<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_18_1848234</id>
	<title>Nvidia Lauds Windows CE Over Android For Smartbooks</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1245351960000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>ericatcw writes <i>"Google's Android may enjoy the hype, but an increasing number of key industry players say the mobile OS isn't ready for ARM netbooks, aka smartbooks. Nvidia is the most recent to <a href="http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&amp;articleId=9134522">declare Android unfit for duty,</a> stating its preference for Microsoft's Windows CE, which an Nvidia exec praised for having a "low footprint" and being "rock solid." Nvidia is busy optimizing its multimedia-savvy Tegra system-on-chip for Windows CE. Such improvements won't arrive for at least a year to Android, which has an inflexible UI and poor graphics support for devices larger than a smartphone, says Nvidia. Other <a href="http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&amp;articleId=9133989">firms echoing</a> <a href="http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&amp;articleId=9133813">similar criticism</a> include ARM and Asustek."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>ericatcw writes " Google 's Android may enjoy the hype , but an increasing number of key industry players say the mobile OS is n't ready for ARM netbooks , aka smartbooks .
Nvidia is the most recent to declare Android unfit for duty , stating its preference for Microsoft 's Windows CE , which an Nvidia exec praised for having a " low footprint " and being " rock solid .
" Nvidia is busy optimizing its multimedia-savvy Tegra system-on-chip for Windows CE .
Such improvements wo n't arrive for at least a year to Android , which has an inflexible UI and poor graphics support for devices larger than a smartphone , says Nvidia .
Other firms echoing similar criticism include ARM and Asustek .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ericatcw writes "Google's Android may enjoy the hype, but an increasing number of key industry players say the mobile OS isn't ready for ARM netbooks, aka smartbooks.
Nvidia is the most recent to declare Android unfit for duty, stating its preference for Microsoft's Windows CE, which an Nvidia exec praised for having a "low footprint" and being "rock solid.
" Nvidia is busy optimizing its multimedia-savvy Tegra system-on-chip for Windows CE.
Such improvements won't arrive for at least a year to Android, which has an inflexible UI and poor graphics support for devices larger than a smartphone, says Nvidia.
Other firms echoing similar criticism include ARM and Asustek.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380457</id>
	<title>as an embedded developer using ARM, SH4, MIPS, etc</title>
	<author>glebovitz</author>
	<datestamp>1245318840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I ask, NVIDIA who?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ask , NVIDIA who ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I ask, NVIDIA who?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28472313</id>
	<title>Android == Native code support!!</title>
	<author>BlackCreek</author>
	<datestamp>1245924240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google just announced a Native Code Development Kit for Android:</p><p><a href="http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2009/06/introducing-android-15-ndk-release-1.html" title="blogspot.com">http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2009/06/introducing-android-15-ndk-release-1.html</a> [blogspot.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google just announced a Native Code Development Kit for Android : http : //android-developers.blogspot.com/2009/06/introducing-android-15-ndk-release-1.html [ blogspot.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google just announced a Native Code Development Kit for Android:http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2009/06/introducing-android-15-ndk-release-1.html [blogspot.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379111</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380055</id>
	<title>Re:Android = no native code support</title>
	<author>i.of.the.storm</author>
	<datestamp>1245317400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>JNI is kind of a pain, but it's interesting that they allow it anyway. It seems like it bypasses their whole security platform idea with having programs run in a VM. Are there C headers/libraries for all the hardware you would want to access like graphics chip, accelerometers, cameras, etc? And I think it's a good thing that at the least you have to redo the GUI for a mobile app, because the desktop application paradigms don't transfer well to a small screen.</htmltext>
<tokenext>JNI is kind of a pain , but it 's interesting that they allow it anyway .
It seems like it bypasses their whole security platform idea with having programs run in a VM .
Are there C headers/libraries for all the hardware you would want to access like graphics chip , accelerometers , cameras , etc ?
And I think it 's a good thing that at the least you have to redo the GUI for a mobile app , because the desktop application paradigms do n't transfer well to a small screen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>JNI is kind of a pain, but it's interesting that they allow it anyway.
It seems like it bypasses their whole security platform idea with having programs run in a VM.
Are there C headers/libraries for all the hardware you would want to access like graphics chip, accelerometers, cameras, etc?
And I think it's a good thing that at the least you have to redo the GUI for a mobile app, because the desktop application paradigms don't transfer well to a small screen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378891</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378947</id>
	<title>Re:Android = no native code support</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245357120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Two ends of spectrum: maximum performance vs hardware independence.</p><p>Android targets developers that choose to write their code once and expect it to run on each new device without more work on their part.<br>Windows CE will target those that need to squeeze everything they can from the hardware.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Two ends of spectrum : maximum performance vs hardware independence.Android targets developers that choose to write their code once and expect it to run on each new device without more work on their part.Windows CE will target those that need to squeeze everything they can from the hardware .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Two ends of spectrum: maximum performance vs hardware independence.Android targets developers that choose to write their code once and expect it to run on each new device without more work on their part.Windows CE will target those that need to squeeze everything they can from the hardware.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378731</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378891</id>
	<title>Re:Android = no native code support</title>
	<author>Sonic McTails</author>
	<datestamp>1245357000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You do know that you can use C/C++ code right? JNI is fully supported you know. At most you'd have to rewrite the GUI code in Java and you need to do that with most mobile devices anyway (and here's a hint, Windows CE is different enough from mainstream Windows that it usually requires significant reworking unless your app uses a subset of the MFC libraries or a subset of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET).</htmltext>
<tokenext>You do know that you can use C/C + + code right ?
JNI is fully supported you know .
At most you 'd have to rewrite the GUI code in Java and you need to do that with most mobile devices anyway ( and here 's a hint , Windows CE is different enough from mainstream Windows that it usually requires significant reworking unless your app uses a subset of the MFC libraries or a subset of .NET ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You do know that you can use C/C++ code right?
JNI is fully supported you know.
At most you'd have to rewrite the GUI code in Java and you need to do that with most mobile devices anyway (and here's a hint, Windows CE is different enough from mainstream Windows that it usually requires significant reworking unless your app uses a subset of the MFC libraries or a subset of .NET).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378731</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381435</id>
	<title>Re:More business for ATI</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245322800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They just sold the mobile 3D business unit to Qualcomm at the beginning of this year.  Previously, they were using AMD's mobile graphics device cores in<br>the prototype Snapdragon devices they were showing.  While AMD does gain quite a bit from this, it's not QUITE the gain the gp poster thinks of it, nor,<br>apparently, are you as clued in on things as you'd like for people to believe.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-D</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They just sold the mobile 3D business unit to Qualcomm at the beginning of this year .
Previously , they were using AMD 's mobile graphics device cores inthe prototype Snapdragon devices they were showing .
