty hard with Win95 and OLE/COM, and got rid of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple\_document\_interface" title="wikipedia.org">MDI</a> [wikipedia.org] in later versions of Office<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. but some it never seems to have been perfected on mass-market machines. The tab-view that we have in browsers now seems to be actively moving away from it (this is your application<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. with your documents as child objects to it<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. - though at least Chrome has the decency to put the tabs at the top of window.)</p><p>It'll probably get leap-frogged as an idea by all this Web2.0 stuff and in-browser apps (which again is a regression: you still have to think about which SoaS-providing site you have to go to get a particular job done.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As mentioned by others , document-centric computing : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple \ _Lisa # Historical \ _importance [ wikipedia.org ] http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerox \ _Star # User \ _interface [ wikipedia.org ] People keep having stabs at it , and to give MS their due they did try pretty hard with Win95 and OLE/COM , and got rid of MDI [ wikipedia.org ] in later versions of Office .. but some it never seems to have been perfected on mass-market machines .
The tab-view that we have in browsers now seems to be actively moving away from it ( this is your application .. with your documents as child objects to it .. - though at least Chrome has the decency to put the tabs at the top of window .
) It 'll probably get leap-frogged as an idea by all this Web2.0 stuff and in-browser apps ( which again is a regression : you still have to think about which SoaS-providing site you have to go to get a particular job done .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As mentioned by others, document-centric computing:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple\_Lisa#Historical\_importance [wikipedia.org]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerox\_Star#User\_interface [wikipedia.org]People keep having stabs at it, and to give MS their due they did try pretty hard with Win95 and OLE/COM, and got rid of MDI [wikipedia.org] in later versions of Office .. but some it never seems to have been perfected on mass-market machines.
The tab-view that we have in browsers now seems to be actively moving away from it (this is your application .. with your documents as child objects to it .. - though at least Chrome has the decency to put the tabs at the top of window.
)It'll probably get leap-frogged as an idea by all this Web2.0 stuff and in-browser apps (which again is a regression: you still have to think about which SoaS-providing site you have to go to get a particular job done.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335575</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336391</id>
	<title>Missing options</title>
	<author>griffinme</author>
	<datestamp>1245085920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>16.  failure to include a floppy drive in the iMac G5 and only use USB ports at a time when almost no one was using USB.<br>17.  not really a pc design flaw but a decision that would haunt Outlook users for years, "Allow ActiveX in email made even worse with 'preview window' on by default" by MS<br>18.  Any pc produced by Packard Bell. At one point when someone would start to ask me work on their computer I would interrupt and ask "Is this a Packard Bell?" If they answered 'yes' I would run screaming from the room.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>16. failure to include a floppy drive in the iMac G5 and only use USB ports at a time when almost no one was using USB.17 .
not really a pc design flaw but a decision that would haunt Outlook users for years , " Allow ActiveX in email made even worse with 'preview window ' on by default " by MS18 .
Any pc produced by Packard Bell .
At one point when someone would start to ask me work on their computer I would interrupt and ask " Is this a Packard Bell ?
" If they answered 'yes ' I would run screaming from the room .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>16.  failure to include a floppy drive in the iMac G5 and only use USB ports at a time when almost no one was using USB.17.
not really a pc design flaw but a decision that would haunt Outlook users for years, "Allow ActiveX in email made even worse with 'preview window' on by default" by MS18.
Any pc produced by Packard Bell.
At one point when someone would start to ask me work on their computer I would interrupt and ask "Is this a Packard Bell?
" If they answered 'yes' I would run screaming from the room.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28340861</id>
	<title>Re: The 15 problems</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245061020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Going back a decade or two, I had a VCR with a newfangled IR remote. It even had an on/off button (bloody luxury!)<br>Anyway, when you pressed 'Off' it'd power down the VCR as expected, But it'd also cut power to the IR reciever so it couldn't ever get the 'On' signal.</p><p>ISTR another VCR I had, one bored evening I disassembled the remote, and found a contact pad that had no corresponding rubber button, so I pointed it at the VCR and shorted the pads to see what it did.<br>Damn VCR never worked again!</p><p>Who the hell figured a VCR would need a 'self destruct' button?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Going back a decade or two , I had a VCR with a newfangled IR remote .
It even had an on/off button ( bloody luxury !
) Anyway , when you pressed 'Off ' it 'd power down the VCR as expected , But it 'd also cut power to the IR reciever so it could n't ever get the 'On ' signal.ISTR another VCR I had , one bored evening I disassembled the remote , and found a contact pad that had no corresponding rubber button , so I pointed it at the VCR and shorted the pads to see what it did.Damn VCR never worked again ! Who the hell figured a VCR would need a 'self destruct ' button ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Going back a decade or two, I had a VCR with a newfangled IR remote.
It even had an on/off button (bloody luxury!
)Anyway, when you pressed 'Off' it'd power down the VCR as expected, But it'd also cut power to the IR reciever so it couldn't ever get the 'On' signal.ISTR another VCR I had, one bored evening I disassembled the remote, and found a contact pad that had no corresponding rubber button, so I pointed it at the VCR and shorted the pads to see what it did.Damn VCR never worked again!Who the hell figured a VCR would need a 'self destruct' button?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336883</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337127</id>
	<title>Real mistakes</title>
	<author>Animats</author>
	<datestamp>1245089280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Those are mistakes an end user would see.  Here are some deeper mistakes from an engineerings standpoint.
</p><ul>
<li>
<b>Bus-type peripheral architecture.</b> The IBM PC was a spinoff of the IBM Displaywriter, a dedicated word processor with no expandability.  It inherited some design decisions from the Displaywriter that were reasonable for a word processor, but terrible for an expandable machine. Most notably, the IBM PC had the peripherals on the memory bus.  That meant any DMA had to be on the I/O card, and thus any card could blither all over memory.  Peripherals were thus trusted devices, and, in turn, drivers had to be trusted.  IBM knew the right answer - channels, as on mainframes, and in the PS/2, they used a "microchannel" architecture.  But it was too late - the industry had already standardized on "ISA cards".  This is the fundamental reason cause of most operating system crashes - the I/O architecture gives drivers too much power.</li>
<li>
<b>The Motorola MMU debacle.</b>The Motorola 68000 first appeared in 1978, and it was a very good machine.  Almost. There was a flaw. Instruction backout didn't quite work, and thus a paged MMU couldn't be added.  So Motorola didn't ship an MMU with the 68000. The early UNIX workstations all used the 68000, and painful hacks were used to kludge together some kind of MMU to make it work. Apollo used two CPUs, one for the OS and one for the user, only one running at a time, to get around this.  The Apple Lisa used one CPU with an Apple MMU built from many parts, and the compiler avoided generating any instructions with incrementation so that backout would work.  Motorola came out with the M68010 in 1982, which fixed the bugs, but there was still no MMU. When Motorola finally shipped the 68451 MMU, it was a segmented MMU, and worse, slowed down the machine by one clock cycle per memory access.  If Motorola had gotten it right by 1979 or so, the whole history of personal computing might have been Motorola-based using protected mode-UNIX.</li>
<li>
<b>The Intel 286 CPU.</b> Not enough memory management for a protected mode OS, too much segmentation machinery for an unprotected OS.  That powered the IBM PC/AT and a whole generation of machines with the addressing system from hell.  It could run a version of UNIX, but no process could exceed 64K in protected mode, although you could put a few megabytes on the machine.</li>
<li>
<b>Baseband Ethernet.</b> Coax-based Ethernet had some serious electrical problems.  The thing really was unbalanced baseband, so you couldn't use capacitive coupling.  The coax shield could only be grounded at one point, or you'd get ground loops.  That created an electrical safety issue with the outside of coax connectors, and running coax between buildings was iffy.  It was just bad electrical design.  10baseT, which is balanced, was far better from an electronics standpoint.</li>
</ul></htmltext>
<tokenext>Those are mistakes an end user would see .
Here are some deeper mistakes from an engineerings standpoint .
Bus-type peripheral architecture .
The IBM PC was a spinoff of the IBM Displaywriter , a dedicated word processor with no expandability .
It inherited some design decisions from the Displaywriter that were reasonable for a word processor , but terrible for an expandable machine .
Most notably , the IBM PC had the peripherals on the memory bus .
That meant any DMA had to be on the I/O card , and thus any card could blither all over memory .
Peripherals were thus trusted devices , and , in turn , drivers had to be trusted .
IBM knew the right answer - channels , as on mainframes , and in the PS/2 , they used a " microchannel " architecture .
But it was too late - the industry had already standardized on " ISA cards " .
This is the fundamental reason cause of most operating system crashes - the I/O architecture gives drivers too much power .
The Motorola MMU debacle.The Motorola 68000 first appeared in 1978 , and it was a very good machine .
Almost. There was a flaw .
Instruction backout did n't quite work , and thus a paged MMU could n't be added .
So Motorola did n't ship an MMU with the 68000 .
The early UNIX workstations all used the 68000 , and painful hacks were used to kludge together some kind of MMU to make it work .
Apollo used two CPUs , one for the OS and one for the user , only one running at a time , to get around this .
The Apple Lisa used one CPU with an Apple MMU built from many parts , and the compiler avoided generating any instructions with incrementation so that backout would work .
Motorola came out with the M68010 in 1982 , which fixed the bugs , but there was still no MMU .