While AMD does gain quite a bit from this , it 's not QUITE the gain the gp poster thinks of it , nor,apparently , are you as clued in on things as you 'd like for people to believe .
: -D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They just sold the mobile 3D business unit to Qualcomm at the beginning of this year.
Previously, they were using AMD's mobile graphics device cores inthe prototype Snapdragon devices they were showing.
While AMD does gain quite a bit from this, it's not QUITE the gain the gp poster thinks of it, nor,apparently, are you as clued in on things as you'd like for people to believe.
:-D</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379017</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380505</id>
	<title>Re:Who needs Android?</title>
	<author>Dragonslicer</author>
	<datestamp>1245319020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think you may have missed the point of Android, which was to run on mobile phones, where your input and output hardware is quite a bit different than on most, if not all, portable computers. Sure, you could run Debian on the hardware in an HTC phone, but that isn't the hard part. The bulk of the work would be in the UI programs, and most of the programs that are part of Gnome or KDE wouldn't work too well with the phone's hardware. You'd end up needing to rewrite most of the user applications anyway.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you may have missed the point of Android , which was to run on mobile phones , where your input and output hardware is quite a bit different than on most , if not all , portable computers .
Sure , you could run Debian on the hardware in an HTC phone , but that is n't the hard part .
The bulk of the work would be in the UI programs , and most of the programs that are part of Gnome or KDE would n't work too well with the phone 's hardware .
You 'd end up needing to rewrite most of the user applications anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you may have missed the point of Android, which was to run on mobile phones, where your input and output hardware is quite a bit different than on most, if not all, portable computers.
Sure, you could run Debian on the hardware in an HTC phone, but that isn't the hard part.
The bulk of the work would be in the UI programs, and most of the programs that are part of Gnome or KDE wouldn't work too well with the phone's hardware.
You'd end up needing to rewrite most of the user applications anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379051</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378395</id>
	<title>Microsoft is better than Google</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245355620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>jews, niggers, etc...</htmltext>
<tokenext>jews , niggers , etc.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>jews, niggers, etc...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381203</id>
	<title>Hard trolling post !</title>
	<author>T1B0</author>
	<datestamp>1245321780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This post show preferences for both windows over linux and microsoft over google<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... Hell of a starving Troll !</htmltext>
<tokenext>This post show preferences for both windows over linux and microsoft over google ... Hell of a starving Troll !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This post show preferences for both windows over linux and microsoft over google ... Hell of a starving Troll !</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28382891</id>
	<title>Big deal......</title>
	<author>Dega704</author>
	<datestamp>1245329280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>In other news Nvidia executives praised windows vista as "the bestest OS ever!" and inconspicuously stuffed away protruding wads of cash in their pockets while a winking Steve Ballmer gave them a thumbs-up from the corner of the room.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In other news Nvidia executives praised windows vista as " the bestest OS ever !
" and inconspicuously stuffed away protruding wads of cash in their pockets while a winking Steve Ballmer gave them a thumbs-up from the corner of the room .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In other news Nvidia executives praised windows vista as "the bestest OS ever!
" and inconspicuously stuffed away protruding wads of cash in their pockets while a winking Steve Ballmer gave them a thumbs-up from the corner of the room.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381985</id>
	<title>Microsoft gives companies a lot of reasons ...</title>
	<author>Jerry</author>
	<datestamp>1245325260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>not to use Linux or Mac.</p><p>If they do they'll get their "Air Supply cut off"...   their per/unit price will jump significantly, making them uncompetitive with their competitors<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>I could go on but space is limited.  Microsoft is full of dirty tricks.  Just ask James Plamondon and his "Technical Evangelists (TE):<br><a href="http://platformevangelism.spaces.live.com/default.aspx" title="live.com">http://platformevangelism.spaces.live.com/default.aspx</a> [live.com]<br><a href="http://platformevangelism.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!37F174267DC274C!155.entry" title="live.com">http://platformevangelism.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!37F174267DC274C!155.entry</a> [live.com]<br><a href="http://www.groklaw.net/pdf/Comes-3096.pdf" title="groklaw.net">http://www.groklaw.net/pdf/Comes-3096.pdf</a> [groklaw.net]</p><p>Or the training materials he used, which taught the "Slog" and the "Stuffed Panel":<br><a href="http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20071023002351958" title="groklaw.net">http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20071023002351958</a> [groklaw.net]</p><p>And financial dirty tricks:<br><a href="http://www.billparish.com/msftfraudfacts.html" title="billparish.com">http://www.billparish.com/msftfraudfacts.html</a> [billparish.com]</p><p>Here is a summary of a LOT of Microsoft's dirty tricks, and the reasons why so many "independent" corporations behave as wholly owned subsidiaries of Microsoft:<br><a href="http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/Dirty\_Tricks\_history" title="grokdoc.net">http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/Dirty\_Tricks\_history</a> [grokdoc.net]</p><p>So, ya, it is no surprise when NVIDIA knucles under to Microsoft, otherwise their video chips would suddenly fail to work as well as those from other video chip vendors, just the way DRDOS "failed" to work as well as MSDOS when users tried to install Win3, which was one of the first of an unending examples of how a copy without ethics operates.   An people were surprised that Capitalism exhibited a "flaw" in the current economic crisis?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>not to use Linux or Mac.If they do they 'll get their " Air Supply cut off " ... their per/unit price will jump significantly , making them uncompetitive with their competitors ...I could go on but space is limited .
Microsoft is full of dirty tricks .
Just ask James Plamondon and his " Technical Evangelists ( TE ) : http : //platformevangelism.spaces.live.com/default.aspx [ live.com ] http : //platformevangelism.spaces.live.com/blog/cns ! 37F174267DC274C ! 155.entry [ live.com ] http : //www.groklaw.net/pdf/Comes-3096.pdf [ groklaw.net ] Or the training materials he used , which taught the " Slog " and the " Stuffed Panel " : http : //www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php ? story = 20071023002351958 [ groklaw.net ] And financial dirty tricks : http : //www.billparish.com/msftfraudfacts.html [ billparish.com ] Here is a summary of a LOT of Microsoft 's dirty tricks , and the reasons why so many " independent " corporations behave as wholly owned subsidiaries of Microsoft : http : //www.grokdoc.net/index.php/Dirty \ _Tricks \ _history [ grokdoc.net ] So , ya , it is no surprise when NVIDIA knucles under to Microsoft , otherwise their video chips would suddenly fail to work as well as those from other video chip vendors , just the way DRDOS " failed " to work as well as MSDOS when users tried to install Win3 , which was one of the first of an unending examples of how a copy without ethics operates .
An people were surprised that Capitalism exhibited a " flaw " in the current economic crisis ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>not to use Linux or Mac.If they do they'll get their "Air Supply cut off"...   their per/unit price will jump significantly, making them uncompetitive with their competitors ...I could go on but space is limited.
Microsoft is full of dirty tricks.