When Motorola finally shipped the 68451 MMU , it was a segmented MMU , and worse , slowed down the machine by one clock cycle per memory access .
If Motorola had gotten it right by 1979 or so , the whole history of personal computing might have been Motorola-based using protected mode-UNIX .
The Intel 286 CPU .
Not enough memory management for a protected mode OS , too much segmentation machinery for an unprotected OS .
That powered the IBM PC/AT and a whole generation of machines with the addressing system from hell .
It could run a version of UNIX , but no process could exceed 64K in protected mode , although you could put a few megabytes on the machine .
Baseband Ethernet .
Coax-based Ethernet had some serious electrical problems .
The thing really was unbalanced baseband , so you could n't use capacitive coupling .
The coax shield could only be grounded at one point , or you 'd get ground loops .
That created an electrical safety issue with the outside of coax connectors , and running coax between buildings was iffy .
It was just bad electrical design .
10baseT , which is balanced , was far better from an electronics standpoint .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Those are mistakes an end user would see.
Here are some deeper mistakes from an engineerings standpoint.
Bus-type peripheral architecture.
The IBM PC was a spinoff of the IBM Displaywriter, a dedicated word processor with no expandability.
It inherited some design decisions from the Displaywriter that were reasonable for a word processor, but terrible for an expandable machine.
Most notably, the IBM PC had the peripherals on the memory bus.
That meant any DMA had to be on the I/O card, and thus any card could blither all over memory.
Peripherals were thus trusted devices, and, in turn, drivers had to be trusted.
IBM knew the right answer - channels, as on mainframes, and in the PS/2, they used a "microchannel" architecture.
But it was too late - the industry had already standardized on "ISA cards".
This is the fundamental reason cause of most operating system crashes - the I/O architecture gives drivers too much power.
The Motorola MMU debacle.The Motorola 68000 first appeared in 1978, and it was a very good machine.
Almost. There was a flaw.
Instruction backout didn't quite work, and thus a paged MMU couldn't be added.
So Motorola didn't ship an MMU with the 68000.
The early UNIX workstations all used the 68000, and painful hacks were used to kludge together some kind of MMU to make it work.
Apollo used two CPUs, one for the OS and one for the user, only one running at a time, to get around this.
The Apple Lisa used one CPU with an Apple MMU built from many parts, and the compiler avoided generating any instructions with incrementation so that backout would work.
Motorola came out with the M68010 in 1982, which fixed the bugs, but there was still no MMU.
When Motorola finally shipped the 68451 MMU, it was a segmented MMU, and worse, slowed down the machine by one clock cycle per memory access.
If Motorola had gotten it right by 1979 or so, the whole history of personal computing might have been Motorola-based using protected mode-UNIX.
The Intel 286 CPU.
Not enough memory management for a protected mode OS, too much segmentation machinery for an unprotected OS.
That powered the IBM PC/AT and a whole generation of machines with the addressing system from hell.
It could run a version of UNIX, but no process could exceed 64K in protected mode, although you could put a few megabytes on the machine.
Baseband Ethernet.
Coax-based Ethernet had some serious electrical problems.
The thing really was unbalanced baseband, so you couldn't use capacitive coupling.
The coax shield could only be grounded at one point, or you'd get ground loops.
That created an electrical safety issue with the outside of coax connectors, and running coax between buildings was iffy.
It was just bad electrical design.
10baseT, which is balanced, was far better from an electronics standpoint.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335445</id>
	<title>#1 failure...</title>
	<author>master\_p</author>
	<datestamp>1245082200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the choice of IBM to use the 8086 CPU. It set back the computer industry several years. The PC would now be at least 2 generations ahead if IBM did not use the retarded 8086 design.</p><p>Obviously, IBM did not believe in personal computers and thought they were gimmicks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the choice of IBM to use the 8086 CPU .
It set back the computer industry several years .
The PC would now be at least 2 generations ahead if IBM did not use the retarded 8086 design.Obviously , IBM did not believe in personal computers and thought they were gimmicks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the choice of IBM to use the 8086 CPU.
It set back the computer industry several years.
The PC would now be at least 2 generations ahead if IBM did not use the retarded 8086 design.Obviously, IBM did not believe in personal computers and thought they were gimmicks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28342395</id>
	<title>Re:CapsLock</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245070080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Stupidly, it depends on whether you're using a laptop or a normal desktop.</p><p>On a normal desktop, pointless, it should be jammed on.<br>On a normal laptop, nobody can use the numeric keypad mode, it should be jammed off.  (There's a numeric 'keypad' on the right hand side of the keyboard that's turned on by switching on numlock.  It uses keys like "uiojkl.nm," or similar.</p><p>I wish laptops had an option to 'ignore numlock' in the BIOS so that it just plain didn't matter whether it was on or off, typing letters gives me letters!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Stupidly , it depends on whether you 're using a laptop or a normal desktop.On a normal desktop , pointless , it should be jammed on.On a normal laptop , nobody can use the numeric keypad mode , it should be jammed off .
( There 's a numeric 'keypad ' on the right hand side of the keyboard that 's turned on by switching on numlock .
It uses keys like " uiojkl.nm , " or similar.I wish laptops had an option to 'ignore numlock ' in the BIOS so that it just plain did n't matter whether it was on or off , typing letters gives me letters !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stupidly, it depends on whether you're using a laptop or a normal desktop.On a normal desktop, pointless, it should be jammed on.On a normal laptop, nobody can use the numeric keypad mode, it should be jammed off.
(There's a numeric 'keypad' on the right hand side of the keyboard that's turned on by switching on numlock.
It uses keys like "uiojkl.nm," or similar.I wish laptops had an option to 'ignore numlock' in the BIOS so that it just plain didn't matter whether it was on or off, typing letters gives me letters!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335683</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28345395</id>
	<title>Re:worst: sharp unfinished inside edges in cheap c</title>
	<author>CAIMLAS</author>
	<datestamp>1245144180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Computer case cuts are the worst. I've currently got... 5, all in visible states of healing, that I have acquired in the last couple weeks.</p><p>They're kind of an anomaly, really. I've got knives sharp enough to shave with, and I've cut myself with all sorts of things. But outside of a computer case, I've never been cut and not noticed it. With a computer case, I'll sometimes cut a huge gash in my hand and notice the wet sensation before any discomfort (or feel the sharpness of the cut). It's quite peculiar.</p><p>And newer cases have that problem, too. I'd wager up through about 3-4 years ago there were a number which would do a number on you before you knew it. The 'extraneous' thin-punched metal parts (eg. a metal shield for an unused drive bay or frill RF shielding where you really didn't need it, etc.) has been a problem long after they fixed the "punched steel is sharp" problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Computer case cuts are the worst .
I 've currently got... 5 , all in visible states of healing , that I have acquired in the last couple weeks.They 're kind of an anomaly , really .
I 've got knives sharp enough to shave with , and I 've cut myself with all sorts of things .
But outside of a computer case , I 've never been cut and not noticed it .
With a computer case , I 'll sometimes cut a huge gash in my hand and notice the wet sensation before any discomfort ( or feel the sharpness of the cut ) .
It 's quite peculiar.And newer cases have that problem , too .
I 'd wager up through about 3-4 years ago there were a number which would do a number on you before you knew it .
The 'extraneous ' thin-punched metal parts ( eg .
a metal shield for an unused drive bay or frill RF shielding where you really did n't need it , etc .
) has been a problem long after they fixed the " punched steel is sharp " problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Computer case cuts are the worst.
I've currently got... 5, all in visible states of healing, that I have acquired in the last couple weeks.They're kind of an anomaly, really.
I've got knives sharp enough to shave with, and I've cut myself with all sorts of things.
But outside of a computer case, I've never been cut and not noticed it.
With a computer case, I'll sometimes cut a huge gash in my hand and notice the wet sensation before any discomfort (or feel the sharpness of the cut).
It's quite peculiar.And newer cases have that problem, too.
I'd wager up through about 3-4 years ago there were a number which would do a number on you before you knew it.
The 'extraneous' thin-punched metal parts (eg.
a metal shield for an unused drive bay or frill RF shielding where you really didn't need it, etc.
) has been a problem long after they fixed the "punched steel is sharp" problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337261</id>
	<title>Re:worst: sharp unfinished inside edges in cheap c</title>
	<author>sootman</author>
	<datestamp>1245089880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I heard that beige was chosen because it is the same color as most dust so beige computers don't look dirty.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I heard that beige was chosen because it is the same color as most dust so beige computers do n't look dirty .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I heard that beige was chosen because it is the same color as most dust so beige computers don't look dirty.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336209</id>
	<title>Re:If we started again, today</title>
	<author>Dragonslicer</author>
	<datestamp>1245085200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Are you suggesting that these are things computers should have, or things that would be design mistakes? I would think that having the parts of the OS that are read-often/write-rarely in flash memory would be a good thing, but having no user-accessible parts would be very bad. A unique machine identifier would be okay if it were never transmitted over the network, but making it part of the networking protocols would be just as ineffective as assuming that MAC addresses are unique and perfect identifiers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you suggesting that these are things computers should have , or things that would be design mistakes ?
I would think that having the parts of the OS that are read-often/write-rarely in flash memory would be a good thing , but having no user-accessible parts would be very bad .
A unique machine identifier would be okay if it were never transmitted over the network , but making it part of the networking protocols would be just as ineffective as assuming that MAC addresses are unique and perfect identifiers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you suggesting that these are things computers should have, or things that would be design mistakes?
I would think that having the parts of the OS that are read-often/write-rarely in flash memory would be a good thing, but having no user-accessible parts would be very bad.
A unique machine identifier would be okay if it were never transmitted over the network, but making it part of the networking protocols would be just as ineffective as assuming that MAC addresses are unique and perfect identifiers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335429</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335875</id>
	<title>slashdotted after the first page</title>
	<author>FudRucker</author>
	<datestamp>1245083820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>hmm, they must have been running the webserver on that Apple III and it burnt to a crisp</htmltext>
<tokenext>hmm , they must have been running the webserver on that Apple III and it burnt to a crisp</tokentext>
<sentencetext>hmm, they must have been running the webserver on that Apple III and it burnt to a crisp</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28344049</id>
	<title>Re:The Amiga</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245084240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The real advantage the Amiga had was that it supported TRUE pre-emptive multitasking, something PCs still cannot really do well today.  And it did it all with a 7.2MHz CPU, not a 2200MHz CPU.  Which is why here, in the year 2009, on a dual 1.8GHz cpu machine, I can watch the cursor just hang while I type for a few seconds at a time while some non-critical process steals all the cpu time.  On an Amiga, I'd never see that happen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The real advantage the Amiga had was that it supported TRUE pre-emptive multitasking , something PCs still can not really do well today .
And it did it all with a 7.2MHz CPU , not a 2200MHz CPU .
Which is why here , in the year 2009 , on a dual 1.8GHz cpu machine , I can watch the cursor just hang while I type for a few seconds at a time while some non-critical process steals all the cpu time .
On an Amiga , I 'd never see that happen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The real advantage the Amiga had was that it supported TRUE pre-emptive multitasking, something PCs still cannot really do well today.
And it did it all with a 7.2MHz CPU, not a 2200MHz CPU.
Which is why here, in the year 2009, on a dual 1.8GHz cpu machine, I can watch the cursor just hang while I type for a few seconds at a time while some non-critical process steals all the cpu time.
On an Amiga, I'd never see that happen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337677</id>
	<title>Re: The 15 problems</title>
	<author>pete\_norm</author>
	<datestamp>1245091860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do what i did... Change the setting of the power button to "Hibernate". When you go to sleep, just push the little button... Problem solved. No more flashing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do what i did... Change the setting of the power button to " Hibernate " .
When you go to sleep , just push the little button... Problem solved .
No more flashing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do what i did... Change the setting of the power button to "Hibernate".
When you go to sleep, just push the little button... Problem solved.
No more flashing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336199</id>
	<title>Biggest Design Mistake on Webpages, including TFA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245085140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Next Page Button.</p><p>Put the Article on ONE fscking page, not 4 !</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Next Page Button.Put the Article on ONE fscking page , not 4 !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Next Page Button.Put the Article on ONE fscking page, not 4 !</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335803</id>
	<title>PCjr</title>
	<author>cdrguru</author>
	<datestamp>1245083580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The biggest single problem with the PCjr was that it was late.  In 1984 it was supposed to be on the shelf in the fall - October is the usual month when things are supposed to be shipped so they are stocked and on the shelf in November.</p><p>Didn't happen.  Macy's had received $50,000 to hold shelf space for the PCjr and they left them empty.</p><p>The PCjr came out in February.  A little late for Christmas.  Everyone had created products for Christmas 84 specifically for the PCjr, but there wasn't anything to run them on.  January 1985 CES was pretty dead - lots of PCJr games that nobody cared about.  Parker Brothers closed down their electronic games division, as did lots of other companies right about then.  It was a year or so later that the Nintendo finally started making inroads into the home game market but between the PCjr and Nintendo things were very, very dead.</p><p>You can say all you want about a poor design of the keyboard and limitations of the hardware.  But it is even more difficult to use when it doesn't exist and cannot be purchased.  Not having it in time killed it, not any stupid design decisions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The biggest single problem with the PCjr was that it was late .
In 1984 it was supposed to be on the shelf in the fall - October is the usual month when things are supposed to be shipped so they are stocked and on the shelf in November.Did n't happen .
Macy 's had received $ 50,000 to hold shelf space for the PCjr and they left them empty.The PCjr came out in February .
A little late for Christmas .
Everyone had created products for Christmas 84 specifically for the PCjr , but there was n't anything to run them on .
January 1985 CES was pretty dead - lots of PCJr games that nobody cared about .
Parker Brothers closed down their electronic games division , as did lots of other companies right about then .
It was a year or so later that the Nintendo finally started making inroads into the home game market but between the PCjr and Nintendo things were very , very dead.You can say all you want about a poor design of the keyboard and limitations of the hardware .
But it is even more difficult to use when it does n't exist and can not be purchased .
Not having it in time killed it , not any stupid design decisions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The biggest single problem with the PCjr was that it was late.
In 1984 it was supposed to be on the shelf in the fall - October is the usual month when things are supposed to be shipped so they are stocked and on the shelf in November.Didn't happen.
Macy's had received $50,000 to hold shelf space for the PCjr and they left them empty.The PCjr came out in February.
A little late for Christmas.
Everyone had created products for Christmas 84 specifically for the PCjr, but there wasn't anything to run them on.
January 1985 CES was pretty dead - lots of PCJr games that nobody cared about.
Parker Brothers closed down their electronic games division, as did lots of other companies right about then.
It was a year or so later that the Nintendo finally started making inroads into the home game market but between the PCjr and Nintendo things were very, very dead.You can say all you want about a poor design of the keyboard and limitations of the hardware.
But it is even more difficult to use when it doesn't exist and cannot be purchased.
Not having it in time killed it, not any stupid design decisions.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336185</id>
	<title>Re:Worst Mistake That Still Needs Fixing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245085080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, DisplayPort isn't proprietary, it's the successor to DVI.  Mini-DisplayPort is part of the VESA specification and is entirely royalty-free.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , DisplayPort is n't proprietary , it 's the successor to DVI .
Mini-DisplayPort is part of the VESA specification and is entirely royalty-free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, DisplayPort isn't proprietary, it's the successor to DVI.
Mini-DisplayPort is part of the VESA specification and is entirely royalty-free.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28344219</id>
	<title>Re: The 15 problems</title>
	<author>chthonicdaemon</author>
	<datestamp>1245085920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I hear that -- I just got two new LG LCDs and the blue power lights are incredibly bright and aimed forward, so I had to cover them with a piece of tape.  I don't see how this could get past testing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hear that -- I just got two new LG LCDs and the blue power lights are incredibly bright and aimed forward , so I had to cover them with a piece of tape .
I do n't see how this could get past testing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hear that -- I just got two new LG LCDs and the blue power lights are incredibly bright and aimed forward, so I had to cover them with a piece of tape.
I don't see how this could get past testing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28345755</id>
	<title>Re:What , you mean like the Mac , Amiga, Atari ST?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245150000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Mac did not have competition in the form of PC compatibles to drive its development around, and Atari/Amiga did not have the resources to further develop their platforms.</p><p>If IBM had chosen the 68000, and assuming PC clones were allowed, we would have stable 32 bit OSes around 1990, instead of 2000.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Mac did not have competition in the form of PC compatibles to drive its development around , and Atari/Amiga did not have the resources to further develop their platforms.If IBM had chosen the 68000 , and assuming PC clones were allowed , we would have stable 32 bit OSes around 1990 , instead of 2000 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Mac did not have competition in the form of PC compatibles to drive its development around, and Atari/Amiga did not have the resources to further develop their platforms.If IBM had chosen the 68000, and assuming PC clones were allowed, we would have stable 32 bit OSes around 1990, instead of 2000.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335931</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338971</id>
	<title>Re:CapsLock</title>
	<author>mrt\_2394871</author>
	<datestamp>1245096960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For those using Windows, the "Togglekeys" Accessibility Option makes your computer beep at you when you ACCIDENTALLY HIT A nUM, cAPS OR sCROLL lOCK KEY, thus preventing you from shouting at the world.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For those using Windows , the " Togglekeys " Accessibility Option makes your computer beep at you when you ACCIDENTALLY HIT A nUM , cAPS OR sCROLL lOCK KEY , thus preventing you from shouting at the world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For those using Windows, the "Togglekeys" Accessibility Option makes your computer beep at you when you ACCIDENTALLY HIT A nUM, cAPS OR sCROLL lOCK KEY, thus preventing you from shouting at the world.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375</id>
	<title>Re: The 15 problems</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245081780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Problem #16: Blindingly intense blue LED on my new Dell that blinks when the computer is asleep.</p><p>All night long the computer constantly warns me: "I'm asleep.  I'm asleep.  I'm asleep."  It's like Homer Simpson's "everything is OK" alarm.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Problem # 16 : Blindingly intense blue LED on my new Dell that blinks when the computer is asleep.All night long the computer constantly warns me : " I 'm asleep .
I 'm asleep .
I 'm asleep .
" It 's like Homer Simpson 's " everything is OK " alarm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Problem #16: Blindingly intense blue LED on my new Dell that blinks when the computer is asleep.All night long the computer constantly warns me: "I'm asleep.
I'm asleep.
I'm asleep.