Just ask James Plamondon and his "Technical Evangelists (TE):http://platformevangelism.spaces.live.com/default.aspx [live.com]http://platformevangelism.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!37F174267DC274C!155.entry [live.com]http://www.groklaw.net/pdf/Comes-3096.pdf [groklaw.net]Or the training materials he used, which taught the "Slog" and the "Stuffed Panel":http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20071023002351958 [groklaw.net]And financial dirty tricks:http://www.billparish.com/msftfraudfacts.html [billparish.com]Here is a summary of a LOT of Microsoft's dirty tricks, and the reasons why so many "independent" corporations behave as wholly owned subsidiaries of Microsoft:http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/Dirty\_Tricks\_history [grokdoc.net]So, ya, it is no surprise when NVIDIA knucles under to Microsoft, otherwise their video chips would suddenly fail to work as well as those from other video chip vendors, just the way DRDOS "failed" to work as well as MSDOS when users tried to install Win3, which was one of the first of an unending examples of how a copy without ethics operates.
An people were surprised that Capitalism exhibited a "flaw" in the current economic crisis?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381207</id>
	<title>Re:ARM hostile to Linux?</title>
	<author>rbanffy</author>
	<datestamp>1245321840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In 2002 they could be even be betting the company on the Risc PC/RiscOS duo...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In 2002 they could be even be betting the company on the Risc PC/RiscOS duo.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In 2002 they could be even be betting the company on the Risc PC/RiscOS duo...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380289</id>
	<title>Re:So...</title>
	<author>The Wooden Badger</author>
	<datestamp>1245318180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Holy carp!  That's like 91 dog years!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Holy carp !
That 's like 91 dog years !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Holy carp!
That's like 91 dog years!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378497</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28382351</id>
	<title>Re:So...</title>
	<author>jrumney</author>
	<datestamp>1245326820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Writing this is hurting me. I really, really hate Windows CE (or Windows Mobile or whatever they call it these days.)</p></div></blockquote><p>
It is Windows CE they are talking about here, the default shell is Windows Explorer from the days before IE integration. Windows Mobile is Microsoft's equivalent of Android - a limited inflexible UI designed for smartphones that sits on top of a flexible OS (Linux in the case of Android). The statement from Nvidia is pure FUD, comparing apples and oranges, I wonder how much they were paid to say it.
</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Writing this is hurting me .
I really , really hate Windows CE ( or Windows Mobile or whatever they call it these days .
) It is Windows CE they are talking about here , the default shell is Windows Explorer from the days before IE integration .
Windows Mobile is Microsoft 's equivalent of Android - a limited inflexible UI designed for smartphones that sits on top of a flexible OS ( Linux in the case of Android ) .
The statement from Nvidia is pure FUD , comparing apples and oranges , I wonder how much they were paid to say it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Writing this is hurting me.
I really, really hate Windows CE (or Windows Mobile or whatever they call it these days.
)
It is Windows CE they are talking about here, the default shell is Windows Explorer from the days before IE integration.
Windows Mobile is Microsoft's equivalent of Android - a limited inflexible UI designed for smartphones that sits on top of a flexible OS (Linux in the case of Android).
The statement from Nvidia is pure FUD, comparing apples and oranges, I wonder how much they were paid to say it.

	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379047</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379051</id>
	<title>Who needs Android?</title>
	<author>GPLHost-Thomas</author>
	<datestamp>1245357540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Really, the early success of netbooks loaded with Ubuntu showed clearly that there is no real need for Android. Now, there's going to be netbooks with ARM. GREAT, this is the time to demonstrate (if only it was needed) that Linux is portable, and that distributions like Debian can run perfectly on ARM chips. There WILL be some players in the industry that will understand it, sooner or later. I knew there will be a time where DFSG free OS would start becoming popular just because of the fact it can fit any hardware. It's great if it's demonstrated by using them on cheaper netbooks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Really , the early success of netbooks loaded with Ubuntu showed clearly that there is no real need for Android .
Now , there 's going to be netbooks with ARM .
GREAT , this is the time to demonstrate ( if only it was needed ) that Linux is portable , and that distributions like Debian can run perfectly on ARM chips .
There WILL be some players in the industry that will understand it , sooner or later .
I knew there will be a time where DFSG free OS would start becoming popular just because of the fact it can fit any hardware .
It 's great if it 's demonstrated by using them on cheaper netbooks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really, the early success of netbooks loaded with Ubuntu showed clearly that there is no real need for Android.
Now, there's going to be netbooks with ARM.
GREAT, this is the time to demonstrate (if only it was needed) that Linux is portable, and that distributions like Debian can run perfectly on ARM chips.
There WILL be some players in the industry that will understand it, sooner or later.
I knew there will be a time where DFSG free OS would start becoming popular just because of the fact it can fit any hardware.
It's great if it's demonstrated by using them on cheaper netbooks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380419</id>
	<title>Re:More business for ATI</title>
	<author>limaxray</author>
	<datestamp>1245318660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What about the TI OMAP3 platform that uses a GPU from Imagination Technologies/PowerVR?  Or what about Freescale's i.MX515 platform?  Not to mention both of these devices currently use the ARM Cortex A-8, while Tegra is still using the ARM11.  Oh, and the best part is these devices are on the market now.<br> <br>But yeah, there is a lot of competition in the high performance, low power market and NVidia is just the newest entrant.  Frankly, as an embedded developer who is currently evaluating such a solution, there is nothing I've heard about Tegra that particularly peaks my interest.  Sure NVidia is a big name in the consumer computer market, but that doesn't mean that translates to the embedded world.  I'm much more interested in what is coming from TI and Freescale, and they both have excellent OSS support.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What about the TI OMAP3 platform that uses a GPU from Imagination Technologies/PowerVR ?
Or what about Freescale 's i.MX515 platform ?
Not to mention both of these devices currently use the ARM Cortex A-8 , while Tegra is still using the ARM11 .
Oh , and the best part is these devices are on the market now .
But yeah , there is a lot of competition in the high performance , low power market and NVidia is just the newest entrant .
Frankly , as an embedded developer who is currently evaluating such a solution , there is nothing I 've heard about Tegra that particularly peaks my interest .
Sure NVidia is a big name in the consumer computer market , but that does n't mean that translates to the embedded world .
I 'm much more interested in what is coming from TI and Freescale , and they both have excellent OSS support .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What about the TI OMAP3 platform that uses a GPU from Imagination Technologies/PowerVR?
Or what about Freescale's i.MX515 platform?
Not to mention both of these devices currently use the ARM Cortex A-8, while Tegra is still using the ARM11.
Oh, and the best part is these devices are on the market now.
But yeah, there is a lot of competition in the high performance, low power market and NVidia is just the newest entrant.
Frankly, as an embedded developer who is currently evaluating such a solution, there is nothing I've heard about Tegra that particularly peaks my interest.