"  It's like Homer Simpson's "everything is OK" alarm.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339777</id>
	<title>Re:No standard connectors in 1983</title>
	<author>evilviper</author>
	<datestamp>1245056760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>People, this is 1983. All connectors were "non-standard".</p></div></blockquote><p>What?  I've got terminals from the 70s with 25-pin RS-232 connectors that work fine with modern PCs with standard wiring.  So you're off by about a decade and a half there...</p><blockquote><div><p>So making cables that would connect some random computer to some random modem or serial printer was a serious black art.</p></div></blockquote><p>Not really.  The usual 3 pins did 99\% of everything.  Of course there will always edge cases, even with "standards".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>People , this is 1983 .
All connectors were " non-standard " .What ?
I 've got terminals from the 70s with 25-pin RS-232 connectors that work fine with modern PCs with standard wiring .
So you 're off by about a decade and a half there...So making cables that would connect some random computer to some random modem or serial printer was a serious black art.Not really .
The usual 3 pins did 99 \ % of everything .
Of course there will always edge cases , even with " standards " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People, this is 1983.
All connectors were "non-standard".What?
I've got terminals from the 70s with 25-pin RS-232 connectors that work fine with modern PCs with standard wiring.
So you're off by about a decade and a half there...So making cables that would connect some random computer to some random modem or serial printer was a serious black art.Not really.
The usual 3 pins did 99\% of everything.
Of course there will always edge cases, even with "standards".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28340175</id>
	<title>Re:The Amiga</title>
	<author>ogdenk</author>
	<datestamp>1245058200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had an Atari ST and used to make similar arguments.  The ST was pretty cool as well.  The simple fact is.... nobody really cares.</p><p>Maybe if they came back and made an Amiga covered in chrome with an 8" exhaust tip and some "No Fear" stickers, people would give a crap.  Throw in some buzzwords like "Multitouch" and you'll have a winner.  It's not technological marvels and engineering that sells computers, it's marketing departments and sales monkeys.</p><p>The fact that Windows 2000/XP is on near everyone's desktop despite being riddled with flaws in nearly every OS component over the years should be blatant evidence.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had an Atari ST and used to make similar arguments .
The ST was pretty cool as well .
The simple fact is.... nobody really cares.Maybe if they came back and made an Amiga covered in chrome with an 8 " exhaust tip and some " No Fear " stickers , people would give a crap .
Throw in some buzzwords like " Multitouch " and you 'll have a winner .
It 's not technological marvels and engineering that sells computers , it 's marketing departments and sales monkeys.The fact that Windows 2000/XP is on near everyone 's desktop despite being riddled with flaws in nearly every OS component over the years should be blatant evidence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had an Atari ST and used to make similar arguments.
The ST was pretty cool as well.
The simple fact is.... nobody really cares.Maybe if they came back and made an Amiga covered in chrome with an 8" exhaust tip and some "No Fear" stickers, people would give a crap.
Throw in some buzzwords like "Multitouch" and you'll have a winner.
It's not technological marvels and engineering that sells computers, it's marketing departments and sales monkeys.The fact that Windows 2000/XP is on near everyone's desktop despite being riddled with flaws in nearly every OS component over the years should be blatant evidence.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335893</id>
	<title>Re:Worst Mistake That Still Needs Fixing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245083940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>shit, i just modded you offtopic by mistake... meant to hit 'interesting.' So that means I have to reply in here just so it will undo my mod.<br> <br> anyway, totally agree about the mini-display port.</htmltext>
<tokenext>shit , i just modded you offtopic by mistake... meant to hit 'interesting .
' So that means I have to reply in here just so it will undo my mod .
anyway , totally agree about the mini-display port .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>shit, i just modded you offtopic by mistake... meant to hit 'interesting.
' So that means I have to reply in here just so it will undo my mod.
anyway, totally agree about the mini-display port.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28344133</id>
	<title>Re: The 15 problems</title>
	<author>BeaverCleaver</author>
	<datestamp>1245084960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Amen to that. High-intensity LEDs are cool technology, but whatever form-over-function "designer" decreed that bright blue LEDs are a must-have in every product (to make it look "high-tech") should be savagely beaten.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Amen to that .
High-intensity LEDs are cool technology , but whatever form-over-function " designer " decreed that bright blue LEDs are a must-have in every product ( to make it look " high-tech " ) should be savagely beaten .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Amen to that.
High-intensity LEDs are cool technology, but whatever form-over-function "designer" decreed that bright blue LEDs are a must-have in every product (to make it look "high-tech") should be savagely beaten.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339697</id>
	<title>Re:Not 'classic', but still...</title>
	<author>Khashishi</author>
	<datestamp>1245056460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>or liquid nitrogen cooling: <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUc6znC848o" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUc6znC848o</a> [youtube.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>or liquid nitrogen cooling : http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = zUc6znC848o [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>or liquid nitrogen cooling: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUc6znC848o [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337111</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336695</id>
	<title>Cooling, so simple yet so hard.</title>
	<author>miffo.swe</author>
	<datestamp>1245087240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The worst design decision in my mind is having the hot stuff inside the computer case. It would be very simple to cool the hot parts outside the case. The CPU is easiest, just put the CPU on the backside of the motherboard and have its hot side easily accesible on the outside. That way most CPU would be sufficiantly cooled by passive cooling given a large enough dissipating area. An added benefit would be that it wouldnt be heating the rest of the computer up.</p><p>Same goes for graphics, especially the kind that just tosses the same hot air around in the case. Its no wonder a modern computer is hard to cool silently since most of the cooling happens in a very hot enviroment and has very low delta T to operate in.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The worst design decision in my mind is having the hot stuff inside the computer case .
It would be very simple to cool the hot parts outside the case .
The CPU is easiest , just put the CPU on the backside of the motherboard and have its hot side easily accesible on the outside .
That way most CPU would be sufficiantly cooled by passive cooling given a large enough dissipating area .
An added benefit would be that it wouldnt be heating the rest of the computer up.Same goes for graphics , especially the kind that just tosses the same hot air around in the case .
Its no wonder a modern computer is hard to cool silently since most of the cooling happens in a very hot enviroment and has very low delta T to operate in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The worst design decision in my mind is having the hot stuff inside the computer case.
It would be very simple to cool the hot parts outside the case.
The CPU is easiest, just put the CPU on the backside of the motherboard and have its hot side easily accesible on the outside.
That way most CPU would be sufficiantly cooled by passive cooling given a large enough dissipating area.
An added benefit would be that it wouldnt be heating the rest of the computer up.Same goes for graphics, especially the kind that just tosses the same hot air around in the case.
Its no wonder a modern computer is hard to cool silently since most of the cooling happens in a very hot enviroment and has very low delta T to operate in.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336087</id>
	<title>Re:Apple Lisa</title>
	<author>copponex</author>
	<datestamp>1245084720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a4BlmsN4q2I" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a4BlmsN4q2I</a> [youtube.com]</p><p>Start at minute 6:45.</p><p>Seems that you would pick a stack of paper - word processing, spreadsheet, graphing, etc. - and it would "tear off" a new page for a new document that you could put elsewhere.</p><p>It may be worth creating a newbie shell that hides many options with an option to go into "advanced" mode. The real endgame will be context sensitive interfaces that allow the computer to guess what you want to do, with an override for people who prefer to keep menus in the same place.</p><p>I think a good design is to have all features across the top via pulldowns, and contextual options at the bottom that you can just turn off if you like.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = a4BlmsN4q2I [ youtube.com ] Start at minute 6 : 45.Seems that you would pick a stack of paper - word processing , spreadsheet , graphing , etc .
- and it would " tear off " a new page for a new document that you could put elsewhere.It may be worth creating a newbie shell that hides many options with an option to go into " advanced " mode .
The real endgame will be context sensitive interfaces that allow the computer to guess what you want to do , with an override for people who prefer to keep menus in the same place.I think a good design is to have all features across the top via pulldowns , and contextual options at the bottom that you can just turn off if you like .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a4BlmsN4q2I [youtube.com]Start at minute 6:45.Seems that you would pick a stack of paper - word processing, spreadsheet, graphing, etc.
- and it would "tear off" a new page for a new document that you could put elsewhere.It may be worth creating a newbie shell that hides many options with an option to go into "advanced" mode.
The real endgame will be context sensitive interfaces that allow the computer to guess what you want to do, with an override for people who prefer to keep menus in the same place.I think a good design is to have all features across the top via pulldowns, and contextual options at the bottom that you can just turn off if you like.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335575</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335733</id>
	<title>Re:#1 failure...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245083340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wasn't around at the time - not in a position to buy computers anyway - but i spoke to some people who were buying hardware at the time. They decided to go with Intel and Microsoft because of their dedication to backwards compatibility. They didn't want systems they couldn't upgrade without having to rewrite the software for them. Very simple.</p><p>If Intel hadn't stuck to backwards compatibility, most of the problems we see with x86 today would have gone. Even more so with Windows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was n't around at the time - not in a position to buy computers anyway - but i spoke to some people who were buying hardware at the time .
They decided to go with Intel and Microsoft because of their dedication to backwards compatibility .
They did n't want systems they could n't upgrade without having to rewrite the software for them .
Very simple.If Intel had n't stuck to backwards compatibility , most of the problems we see with x86 today would have gone .
Even more so with Windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wasn't around at the time - not in a position to buy computers anyway - but i spoke to some people who were buying hardware at the time.
They decided to go with Intel and Microsoft because of their dedication to backwards compatibility.
They didn't want systems they couldn't upgrade without having to rewrite the software for them.