Sure NVidia is a big name in the consumer computer market, but that doesn't mean that translates to the embedded world.
I'm much more interested in what is coming from TI and Freescale, and they both have excellent OSS support.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379119</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28382549</id>
	<title>Re:corruption and collusion</title>
	<author>gemada</author>
	<datestamp>1245327960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>WinCE isn't even a good OS for phones...unless you enjoy rebooting your phone twice a day. And try suppporting activesync for desktops for a while and see how soon you want to send all WinCE devices to the bottom of the sea.</htmltext>
<tokenext>WinCE is n't even a good OS for phones...unless you enjoy rebooting your phone twice a day .
And try suppporting activesync for desktops for a while and see how soon you want to send all WinCE devices to the bottom of the sea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WinCE isn't even a good OS for phones...unless you enjoy rebooting your phone twice a day.
And try suppporting activesync for desktops for a while and see how soon you want to send all WinCE devices to the bottom of the sea.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379529</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378497</id>
	<title>So...</title>
	<author>MBCook</author>
	<datestamp>1245355920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So you're saying software <i>designed</i> for mobile phones doesn't work as well on a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netbook" title="wikipedia.org">little computer like device</a> [wikipedia.org] as software which was <a href="http://www.pdagold.com/hardware/detail.asp?d=7" title="pdagold.com">designed for little computer like devices</a> [pdagold.com]?</p><p>Wow. Amazing. Incredible.</p><p>And they're the same age too!</p><p>No, wait, Windows CE is <b>13 years old</b>. It's had a <i>little</i> more time to design the window manager for different screen sizes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So you 're saying software designed for mobile phones does n't work as well on a little computer like device [ wikipedia.org ] as software which was designed for little computer like devices [ pdagold.com ] ? Wow .
Amazing. Incredible.And they 're the same age too ! No , wait , Windows CE is 13 years old .
It 's had a little more time to design the window manager for different screen sizes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you're saying software designed for mobile phones doesn't work as well on a little computer like device [wikipedia.org] as software which was designed for little computer like devices [pdagold.com]?Wow.
Amazing. Incredible.And they're the same age too!No, wait, Windows CE is 13 years old.
It's had a little more time to design the window manager for different screen sizes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380931</id>
	<title>Re:So...</title>
	<author>PopeRatzo</author>
	<datestamp>1245320700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>No, wait, Windows CE is 13 years old. It's had a little more time to design the window manager for different screen sizes.</p></div></blockquote><p>And Linux is <i>18 years old</i>.  What's your point?</p><p>So now the longevity of an operating system is an unfair advantage?  We should give extra credit to operating systems for being new, even when they're (currently) inferior in many ways?  It's not like the Android folks haven't been pushing their OS for devices up to and including netbooks.</p><p>If you're a hardware manufacturer, your customers are going to judge your products based upon how well it works for them.  They're not going to handicap operating systems like golf scores based on age.</p><p>Yes, Microsoft plays hardball with hardware manufacturers.  But whatever effect Microsoft's pressure is going to have on those manufacturers is not going to be enough if their customers are insisting on a different OS if it was clearly better.  Windows CE devices have been doing pretty well in the marketplace.  Short of Apple licensing their OS, it's going to take some clear improvements to get them to switch to a new OS and away from WinCE.</p><p>You and I are going to try out Android, no doubt.  We see important ways that WinCE is insufficient, and we're willing to support something new under the right circumstances.  Most consumers aren't like that, however, especially when it comes to something that's as important to them as their phone/netbook/PDA.  Android may well be the prominent OS for those devices in a little while, but for now you can't fault NVIDIA for saying "not yet".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , wait , Windows CE is 13 years old .
It 's had a little more time to design the window manager for different screen sizes.And Linux is 18 years old .
What 's your point ? So now the longevity of an operating system is an unfair advantage ?
We should give extra credit to operating systems for being new , even when they 're ( currently ) inferior in many ways ?
It 's not like the Android folks have n't been pushing their OS for devices up to and including netbooks.If you 're a hardware manufacturer , your customers are going to judge your products based upon how well it works for them .
They 're not going to handicap operating systems like golf scores based on age.Yes , Microsoft plays hardball with hardware manufacturers .
But whatever effect Microsoft 's pressure is going to have on those manufacturers is not going to be enough if their customers are insisting on a different OS if it was clearly better .
Windows CE devices have been doing pretty well in the marketplace .
Short of Apple licensing their OS , it 's going to take some clear improvements to get them to switch to a new OS and away from WinCE.You and I are going to try out Android , no doubt .
We see important ways that WinCE is insufficient , and we 're willing to support something new under the right circumstances .
Most consumers are n't like that , however , especially when it comes to something that 's as important to them as their phone/netbook/PDA .
Android may well be the prominent OS for those devices in a little while , but for now you ca n't fault NVIDIA for saying " not yet " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, wait, Windows CE is 13 years old.
It's had a little more time to design the window manager for different screen sizes.And Linux is 18 years old.
What's your point?So now the longevity of an operating system is an unfair advantage?
We should give extra credit to operating systems for being new, even when they're (currently) inferior in many ways?
It's not like the Android folks haven't been pushing their OS for devices up to and including netbooks.If you're a hardware manufacturer, your customers are going to judge your products based upon how well it works for them.
They're not going to handicap operating systems like golf scores based on age.Yes, Microsoft plays hardball with hardware manufacturers.
But whatever effect Microsoft's pressure is going to have on those manufacturers is not going to be enough if their customers are insisting on a different OS if it was clearly better.
Windows CE devices have been doing pretty well in the marketplace.
Short of Apple licensing their OS, it's going to take some clear improvements to get them to switch to a new OS and away from WinCE.You and I are going to try out Android, no doubt.
We see important ways that WinCE is insufficient, and we're willing to support something new under the right circumstances.
Most consumers aren't like that, however, especially when it comes to something that's as important to them as their phone/netbook/PDA.
Android may well be the prominent OS for those devices in a little while, but for now you can't fault NVIDIA for saying "not yet".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378497</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379699</id>
	<title>Win CE</title>
	<author>zorro-z</author>
	<datestamp>1245316260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Only Microsoft would think of releasing a product whose more-or-less-official abbreviation means to grimace in pain.</p><p>More seriously, if WinCE genuinely has a smaller footprint + is more stable than Android, that says something really bad about Android.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Only Microsoft would think of releasing a product whose more-or-less-official abbreviation means to grimace in pain.More seriously , if WinCE genuinely has a smaller footprint + is more stable than Android , that says something really bad about Android .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only Microsoft would think of releasing a product whose more-or-less-official abbreviation means to grimace in pain.More seriously, if WinCE genuinely has a smaller footprint + is more stable than Android, that says something really bad about Android.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379765</id>
	<title>Re:Android = no native code support</title>
	<author>moon3</author>
	<datestamp>1245316440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Native code is not officially supported. The Android-SDK gave me Java last time I tried.<br> <br>The trick of native code is that you do not need to buy expensive hardware to run you application at decent speed. You can run your server even on ARM Cortex while Java needs some expensive hardware to be even considered. Cost saving, green technology, etc. that is what native code enables. While Java is designed to sell pricey hardware from day one.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Native code is not officially supported .
The Android-SDK gave me Java last time I tried .
The trick of native code is that you do not need to buy expensive hardware to run you application at decent speed .
You can run your server even on ARM Cortex while Java needs some expensive hardware to be even considered .
Cost saving , green technology , etc .
that is what native code enables .
While Java is designed to sell pricey hardware from day one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Native code is not officially supported.
The Android-SDK gave me Java last time I tried.
The trick of native code is that you do not need to buy expensive hardware to run you application at decent speed.
You can run your server even on ARM Cortex while Java needs some expensive hardware to be even considered.
Cost saving, green technology, etc.
that is what native code enables.
While Java is designed to sell pricey hardware from day one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379019</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380493</id>
	<title>Re:ARM hostile to Linux?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245318960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess in 2002 Robin Saxby didn't expect that Risc Os could become an open source OS too. It is now and it may run on netbook hardware in the near future.</p><p>https://www.riscosopen.org/forum/forums/5/topics/166?page=1</p><p>Ernst</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess in 2002 Robin Saxby did n't expect that Risc Os could become an open source OS too .
It is now and it may run on netbook hardware in the near future.https : //www.riscosopen.org/forum/forums/5/topics/166 ? page = 1Ernst</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess in 2002 Robin Saxby didn't expect that Risc Os could become an open source OS too.
It is now and it may run on netbook hardware in the near future.https://www.riscosopen.org/forum/forums/5/topics/166?page=1Ernst</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378935</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380693</id>
	<title>Re:corruption and collusion</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245319740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Personally, I think Android is not a very good choice for netbooks; Ubuntu Netbook edition is a much better choice.</p></div><p>It's disturbing how many people still don't realize that software that's designed for a specific purpose is better at that purpose than software that was designed for some other purpose.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Personally , I think Android is not a very good choice for netbooks ; Ubuntu Netbook edition is a much better choice.It 's disturbing how many people still do n't realize that software that 's designed for a specific purpose is better at that purpose than software that was designed for some other purpose .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Personally, I think Android is not a very good choice for netbooks; Ubuntu Netbook edition is a much better choice.It's disturbing how many people still don't realize that software that's designed for a specific purpose is better at that purpose than software that was designed for some other purpose.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379529</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28392563</id>
	<title>Re:Why is this surprising?</title>
	<author>Quantumstate</author>
	<datestamp>1245437580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think the market share would be large enough to make it worth the time.  Putting Linux use at 1\% that is still a pretty large section of the market and Linux users will be the kind of people who will know to look elsewhere.  Also the extra work needed probably isn't that large since they already have to write drivers for Apple which is a *nix system.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the market share would be large enough to make it worth the time .
Putting Linux use at 1 \ % that is still a pretty large section of the market and Linux users will be the kind of people who will know to look elsewhere .
Also the extra work needed probably is n't that large since they already have to write drivers for Apple which is a * nix system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the market share would be large enough to make it worth the time.
Putting Linux use at 1\% that is still a pretty large section of the market and Linux users will be the kind of people who will know to look elsewhere.
Also the extra work needed probably isn't that large since they already have to write drivers for Apple which is a *nix system.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381711</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28387559</id>
	<title>If Android is not good..</title>
	<author>FithisUX</author>
	<datestamp>1245413460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>why not try QNX which is a commercial offering? This is very suspicious. Sounds like the most closed useless thing ever. I go for N270/GMA950. Possibly if VIA really helps openchrome I have no problem to give it a try. Moreover the whole thing smells like early adopters saga. First version would be totally experimental, save for the calculator and notepad (I can suggest vi).</htmltext>
<tokenext>why not try QNX which is a commercial offering ?
This is very suspicious .
Sounds like the most closed useless thing ever .
I go for N270/GMA950 .
Possibly if VIA really helps openchrome I have no problem to give it a try .
Moreover the whole thing smells like early adopters saga .
First version would be totally experimental , save for the calculator and notepad ( I can suggest vi ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>why not try QNX which is a commercial offering?
This is very suspicious.
Sounds like the most closed useless thing ever.
I go for N270/GMA950.
Possibly if VIA really helps openchrome I have no problem to give it a try.
Moreover the whole thing smells like early adopters saga.
First version would be totally experimental, save for the calculator and notepad (I can suggest vi).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380823</id>
	<title>Re:Wait a minute</title>
	<author>CannonballHead</author>
	<datestamp>1245320280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>but still, it's a huge mess stiched together</p></div><p>As opposed to which OS?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>but still , it 's a huge mess stiched togetherAs opposed to which OS ?
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but still, it's a huge mess stiched togetherAs opposed to which OS?
:)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379757</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380539</id>
	<title>Re:Wait a minute</title>
	<author>H0p313ss</author>
	<datestamp>1245319140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>1) Poor UI - what he is talking about? Windows CE is a mess. </p></div><p>It's all relative... I've been playing with Android on my Freerunner and while kind of sexy for a handheld technically it's not going to win any UI design awards.</p><p>In fact I'd say that for non-technical users (the majority of the market) it's got major usability issues.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) Poor UI - what he is talking about ?
Windows CE is a mess .
It 's all relative... I 've been playing with Android on my Freerunner and while kind of sexy for a handheld technically it 's not going to win any UI design awards.In fact I 'd say that for non-technical users ( the majority of the market ) it 's got major usability issues .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) Poor UI - what he is talking about?
Windows CE is a mess.
It's all relative... I've been playing with Android on my Freerunner and while kind of sexy for a handheld technically it's not going to win any UI design awards.In fact I'd say that for non-technical users (the majority of the market) it's got major usability issues.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379757</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28390393</id>
	<title>Re:A bunch of FUD?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245428100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't understand why he said this.  There IS hardware acceleration!  There are 3d opengl games on the platform already!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't understand why he said this .
There IS hardware acceleration !
There are 3d opengl games on the platform already !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't understand why he said this.
There IS hardware acceleration!
There are 3d opengl games on the platform already!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378819</id>
	<title>Drivers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245356700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From TFA:<br>"The world soundly rejected the first netbooks that came out with Linux," he said. "Printers didn't work, and devices didn't get recognized. The whole thing was a mess."</p><p>I'm sure all printers come with WinCE drivers these days. Or maybe Nvidia knows how to install Vista drivers on CE?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From TFA : " The world soundly rejected the first netbooks that came out with Linux , " he said .
" Printers did n't work , and devices did n't get recognized .
The whole thing was a mess .