Very simple.If Intel hadn't stuck to backwards compatibility, most of the problems we see with x86 today would have gone.
Even more so with Windows.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335445</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28345445</id>
	<title>Re:Sony VAIO desktop problem...</title>
	<author>CAIMLAS</author>
	<datestamp>1245144900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh, forget Sony. I'm wary of freaking <i>magnets</i> to this day. No, not because of that specific design flaw, but a magnet here or a magnet there... well, they have a way of mucking things up for CRTs and an ill-placed floppy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , forget Sony .
I 'm wary of freaking magnets to this day .
No , not because of that specific design flaw , but a magnet here or a magnet there... well , they have a way of mucking things up for CRTs and an ill-placed floppy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, forget Sony.
I'm wary of freaking magnets to this day.
No, not because of that specific design flaw, but a magnet here or a magnet there... well, they have a way of mucking things up for CRTs and an ill-placed floppy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335511</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28345099</id>
	<title>Re:#1 failure...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245183480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Umm, you don't know how close to the truth you are.  I was there, 1986 I believe, when a senior vp came to the IBM country club for a presentation and actually said "If God had wanted distributed processing, he would have put brains in our fingertips".  Of course, distributed processing back then meant that you did not hook into the mainframe but had a pc and a printer on your desk so you didn't have to rely on the mainframe for general office tasks.

The senior executives at the time would not even entertain the thought of a pc; it was heresy at IBM to even mention that the mainframe might not be the platform of choice
for the unwashed masses.  Bill Gates, at the time, was thought a genius.  Little did we know how he stole code, intimidated vendors and frightened the IBM executives with monopolistic threats (re:  Ramsey Clark) .  Now he is just the antiChrist.

Now that I'm out of software and have become a user, I agree with cdn-programmer.  Microsoft's days are numbered; their rehashes of the iPod, search engines and their attempt to create
an iPhone knockoff are truly pathetic.   And I really don't have time to dick with Microsoft's errors and their creepy software apps.  Apple and Linux are the only choices left for the small business owner who wants reliable, inexpensive software that actually performs as advertised.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Umm , you do n't know how close to the truth you are .
I was there , 1986 I believe , when a senior vp came to the IBM country club for a presentation and actually said " If God had wanted distributed processing , he would have put brains in our fingertips " .
Of course , distributed processing back then meant that you did not hook into the mainframe but had a pc and a printer on your desk so you did n't have to rely on the mainframe for general office tasks .
The senior executives at the time would not even entertain the thought of a pc ; it was heresy at IBM to even mention that the mainframe might not be the platform of choice for the unwashed masses .
Bill Gates , at the time , was thought a genius .
Little did we know how he stole code , intimidated vendors and frightened the IBM executives with monopolistic threats ( re : Ramsey Clark ) .
Now he is just the antiChrist .
Now that I 'm out of software and have become a user , I agree with cdn-programmer .
Microsoft 's days are numbered ; their rehashes of the iPod , search engines and their attempt to create an iPhone knockoff are truly pathetic .
And I really do n't have time to dick with Microsoft 's errors and their creepy software apps .
Apple and Linux are the only choices left for the small business owner who wants reliable , inexpensive software that actually performs as advertised .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Umm, you don't know how close to the truth you are.
I was there, 1986 I believe, when a senior vp came to the IBM country club for a presentation and actually said "If God had wanted distributed processing, he would have put brains in our fingertips".
Of course, distributed processing back then meant that you did not hook into the mainframe but had a pc and a printer on your desk so you didn't have to rely on the mainframe for general office tasks.
The senior executives at the time would not even entertain the thought of a pc; it was heresy at IBM to even mention that the mainframe might not be the platform of choice
for the unwashed masses.
Bill Gates, at the time, was thought a genius.
Little did we know how he stole code, intimidated vendors and frightened the IBM executives with monopolistic threats (re:  Ramsey Clark) .
Now he is just the antiChrist.
Now that I'm out of software and have become a user, I agree with cdn-programmer.
Microsoft's days are numbered; their rehashes of the iPod, search engines and their attempt to create
an iPhone knockoff are truly pathetic.
And I really don't have time to dick with Microsoft's errors and their creepy software apps.
Apple and Linux are the only choices left for the small business owner who wants reliable, inexpensive software that actually performs as advertised.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335445</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335585</id>
	<title>deja vue all over again in smart phones</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245082800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Smart phones are current decade's generation of personal computing like PDAs were in the 90s, and PCs in the 80s.  We see some of the same trade-offs between of proprietary vs openess, short-cutting essential hardware features, clunky GUIs, etc we saw in the 80s.  Will Apple's clean, but proprietary SDK win over the more portable, but clunky Android?  Does a darkhouse OS like the new Pre, Windows ME, or micro-Java stand a chance?  Will non-keyboard phones win over keyboard phones? And so on.  Some of these debates have clear answers and others we are waiting for the market to decide.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Smart phones are current decade 's generation of personal computing like PDAs were in the 90s , and PCs in the 80s .
We see some of the same trade-offs between of proprietary vs openess , short-cutting essential hardware features , clunky GUIs , etc we saw in the 80s .
Will Apple 's clean , but proprietary SDK win over the more portable , but clunky Android ?
Does a darkhouse OS like the new Pre , Windows ME , or micro-Java stand a chance ?
Will non-keyboard phones win over keyboard phones ?
And so on .
Some of these debates have clear answers and others we are waiting for the market to decide .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Smart phones are current decade's generation of personal computing like PDAs were in the 90s, and PCs in the 80s.
We see some of the same trade-offs between of proprietary vs openess, short-cutting essential hardware features, clunky GUIs, etc we saw in the 80s.
Will Apple's clean, but proprietary SDK win over the more portable, but clunky Android?
Does a darkhouse OS like the new Pre, Windows ME, or micro-Java stand a chance?
Will non-keyboard phones win over keyboard phones?
And so on.
Some of these debates have clear answers and others we are waiting for the market to decide.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28342885</id>
	<title>Re:worst: sharp unfinished inside edges in cheap c</title>
	<author>AceofSpades19</author>
	<datestamp>1245073740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>My personal list...</p><p>- 15 to 10 years ago, you had to be careful when installing drives, or RAM.  You could almost slice your hand on a cheap case that had unfinished and sharp edges.</p><p>- Beige Only. You can pick any color, as long as it is beige. Why did it take so bloody long to offer any other color then beige? Critical mass?</p><p>- LOUD systems.  Have to thank George for showing me just how nice a quiet system is.</p><p>- Power hunger systems.  2 molex connections for a GPU ?!</p><p>- Crap 3D Video cards in laptops, and almost no benchmarks from the "classic" hardware review sites so you know how bad it sucks compared to a "real" GPU. (Thankfully the S3 Virge is gone from desktops, but laptops are still stuck with poor performance unless you pay an arm and a leg.)</p><p>
What is the point of buying a laptop with a powerful graphics card when its going to suck the battery life right out of it?</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>My personal list...- 15 to 10 years ago , you had to be careful when installing drives , or RAM .
You could almost slice your hand on a cheap case that had unfinished and sharp edges.- Beige Only .
You can pick any color , as long as it is beige .
Why did it take so bloody long to offer any other color then beige ?
Critical mass ? - LOUD systems .
Have to thank George for showing me just how nice a quiet system is.- Power hunger systems .
2 molex connections for a GPU ?
! - Crap 3D Video cards in laptops , and almost no benchmarks from the " classic " hardware review sites so you know how bad it sucks compared to a " real " GPU .
( Thankfully the S3 Virge is gone from desktops , but laptops are still stuck with poor performance unless you pay an arm and a leg .
) What is the point of buying a laptop with a powerful graphics card when its going to suck the battery life right out of it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My personal list...- 15 to 10 years ago, you had to be careful when installing drives, or RAM.
You could almost slice your hand on a cheap case that had unfinished and sharp edges.- Beige Only.
You can pick any color, as long as it is beige.
Why did it take so bloody long to offer any other color then beige?
Critical mass?- LOUD systems.
Have to thank George for showing me just how nice a quiet system is.- Power hunger systems.
2 molex connections for a GPU ?
!- Crap 3D Video cards in laptops, and almost no benchmarks from the "classic" hardware review sites so you know how bad it sucks compared to a "real" GPU.
(Thankfully the S3 Virge is gone from desktops, but laptops are still stuck with poor performance unless you pay an arm and a leg.
)
What is the point of buying a laptop with a powerful graphics card when its going to suck the battery life right out of it?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336405</id>
	<title>Re:worst: sharp unfinished inside edges in cheap c</title>
	<author>jandrese</author>
	<datestamp>1245085980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm sure there is a special place in hell for knockoff case manufacturers who didn't file down or round off the edges of their cases.  Presumably they'll be forced to replace components in their own cases for eternity.<br>
<br>
Two power leads for a GPU is the inevitable result of the graphics arms race that has caused video cards to outrace virtually every other component of the system.  Just be glad you don't have to plug in an external power supply.  That said, if you have a problem set that can be solved by a GPGPU, you'll get it done [b]way[/b] faster than you would have if you had just thrown a basic CPU at it.  Modern GPUs are practically tiny supercomputers that almost anybody can afford.<br>
<br>
My rule of thumb when looking at video cards is this:  If it's Intel it's crap, just total crap.  Don't buy it unless you really know for sure that you'll never want to do anything 3D.  Otherwise, look at the second digit in the model number, the lower that number is the slower the card will be.  Anything 4 or less is going to be slow, but still miles better than the Intel card.  It doesn't always work, but typically it works reasonably well.  Just be aware that you can't put a fast card in a small laptop and not melt the thing down and reduce the battery life to mere minutes.  The smaller a laptop is, the slower the graphics will be in general.  If you want fast graphics, you'll be stuck buying a huge heavy clunker that will make you wonder why you didn't just buy the tower instead unfortunately.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure there is a special place in hell for knockoff case manufacturers who did n't file down or round off the edges of their cases .
Presumably they 'll be forced to replace components in their own cases for eternity .
Two power leads for a GPU is the inevitable result of the graphics arms race that has caused video cards to outrace virtually every other component of the system .
Just be glad you do n't have to plug in an external power supply .
That said , if you have a problem set that can be solved by a GPGPU , you 'll get it done [ b ] way [ /b ] faster than you would have if you had just thrown a basic CPU at it .
Modern GPUs are practically tiny supercomputers that almost anybody can afford .
My rule of thumb when looking at video cards is this : If it 's Intel it 's crap , just total crap .
Do n't buy it unless you really know for sure that you 'll never want to do anything 3D .
Otherwise , look at the second digit in the model number , the lower that number is the slower the card will be .
Anything 4 or less is going to be slow , but still miles better than the Intel card .
It does n't always work , but typically it works reasonably well .
Just be aware that you ca n't put a fast card in a small laptop and not melt the thing down and reduce the battery life to mere minutes .
The smaller a laptop is , the slower the graphics will be in general .
If you want fast graphics , you 'll be stuck buying a huge heavy clunker that will make you wonder why you did n't just buy the tower instead unfortunately .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure there is a special place in hell for knockoff case manufacturers who didn't file down or round off the edges of their cases.
Presumably they'll be forced to replace components in their own cases for eternity.
Two power leads for a GPU is the inevitable result of the graphics arms race that has caused video cards to outrace virtually every other component of the system.
Just be glad you don't have to plug in an external power supply.
That said, if you have a problem set that can be solved by a GPGPU, you'll get it done [b]way[/b] faster than you would have if you had just thrown a basic CPU at it.
Modern GPUs are practically tiny supercomputers that almost anybody can afford.
My rule of thumb when looking at video cards is this:  If it's Intel it's crap, just total crap.
Don't buy it unless you really know for sure that you'll never want to do anything 3D.
Otherwise, look at the second digit in the model number, the lower that number is the slower the card will be.
Anything 4 or less is going to be slow, but still miles better than the Intel card.
It doesn't always work, but typically it works reasonably well.
Just be aware that you can't put a fast card in a small laptop and not melt the thing down and reduce the battery life to mere minutes.
The smaller a laptop is, the slower the graphics will be in general.
If you want fast graphics, you'll be stuck buying a huge heavy clunker that will make you wonder why you didn't just buy the tower instead unfortunately.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335323</id>
	<title>Big ISA bus flaw</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245081540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IOCHRDY signal is active high instead of active low.  Causes no end of problems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IOCHRDY signal is active high instead of active low .
Causes no end of problems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IOCHRDY signal is active high instead of active low.
Causes no end of problems.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335753</id>
	<title>In the defense industry...</title>
	<author>sean.peters</author>
	<datestamp>1245083400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... you have to type a lot of acronyms (and not in TeX, either). Also, strength has nothing to do with the use of CapsLock... the point is having to avoid constantly shifting from the left Shift key to the right Shift key as you type a passage in all caps. </p><p>You can have my CAPSLOCK key when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... you have to type a lot of acronyms ( and not in TeX , either ) .
Also , strength has nothing to do with the use of CapsLock... the point is having to avoid constantly shifting from the left Shift key to the right Shift key as you type a passage in all caps .
You can have my CAPSLOCK key when you pry it from my cold , dead fingers !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... you have to type a lot of acronyms (and not in TeX, either).
Also, strength has nothing to do with the use of CapsLock... the point is having to avoid constantly shifting from the left Shift key to the right Shift key as you type a passage in all caps.
You can have my CAPSLOCK key when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338141</id>
	<title>OS choice</title>
	<author>Gothmolly</author>
	<datestamp>1245093900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unix existed when they wrote DOS.   Inexcusable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unix existed when they wrote DOS .
Inexcusable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unix existed when they wrote DOS.
Inexcusable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337027</id>
	<title>Zenith</title>
	<author>coolmoose25</author>
	<datestamp>1245088740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>One of my favorites was the Zenith PC compatible... It came with floppy disk drives with the traditional "fold down" switch like most floppy drives of the day.  What was different was that the switch wouldn't fold down unless there was a floppy in the drive.  So the lab at school I worked in had dozens of drives with broken latches that had been forced closed without a floppy in the drive.  Dumb.</htmltext>
<tokenext>One of my favorites was the Zenith PC compatible... It came with floppy disk drives with the traditional " fold down " switch like most floppy drives of the day .
What was different was that the switch would n't fold down unless there was a floppy in the drive .
So the lab at school I worked in had dozens of drives with broken latches that had been forced closed without a floppy in the drive .
Dumb .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of my favorites was the Zenith PC compatible... It came with floppy disk drives with the traditional "fold down" switch like most floppy drives of the day.
What was different was that the switch wouldn't fold down unless there was a floppy in the drive.
So the lab at school I worked in had dozens of drives with broken latches that had been forced closed without a floppy in the drive.
Dumb.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336909</id>
	<title>Apple FileWare</title>
	<author>Tetsujin</author>
	<datestamp>1245088260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <i>Problem #4: EM Pulse Erases Tapes</i> </p><p>Hardly a design mistake.  Its more a lack of testing mistake.</p></div><p>No, pretty sure that's a design mistake.  The lack of testing is just the reason they didn't <em>find and correct</em> the problem...</p><p><div class="quote"><p> <i>Problem #6: Rubber Keyboard</i> </p><p>It didn't hurt the Sinclair ZX Spectrum's sales too much.  I'd say the same thing about most PC keyboards sold today but it comes down to money.  $6 for a cheap rubbery key keyboard or $75 for a clicky microswitch keyboard.. most people aren't prepared to pay the extra.</p></div><p>There's a huge difference between a rubber membrane keyboard <em>with plastic keycaps</em> and one without...  As for the ZX Spectrum - whether the thing was popular or not I wouldn't exactly say people were happy about that keyboard...</p><p><div class="quote"><p> <i>Problem #15: Unreliable Proprietary Disk Drives</i> </p><p>I'd say all disk drives are proprietary until they become a standard.  If the machine had been a success i'm sure everyone would have licensed it.</p></div><p>Back then each platform would usually have its own format for data on the disk, and all of these were incompatible.  However, the <em>media itself</em> was generally compatible between platforms.  If you had a 5.25" single-density drive, then you went to the store and bought yourself a 5.25" single-density disk and formatted it at home.</p><p>The Lisa used a new type of 5.25" disk developed internally at apple - it wasn't compatible with anything.  It probably cost Apple a bundle to develop it, and the drives apparently were difficult to produce.  All of this could have still worked out - people could have accepted the trade-off of a non-standard disk media in exchange for the increased capacity - except that in the end the drives were unreliable.  It doesn't matter how much data a drive holds if it's always at risk of corrupting the data.</p><p>And then, if you look at these disks - it seems like they'd be real confusing for users, too.  When you're holding a FileWare disk to insert it, you have to hold one of the corners: because the end that's being inserted into the drive and the end facing you <em>both</em> have exposed disk tracks.  If somebody grabbed the media as they would a regular 5.25" disk, they'd fingerprint the media.</p><p>So the issue there wasn't just that you were stuck with this crappy drive and couldn't swap it out for something else.  The issue there was that Apple put a bundle into trying to make a better floppy drive and tied the Lisa platform (and the Mac, too, while it was still under development) to this standard - and they didn't make it work right.  The whole thing was a fiasco - a disaster from any reasonable perspective.  It probably contributed to the failure of the Lisa and it could have potentially killed the Mac as well.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Problem # 4 : EM Pulse Erases Tapes Hardly a design mistake .
Its more a lack of testing mistake.No , pretty sure that 's a design mistake .
The lack of testing is just the reason they did n't find and correct the problem... Problem # 6 : Rubber Keyboard It did n't hurt the Sinclair ZX Spectrum 's sales too much .
I 'd say the same thing about most PC keyboards sold today but it comes down to money .
$ 6 for a cheap rubbery key keyboard or $ 75 for a clicky microswitch keyboard.. most people are n't prepared to pay the extra.There 's a huge difference between a rubber membrane keyboard with plastic keycaps and one without... As for the ZX Spectrum - whether the thing was popular or not I would n't exactly say people were happy about that keyboard... Problem # 15 : Unreliable Proprietary Disk Drives I 'd say all disk drives are proprietary until they become a standard .
If the machine had been a success i 'm sure everyone would have licensed it.Back then each platform would usually have its own format for data on the disk , and all of these were incompatible .
However , the media itself was generally compatible between platforms .
If you had a 5.25 " single-density drive , then you went to the store and bought yourself a 5.25 " single-density disk and formatted it at home.The Lisa used a new type of 5.25 " disk developed internally at apple - it was n't compatible with anything .