" I 'm sure all printers come with WinCE drivers these days .
Or maybe Nvidia knows how to install Vista drivers on CE ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From TFA:"The world soundly rejected the first netbooks that came out with Linux," he said.
"Printers didn't work, and devices didn't get recognized.
The whole thing was a mess.
"I'm sure all printers come with WinCE drivers these days.
Or maybe Nvidia knows how to install Vista drivers on CE?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379759</id>
	<title>Re:Android = no native code support</title>
	<author>thePowerOfGrayskull</author>
	<datestamp>1245316440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Java is a nice toy, but unfit for production, get real.</p> </div><p>Might help to do a bit of research before making posts like this one.  You realize that Blackberry has been an all-java platform for years now, and nobody is complaining about performance?   Even on their new systems, which directly compete with the iPhone.
</p><p>
The problem here isn't with the Java platform, it's in the fact that Android is a custom implementation that is not standards compliant.   This, in turn, means that the tens of thousands (or more?) of J2ME applications that have been developed over the years are useless on this platform.  By choosing not to support it, Google has greater control over the platform - but they also compete with the  "real" JME platform for mindshare, while providing no measurable advantage other than marketing.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Java is a nice toy , but unfit for production , get real .
Might help to do a bit of research before making posts like this one .
You realize that Blackberry has been an all-java platform for years now , and nobody is complaining about performance ?
Even on their new systems , which directly compete with the iPhone .
The problem here is n't with the Java platform , it 's in the fact that Android is a custom implementation that is not standards compliant .
This , in turn , means that the tens of thousands ( or more ?
) of J2ME applications that have been developed over the years are useless on this platform .
By choosing not to support it , Google has greater control over the platform - but they also compete with the " real " JME platform for mindshare , while providing no measurable advantage other than marketing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Java is a nice toy, but unfit for production, get real.
Might help to do a bit of research before making posts like this one.
You realize that Blackberry has been an all-java platform for years now, and nobody is complaining about performance?
Even on their new systems, which directly compete with the iPhone.
The problem here isn't with the Java platform, it's in the fact that Android is a custom implementation that is not standards compliant.
This, in turn, means that the tens of thousands (or more?
) of J2ME applications that have been developed over the years are useless on this platform.
By choosing not to support it, Google has greater control over the platform - but they also compete with the  "real" JME platform for mindshare, while providing no measurable advantage other than marketing.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378731</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28392713</id>
	<title>Re:So...</title>
	<author>Locutus</author>
	<datestamp>1245438180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>that's all fine and dandy but there is an elephant in the room. Did you know that earlier this year, the largest mobile phone conference was held and reporters had to pry vendors to talk about Android while they were all willing to talk about Microsofts Windows Mobile due out in 2010? Some of the press was thinking this was quite strange and now we find out that almost 2 dozen Android based phones are due to hit the market \_this\_ year.<br>
&nbsp; </p><p>The elephant in the room is the fact that Microsoft has lost over $15 billion, yes BILLION over the past 13 years playing these marketing games. I would not doubt that Nvidia has a deal with Microsoft which provides Nvidia with some good profit as long as they yank the Microsoft chain and talk about Windows. And did you see Asus, the company who put Linux on a tiny laptop and started this market, apologize for Qualcomm showing an Asus ARM device running Linux? And wasn't that Microsoft on stage with them during the apology?  Money talks and that's all Microsoft's got so I will question the validity of Nvidia's platform choice. As others have said, Android is just one distro of GNU/Linux and there are many more that have been on the market for years and run on ARM. But Nvidia only talks of Android and they talk of Windows CE. Fishy and likely part of Microsoft's marketing methods. IMO<br>
&nbsp; </p><p>LoB<br>
&nbsp; </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>that 's all fine and dandy but there is an elephant in the room .
Did you know that earlier this year , the largest mobile phone conference was held and reporters had to pry vendors to talk about Android while they were all willing to talk about Microsofts Windows Mobile due out in 2010 ?
Some of the press was thinking this was quite strange and now we find out that almost 2 dozen Android based phones are due to hit the market \ _this \ _ year .
  The elephant in the room is the fact that Microsoft has lost over $ 15 billion , yes BILLION over the past 13 years playing these marketing games .
I would not doubt that Nvidia has a deal with Microsoft which provides Nvidia with some good profit as long as they yank the Microsoft chain and talk about Windows .
And did you see Asus , the company who put Linux on a tiny laptop and started this market , apologize for Qualcomm showing an Asus ARM device running Linux ?
And was n't that Microsoft on stage with them during the apology ?
Money talks and that 's all Microsoft 's got so I will question the validity of Nvidia 's platform choice .
As others have said , Android is just one distro of GNU/Linux and there are many more that have been on the market for years and run on ARM .
But Nvidia only talks of Android and they talk of Windows CE .
Fishy and likely part of Microsoft 's marketing methods .
IMO   LoB  </tokentext>
<sentencetext>that's all fine and dandy but there is an elephant in the room.
Did you know that earlier this year, the largest mobile phone conference was held and reporters had to pry vendors to talk about Android while they were all willing to talk about Microsofts Windows Mobile due out in 2010?
Some of the press was thinking this was quite strange and now we find out that almost 2 dozen Android based phones are due to hit the market \_this\_ year.
  The elephant in the room is the fact that Microsoft has lost over $15 billion, yes BILLION over the past 13 years playing these marketing games.
I would not doubt that Nvidia has a deal with Microsoft which provides Nvidia with some good profit as long as they yank the Microsoft chain and talk about Windows.
And did you see Asus, the company who put Linux on a tiny laptop and started this market, apologize for Qualcomm showing an Asus ARM device running Linux?
And wasn't that Microsoft on stage with them during the apology?
Money talks and that's all Microsoft's got so I will question the validity of Nvidia's platform choice.
As others have said, Android is just one distro of GNU/Linux and there are many more that have been on the market for years and run on ARM.
But Nvidia only talks of Android and they talk of Windows CE.
Fishy and likely part of Microsoft's marketing methods.
IMO
  LoB
  </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379047</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378731</id>
	<title>Android = no native code support</title>
	<author>moon3</author>
	<datestamp>1245356520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have to reiterate this again and again. This might be unrelated to the story, but that is the problem that is keeping us from switching to Android.
<br> <br>
I mean 20+ years of experience and all perfectly working C/C++ code and libraries have to be thrown out of window ? Cmon Google. Java is a nice toy, but unfit for production, get real.
<br> <br>
Apple and Microsoft gave us native code with full support, native code comes first on their platforms so we are able to get maximum from the given hardware, lots of people will never downgrade to Java, sorry.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have to reiterate this again and again .
This might be unrelated to the story , but that is the problem that is keeping us from switching to Android .
I mean 20 + years of experience and all perfectly working C/C + + code and libraries have to be thrown out of window ?
Cmon Google .