It probably cost Apple a bundle to develop it , and the drives apparently were difficult to produce .
All of this could have still worked out - people could have accepted the trade-off of a non-standard disk media in exchange for the increased capacity - except that in the end the drives were unreliable .
It does n't matter how much data a drive holds if it 's always at risk of corrupting the data.And then , if you look at these disks - it seems like they 'd be real confusing for users , too .
When you 're holding a FileWare disk to insert it , you have to hold one of the corners : because the end that 's being inserted into the drive and the end facing you both have exposed disk tracks .
If somebody grabbed the media as they would a regular 5.25 " disk , they 'd fingerprint the media.So the issue there was n't just that you were stuck with this crappy drive and could n't swap it out for something else .
The issue there was that Apple put a bundle into trying to make a better floppy drive and tied the Lisa platform ( and the Mac , too , while it was still under development ) to this standard - and they did n't make it work right .
The whole thing was a fiasco - a disaster from any reasonable perspective .
It probably contributed to the failure of the Lisa and it could have potentially killed the Mac as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Problem #4: EM Pulse Erases Tapes Hardly a design mistake.
Its more a lack of testing mistake.No, pretty sure that's a design mistake.
The lack of testing is just the reason they didn't find and correct the problem... Problem #6: Rubber Keyboard It didn't hurt the Sinclair ZX Spectrum's sales too much.
I'd say the same thing about most PC keyboards sold today but it comes down to money.
$6 for a cheap rubbery key keyboard or $75 for a clicky microswitch keyboard.. most people aren't prepared to pay the extra.There's a huge difference between a rubber membrane keyboard with plastic keycaps and one without...  As for the ZX Spectrum - whether the thing was popular or not I wouldn't exactly say people were happy about that keyboard... Problem #15: Unreliable Proprietary Disk Drives I'd say all disk drives are proprietary until they become a standard.
If the machine had been a success i'm sure everyone would have licensed it.Back then each platform would usually have its own format for data on the disk, and all of these were incompatible.
However, the media itself was generally compatible between platforms.
If you had a 5.25" single-density drive, then you went to the store and bought yourself a 5.25" single-density disk and formatted it at home.The Lisa used a new type of 5.25" disk developed internally at apple - it wasn't compatible with anything.
It probably cost Apple a bundle to develop it, and the drives apparently were difficult to produce.
All of this could have still worked out - people could have accepted the trade-off of a non-standard disk media in exchange for the increased capacity - except that in the end the drives were unreliable.
It doesn't matter how much data a drive holds if it's always at risk of corrupting the data.And then, if you look at these disks - it seems like they'd be real confusing for users, too.
When you're holding a FileWare disk to insert it, you have to hold one of the corners: because the end that's being inserted into the drive and the end facing you both have exposed disk tracks.
If somebody grabbed the media as they would a regular 5.25" disk, they'd fingerprint the media.So the issue there wasn't just that you were stuck with this crappy drive and couldn't swap it out for something else.
The issue there was that Apple put a bundle into trying to make a better floppy drive and tied the Lisa platform (and the Mac, too, while it was still under development) to this standard - and they didn't make it work right.
The whole thing was a fiasco - a disaster from any reasonable perspective.
It probably contributed to the failure of the Lisa and it could have potentially killed the Mac as well.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335485</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336415</id>
	<title>Re:The Amiga</title>
	<author>Mordaximus</author>
	<datestamp>1245086040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As was the Atari ST. Not trying to draw comparisons between the two systems, each had strengths and weaknesses. The point is there were a few very advanced and powerful systems around back in the day, and they likely only died out because EGA and speaker beeps was in offices everywhere.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As was the Atari ST. Not trying to draw comparisons between the two systems , each had strengths and weaknesses .
The point is there were a few very advanced and powerful systems around back in the day , and they likely only died out because EGA and speaker beeps was in offices everywhere .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As was the Atari ST. Not trying to draw comparisons between the two systems, each had strengths and weaknesses.
The point is there were a few very advanced and powerful systems around back in the day, and they likely only died out because EGA and speaker beeps was in offices everywhere.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28340719</id>
	<title>Re: The 15 problems</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245060240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>My roommate has an HP laptop.  He left it on once while I was trying to sleep, and I counted 20 blue LEDs and one or two orange ones.  Even when it is in standby there is a blinking blue LED that lights up the whole room, and a blue LED ring around the power connector that is bright enough to read a book by.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My roommate has an HP laptop .
He left it on once while I was trying to sleep , and I counted 20 blue LEDs and one or two orange ones .
Even when it is in standby there is a blinking blue LED that lights up the whole room , and a blue LED ring around the power connector that is bright enough to read a book by .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My roommate has an HP laptop.
He left it on once while I was trying to sleep, and I counted 20 blue LEDs and one or two orange ones.
Even when it is in standby there is a blinking blue LED that lights up the whole room, and a blue LED ring around the power connector that is bright enough to read a book by.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336339</id>
	<title>Re:General trend</title>
	<author>fermion</author>
	<datestamp>1245085620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I would say that and anything limited by current technology is a mistake.  The Apple<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/// not running Apple ][ software, that is like saying that MS Vista can't run Windows XP Software.  Sure, today with virtualization it sucks, but this is 25 years ago.  We just did not have full virtualization.  Apple<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/// was a good machine because it could run two OS, and, with a card, CP/m.  I never had any problem with my machine due to the lack of a fan.  When did computers get fans?  In a addition, does the author even know how much computer costs pre-Compaq?  And this Apple was introduced three years prior to the PC Jr.
<p>
Then, what about formatting disks.  Did we go around formatting disks in the early 80's.  I don't think so.  Most of the disks I bought were pre-formatted.  That was the norm.  I believe it was the norm from 8" to 3.5" disks.  I do know that I did order some unformatted bulk disks in the mid 80's, at the bargain basement price of $2 each, in current dollars.
</p><p>
Both the PC jr and lisa were victims of the disruptive technology of Compaq.  By clean room reverse engineering the IBM technology, and selling a less expensive computer(no one wold say cheap), they created a market in which even Compaq ultimately failed.  Soon cheap commodity computer parts were the norm, requiring a cheap commodity OS.  And speaking of commodity, standard I/O hardly existed until the  late 80's, and that which did, sucked.  The parallel port was good, but slow.  RS-232 was good, but unlike RS-422 it would only handle a single device.  We are still haunted by the relic of a keyboard and mouse requiring dedicated ports, and even some modern machines cannot read a keyboard from any USB port.  SCSI, a maligned as it is, at least was fast and provided plug and play functionality.
</p><p>
The rest of this is just evolving technology and philosophical idealism.  Not everyone who owns a computer wants to epand inside the box.  Honestly, those who did in the 80's built there own, often from parts bought from the back of BYTE.  Otherwise, we were just looking for a tool to run a program.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would say that and anything limited by current technology is a mistake .
The Apple /// not running Apple ] [ software , that is like saying that MS Vista ca n't run Windows XP Software .
Sure , today with virtualization it sucks , but this is 25 years ago .
We just did not have full virtualization .
Apple /// was a good machine because it could run two OS , and , with a card , CP/m .
I never had any problem with my machine due to the lack of a fan .
When did computers get fans ?
In a addition , does the author even know how much computer costs pre-Compaq ?
And this Apple was introduced three years prior to the PC Jr . Then , what about formatting disks .
Did we go around formatting disks in the early 80 's .
I do n't think so .
Most of the disks I bought were pre-formatted .
That was the norm .
I believe it was the norm from 8 " to 3.5 " disks .
I do know that I did order some unformatted bulk disks in the mid 80 's , at the bargain basement price of $ 2 each , in current dollars .
Both the PC jr and lisa were victims of the disruptive technology of Compaq .
By clean room reverse engineering the IBM technology , and selling a less expensive computer ( no one wold say cheap ) , they created a market in which even Compaq ultimately failed .
Soon cheap commodity computer parts were the norm , requiring a cheap commodity OS .
And speaking of commodity , standard I/O hardly existed until the late 80 's , and that which did , sucked .
The parallel port was good , but slow .
RS-232 was good , but unlike RS-422 it would only handle a single device .
We are still haunted by the relic of a keyboard and mouse requiring dedicated ports , and even some modern machines can not read a keyboard from any USB port .
SCSI , a maligned as it is , at least was fast and provided plug and play functionality .
The rest of this is just evolving technology and philosophical idealism .
Not everyone who owns a computer wants to epand inside the box .
Honestly , those who did in the 80 's built there own , often from parts bought from the back of BYTE .
Otherwise , we were just looking for a tool to run a program .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would say that and anything limited by current technology is a mistake.
The Apple /// not running Apple ][ software, that is like saying that MS Vista can't run Windows XP Software.
Sure, today with virtualization it sucks, but this is 25 years ago.
We just did not have full virtualization.
Apple /// was a good machine because it could run two OS, and, with a card, CP/m.
I never had any problem with my machine due to the lack of a fan.
When did computers get fans?
In a addition, does the author even know how much computer costs pre-Compaq?
And this Apple was introduced three years prior to the PC Jr.

Then, what about formatting disks.
Did we go around formatting disks in the early 80's.
I don't think so.
Most of the disks I bought were pre-formatted.
That was the norm.
I believe it was the norm from 8" to 3.5" disks.
I do know that I did order some unformatted bulk disks in the mid 80's, at the bargain basement price of $2 each, in current dollars.
Both the PC jr and lisa were victims of the disruptive technology of Compaq.
By clean room reverse engineering the IBM technology, and selling a less expensive computer(no one wold say cheap), they created a market in which even Compaq ultimately failed.
Soon cheap commodity computer parts were the norm, requiring a cheap commodity OS.
And speaking of commodity, standard I/O hardly existed until the  late 80's, and that which did, sucked.
The parallel port was good, but slow.
RS-232 was good, but unlike RS-422 it would only handle a single device.
We are still haunted by the relic of a keyboard and mouse requiring dedicated ports, and even some modern machines cannot read a keyboard from any USB port.
SCSI, a maligned as it is, at least was fast and provided plug and play functionality.
The rest of this is just evolving technology and philosophical idealism.
Not everyone who owns a computer wants to epand inside the box.
Honestly, those who did in the 80's built there own, often from parts bought from the back of BYTE.
Otherwise, we were just looking for a tool to run a program.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335301</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28342601</id>
	<title>Re:Low-tech solution</title>
	<author>pbhj</author>
	<datestamp>1245071460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a Samsung SyncMaster 226BW, the blue LED by the power button (bottom right) has a light guide around same power button. So I can't tape over it if I want to switch the machine on (it's a soft button so I can't leave it on and rely on my automatic power saving master-switch). The LED lights my whole kitchen! It's so bright that in low ambient light levels it interferes with the colour in teh bottom right of the panel.</p><p>If one can't tell, Samsung, that the panel is on by looking at the screen then it's not hard to press the switch. Also if an indicator light detracts from the performance of your hardware then you need to fire a product engineer every day until it gets fixed.</p><p>KTHXBI.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a Samsung SyncMaster 226BW , the blue LED by the power button ( bottom right ) has a light guide around same power button .
So I ca n't tape over it if I want to switch the machine on ( it 's a soft button so I ca n't leave it on and rely on my automatic power saving master-switch ) .
The LED lights my whole kitchen !
It 's so bright that in low ambient light levels it interferes with the colour in teh bottom right of the panel.If one ca n't tell , Samsung , that the panel is on by looking at the screen then it 's not hard to press the switch .
Also if an indicator light detracts from the performance of your hardware then you need to fire a product engineer every day until it gets fixed.KTHXBI .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a Samsung SyncMaster 226BW, the blue LED by the power button (bottom right) has a light guide around same power button.
So I can't tape over it if I want to switch the machine on (it's a soft button so I can't leave it on and rely on my automatic power saving master-switch).
The LED lights my whole kitchen!
It's so bright that in low ambient light levels it interferes with the colour in teh bottom right of the panel.If one can't tell, Samsung, that the panel is on by looking at the screen then it's not hard to press the switch.
Also if an indicator light detracts from the performance of your hardware then you need to fire a product engineer every day until it gets fixed.KTHXBI.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336325</id>
	<title>Re:Worst Mistake That Still Needs Fixing</title>
	<author>Mister Whirly</author>
	<datestamp>1245085620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Proprietary ports, whether open or closed specs, still suck.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Proprietary ports , whether open or closed specs , still suck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Proprietary ports, whether open or closed specs, still suck.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335681</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336883</id>
	<title>Re: The 15 problems</title>
	<author>Amazing Quantum Man</author>
	<datestamp>1245088140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have two DVD players that have a helpful little red LED that lets me know the device is off.</p><p>Seriously.  When I turn the player on, the LED goes off.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have two DVD players that have a helpful little red LED that lets me know the device is off.Seriously .
When I turn the player on , the LED goes off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have two DVD players that have a helpful little red LED that lets me know the device is off.Seriously.
When I turn the player on, the LED goes off.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338161</id>
	<title>Re:worst: sharp unfinished inside edges in cheap c</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245093960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>You could almost slice your hand on a cheap case</p></div></blockquote><p>
Almost? It's a well known fact that many computers require a blood sacrifice in order to work correctly.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You could almost slice your hand on a cheap case Almost ?
It 's a well known fact that many computers require a blood sacrifice in order to work correctly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You could almost slice your hand on a cheap case
Almost?
It's a well known fact that many computers require a blood sacrifice in order to work correctly.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336683
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_142</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336719
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338285
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336405
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_128</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336201
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336457
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_119</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336039
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335801
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338695
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339191
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335525
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336415
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_135</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335445
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339971
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_118</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336329
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336135
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_109</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335525
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336455
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335243
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28341797
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_100</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338253
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_125</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336087
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28340991
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335243
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336787
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335585
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337095
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_130</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335243
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336615
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336191
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339391
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_98</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335429
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337223
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335801
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28345141
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335801
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336227
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28341883
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339075
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335893
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337731
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_117</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335801
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336021
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28340513
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28342885
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_122</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335243
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337465
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335801
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337093
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337051
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_107</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335243
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336665
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335445
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335629
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28345715
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339201
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_112</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337677
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337439
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335825
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_140</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335763
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337373
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335525
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28344049
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336335
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335445
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336343
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28342601
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335803
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339469
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_139</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335683
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28342395
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338025
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335701
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337963
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28342159
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336883
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28340861
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_143</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335445
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28341445
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_104</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336925
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339285
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_129</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335445
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335709
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336187
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339697
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28344219
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337053
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_120</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336883
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28347641
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335445
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336141
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_111</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28340065
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_134</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28345239
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335243
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335475
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339083
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_110</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336187
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336901
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28344133
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_101</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339749
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337541
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337065
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335429
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336209
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338161
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335243
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335485
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336909
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336193
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339221
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_97</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336007
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_99</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336929
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_126</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336849
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336699
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335791
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339259
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338971
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_102</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336723
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339777
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335243
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335485
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336009
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336193
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28340503
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_133</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335801
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335789
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_116</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338673
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336883
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339625
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336193
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28341097
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_132</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336193
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28340927
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335587
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_123</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336193
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339457
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336187
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339379
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28341373
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335243
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335785
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28352221
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336555
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335323
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28344993
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_96</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335445
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335749
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336595
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28340719
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_108</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338201
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335801
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339887
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335445
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28345755
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_141</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338345
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_95</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339799
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_124</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335701
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335871
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335445
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28345099
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_115</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336501
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_138</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335243
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337063
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336541
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336287
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338727
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_131</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335445
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335733
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337981
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_114</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335323
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337031
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335683
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338215
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28345331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_105</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28345395
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_121</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335753
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339583
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335851
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337261
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336187
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336987
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28342591
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335801
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336487
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335429
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336735
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_144</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335511
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28345445
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335323
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337647
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337865
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335681
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336325
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_94</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335585
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335445
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335901
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28341201
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_106</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336173
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_137</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335445
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335705
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335525
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28340175
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335323
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337501
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_113</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335301
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335921
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28344731
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_136</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337975
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335301
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336339
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337887
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_127</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336185
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335445
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335865
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337987
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_103</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337619
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335301
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336299
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335445
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28341453
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335243
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335555
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335801
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337207
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_147251_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335429
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335823
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_147251.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335575
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336335
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336135
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336173
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336087
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28340991
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337731
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_147251.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338141
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_147251.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335511
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28345445
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_147251.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335195
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335519
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335681
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336325
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336929
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336201
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337051
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336719
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338285
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336185
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338201
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339391
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336683
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336543
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337981
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335893
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338345
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_147251.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335445
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335705
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339971
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335629
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28345715
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336141
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335901
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28341201
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335749
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336595
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335931
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28341453
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28345755
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28341445
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336343
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335709
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335733
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335865
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28345099
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_147251.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335429
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336735
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336209
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335823
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337223
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_147251.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335525
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28340175
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28344049
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336455
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336415
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_147251.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336723
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339777
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_147251.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335243
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336787
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335785
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28341797
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335555
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336665
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335475
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337063
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335485
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336909
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336009
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336615
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335693
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337465
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_147251.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336945
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_147251.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335375
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337677
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335789
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335763
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335933
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339749
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337541
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338673
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28340065
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28340719
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335587
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336883
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28347641
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28340861
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339625
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28344219
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28344133
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337053
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335581
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335509
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28340513
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337975
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339083
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28345331
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28342601
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336329
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336457
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337619
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_147251.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335399
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336007
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336849
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336501
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28342159
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28345395
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337865
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339799
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336039
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28342885
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28345239
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336699
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336405
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339285
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337987
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338161
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337261
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337065
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338025
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_147251.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335391
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335851
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335825
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338971
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336555
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336191
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336925
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335753
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339583
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338253
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335683
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28342395
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338215
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338533
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339075
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28352221
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337439
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336541
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335791
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339259
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337373
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339191
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_147251.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336187
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336901
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339379
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28341373
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336987
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28342591
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337111
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339697
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_147251.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335701
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337963
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335871
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_147251.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335589
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_147251.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335323
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337647
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337031
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28344993
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337501
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_147251.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335301
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336339
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337887
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335921
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28344731
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336299
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_147251.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336029
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_147251.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335803
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339469
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_147251.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336287
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338727
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_147251.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336391
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_147251.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336395
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_147251.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335801
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339887
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336227
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28341883
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337207
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336487
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28345141
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336021
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336533
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337093
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338695
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_147251.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336799
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339201
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_147251.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336193
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339221
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28341097
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28340503
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28339457
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28340927
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_147251.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28335585
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28336813
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28337095
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_147251.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_147251.28338763
</commentlist>
</conversation>