Java is a nice toy , but unfit for production , get real .
Apple and Microsoft gave us native code with full support , native code comes first on their platforms so we are able to get maximum from the given hardware , lots of people will never downgrade to Java , sorry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have to reiterate this again and again.
This might be unrelated to the story, but that is the problem that is keeping us from switching to Android.
I mean 20+ years of experience and all perfectly working C/C++ code and libraries have to be thrown out of window ?
Cmon Google.
Java is a nice toy, but unfit for production, get real.
Apple and Microsoft gave us native code with full support, native code comes first on their platforms so we are able to get maximum from the given hardware, lots of people will never downgrade to Java, sorry.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379525</id>
	<title>Re:ARM hostile to Linux?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245315720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, back in 2002 he was not the only one. He has probably changed their opinion now that Linux is crucial for their survival.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , back in 2002 he was not the only one .
He has probably changed their opinion now that Linux is crucial for their survival .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, back in 2002 he was not the only one.
He has probably changed their opinion now that Linux is crucial for their survival.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378935</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378975</id>
	<title>Not surprised</title>
	<author>rbanffy</author>
	<datestamp>1245357240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It would be either that or not having Nvidia support on Windows 7 SP 1...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It would be either that or not having Nvidia support on Windows 7 SP 1.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would be either that or not having Nvidia support on Windows 7 SP 1...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379311</id>
	<title>Re:Android = no native code support</title>
	<author>0xdeadbeef</author>
	<datestamp>1245358260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I have to reiterate this again and again.</i></p><p>Hmm... redundant loops. Perhaps the problem isn't the language, but your code?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have to reiterate this again and again.Hmm... redundant loops .
Perhaps the problem is n't the language , but your code ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have to reiterate this again and again.Hmm... redundant loops.
Perhaps the problem isn't the language, but your code?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378731</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379147</id>
	<title>Why is this surprising?</title>
	<author>somenickname</author>
	<datestamp>1245357840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A company that only begrudgingly supports linux with a massive binary blob and no real support thinks that it may be easier to support a platform where that kind of treatment is considered the norm.  This does not surprise me.  I have a lot of respect for the nvidia linux engineers and they seem like knowledgeable and good guys but, I would imagine that management has tied their hands and this is a political rather than an engineering decision.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A company that only begrudgingly supports linux with a massive binary blob and no real support thinks that it may be easier to support a platform where that kind of treatment is considered the norm .
This does not surprise me .
I have a lot of respect for the nvidia linux engineers and they seem like knowledgeable and good guys but , I would imagine that management has tied their hands and this is a political rather than an engineering decision .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A company that only begrudgingly supports linux with a massive binary blob and no real support thinks that it may be easier to support a platform where that kind of treatment is considered the norm.
This does not surprise me.
I have a lot of respect for the nvidia linux engineers and they seem like knowledgeable and good guys but, I would imagine that management has tied their hands and this is a political rather than an engineering decision.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379111</id>
	<title>Re:Android = no native code support</title>
	<author>chrb</author>
	<datestamp>1245357720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android\_(operating\_system)#Native\_code" title="wikipedia.org">Wikipedia says</a> [wikipedia.org], native code runs under Android fine. The Chrome web browser runs on Android. Chrome is not written in Java.</p><p>What you might mean is that you can't run native code on some specific mobile phone type device without hacks, and that you can't upload native code to the App Store. That much is true. In the first case, some manufacturers like to lock down their devices - the iphone is also pretty much locked down. In the second, Google want platform independence. But Android itself can clearly run native code - most of the software that it ships with is written in C. And you can distribute and install whatever Java code you want on any Android device, which is better than Apple's "you only load what we want you to load on a phone" rules.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As Wikipedia says [ wikipedia.org ] , native code runs under Android fine .
The Chrome web browser runs on Android .
Chrome is not written in Java.What you might mean is that you ca n't run native code on some specific mobile phone type device without hacks , and that you ca n't upload native code to the App Store .
That much is true .
In the first case , some manufacturers like to lock down their devices - the iphone is also pretty much locked down .
In the second , Google want platform independence .
But Android itself can clearly run native code - most of the software that it ships with is written in C. And you can distribute and install whatever Java code you want on any Android device , which is better than Apple 's " you only load what we want you to load on a phone " rules .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As Wikipedia says [wikipedia.org], native code runs under Android fine.
The Chrome web browser runs on Android.
Chrome is not written in Java.What you might mean is that you can't run native code on some specific mobile phone type device without hacks, and that you can't upload native code to the App Store.
That much is true.
In the first case, some manufacturers like to lock down their devices - the iphone is also pretty much locked down.
In the second, Google want platform independence.
But Android itself can clearly run native code - most of the software that it ships with is written in C. And you can distribute and install whatever Java code you want on any Android device, which is better than Apple's "you only load what we want you to load on a phone" rules.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378731</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378579</id>
	<title>More business for ATI</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245356100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If NVidia does not want a piece of Android business, it is NVidia's loss.<br>And AMD/ATI gain.<br>My money is on the Linux community figuring out how to incorporate NVidia support into Android with or without NVidia's corporate blessing. Heck, a few of NVidia engineers belong to Linux community too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If NVidia does not want a piece of Android business , it is NVidia 's loss.And AMD/ATI gain.My money is on the Linux community figuring out how to incorporate NVidia support into Android with or without NVidia 's corporate blessing .
Heck , a few of NVidia engineers belong to Linux community too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If NVidia does not want a piece of Android business, it is NVidia's loss.And AMD/ATI gain.My money is on the Linux community figuring out how to incorporate NVidia support into Android with or without NVidia's corporate blessing.
Heck, a few of NVidia engineers belong to Linux community too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379889</id>
	<title>Re:Android = no native code support</title>
	<author>mhall119</author>
	<datestamp>1245316860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I mean 20+ years of experience and all perfectly working C/C++ code and libraries have to be thrown out of window ? Cmon Google. Java is a nice toy, but unfit for production, get real.</p> </div><p>Canonical got Android apps running on Ubuntu on x86, without recompiling or emulation, can you do that with C/C++?  JVMs are now very fast, JIT compilation and run-time optimization lets them match or beat native code for long running processes.  Since the JVM is always running in Android, you don't keep feeling the startup cost, but you do keep benefiting from the optimizations.  Java has been a standard for mobile application development long before Google got into the game.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean 20 + years of experience and all perfectly working C/C + + code and libraries have to be thrown out of window ?
Cmon Google .
Java is a nice toy , but unfit for production , get real .
Canonical got Android apps running on Ubuntu on x86 , without recompiling or emulation , can you do that with C/C + + ?
JVMs are now very fast , JIT compilation and run-time optimization lets them match or beat native code for long running processes .
Since the JVM is always running in Android , you do n't keep feeling the startup cost , but you do keep benefiting from the optimizations .
Java has been a standard for mobile application development long before Google got into the game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean 20+ years of experience and all perfectly working C/C++ code and libraries have to be thrown out of window ?
Cmon Google.
Java is a nice toy, but unfit for production, get real.
Canonical got Android apps running on Ubuntu on x86, without recompiling or emulation, can you do that with C/C++?
JVMs are now very fast, JIT compilation and run-time optimization lets them match or beat native code for long running processes.
Since the JVM is always running in Android, you don't keep feeling the startup cost, but you do keep benefiting from the optimizations.
Java has been a standard for mobile application development long before Google got into the game.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378731</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380501</id>
	<title>Re:So...</title>
	<author>Lord Ender</author>
	<datestamp>1245319020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wince 6 on my HTC phone seems to be very not-ready for consumer use. This device routinely freezes or lags by several seconds from when a button is pressed. It supports <i>everything</i>, including full Bluetooth support, but I can't stand waiting and waiting for my keypresses to be registered by device.</p><p>Android may lack features, but if it responds promptly to user input, it is more mature a product than Wince 6.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wince 6 on my HTC phone seems to be very not-ready for consumer use .
This device routinely freezes or lags by several seconds from when a button is pressed .
It supports everything , including full Bluetooth support , but I ca n't stand waiting and waiting for my keypresses to be registered by device.Android may lack features , but if it responds promptly to user input , it is more mature a product than Wince 6 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wince 6 on my HTC phone seems to be very not-ready for consumer use.
This device routinely freezes or lags by several seconds from when a button is pressed.
It supports everything, including full Bluetooth support, but I can't stand waiting and waiting for my keypresses to be registered by device.Android may lack features, but if it responds promptly to user input, it is more mature a product than Wince 6.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379047</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28384013</id>
	<title>WindowsCE design decisions</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245334860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a PDA running under Windows Mobile 2003SE, corresponding to WinCE v4.2 or so, i.e., should be quite mature. Some of the design decisions of that OS are just mind boggling (not sure if they still apply to later versions).</p><p>Try to come up with the most absurd solutions to the following two questions (try be really creative to find the most bizarre solution) and see if you can beat the actual way it is in WinCE:</p><p>Q: How to implement Help files?</p><p>A: Help files are uncompressed HTML files located in the main system directory \Windows together with system<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.exe and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.dll files. Images appearing in these help file are uncompressed bitmap files, likewise located in \Windows. Extra bonus points for giving these bitmap image files generic names so that they override other programs' help images of the same name for a funny effect.</p><p>Q: How to close a running program?</p><p>A: You can't. (Well, actually you could kill it using the task manager which requires 4 or 5 clicks, WinCE-compliant programs are not allowed to have a close button). The OS may automatically decide based on current use of resources to close a running program at any time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a PDA running under Windows Mobile 2003SE , corresponding to WinCE v4.2 or so , i.e. , should be quite mature .
Some of the design decisions of that OS are just mind boggling ( not sure if they still apply to later versions ) .Try to come up with the most absurd solutions to the following two questions ( try be really creative to find the most bizarre solution ) and see if you can beat the actual way it is in WinCE : Q : How to implement Help files ? A : Help files are uncompressed HTML files located in the main system directory \ Windows together with system .exe and .dll files .
Images appearing in these help file are uncompressed bitmap files , likewise located in \ Windows .
Extra bonus points for giving these bitmap image files generic names so that they override other programs ' help images of the same name for a funny effect.Q : How to close a running program ? A : You ca n't .
( Well , actually you could kill it using the task manager which requires 4 or 5 clicks , WinCE-compliant programs are not allowed to have a close button ) .
The OS may automatically decide based on current use of resources to close a running program at any time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a PDA running under Windows Mobile 2003SE, corresponding to WinCE v4.2 or so, i.e., should be quite mature.
Some of the design decisions of that OS are just mind boggling (not sure if they still apply to later versions).Try to come up with the most absurd solutions to the following two questions (try be really creative to find the most bizarre solution) and see if you can beat the actual way it is in WinCE:Q: How to implement Help files?A: Help files are uncompressed HTML files located in the main system directory \Windows together with system .exe and .dll files.
Images appearing in these help file are uncompressed bitmap files, likewise located in \Windows.
Extra bonus points for giving these bitmap image files generic names so that they override other programs' help images of the same name for a funny effect.Q: How to close a running program?A: You can't.
(Well, actually you could kill it using the task manager which requires 4 or 5 clicks, WinCE-compliant programs are not allowed to have a close button).
The OS may automatically decide based on current use of resources to close a running program at any time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28382911</id>
	<title>Re:Who needs Android?</title>
	<author>spitzak</author>
	<datestamp>1245329340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Yes there is a lot of great FOSS but FOSS has yet to produce great software that fills every need.</i></p><p>You really need to get out more if you think it is impossible to run non-FOSS software on Linux. That is a totally ignorant statement, and one of the oldest pieces of FUD out there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes there is a lot of great FOSS but FOSS has yet to produce great software that fills every need.You really need to get out more if you think it is impossible to run non-FOSS software on Linux .
That is a totally ignorant statement , and one of the oldest pieces of FUD out there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes there is a lot of great FOSS but FOSS has yet to produce great software that fills every need.You really need to get out more if you think it is impossible to run non-FOSS software on Linux.
That is a totally ignorant statement, and one of the oldest pieces of FUD out there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381199</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380537</id>
	<title>not about the hardware</title>
	<author>chrwei</author>
	<datestamp>1245319140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is about software and the user interface being useful on a device of the target size and purpose.  Android's target is smartphones not things that resemble the offspring of a PDA and ultra-portable laptop and the UI simple doesn't scale to anything bigger than a phone.  WinCE's target has always been embedded systems, which do actually resemble these little PC-like devices, especially in the core hardware.</p><p>And just for the record, Windows CE and Windows Mobile are not the same.  WM is based on the CE core, but they are no more the same than WinXP and the first gen x86 based XBox are.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is about software and the user interface being useful on a device of the target size and purpose .
Android 's target is smartphones not things that resemble the offspring of a PDA and ultra-portable laptop and the UI simple does n't scale to anything bigger than a phone .
WinCE 's target has always been embedded systems , which do actually resemble these little PC-like devices , especially in the core hardware.And just for the record , Windows CE and Windows Mobile are not the same .
WM is based on the CE core , but they are no more the same than WinXP and the first gen x86 based XBox are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is about software and the user interface being useful on a device of the target size and purpose.
Android's target is smartphones not things that resemble the offspring of a PDA and ultra-portable laptop and the UI simple doesn't scale to anything bigger than a phone.
WinCE's target has always been embedded systems, which do actually resemble these little PC-like devices, especially in the core hardware.And just for the record, Windows CE and Windows Mobile are not the same.
WM is based on the CE core, but they are no more the same than WinXP and the first gen x86 based XBox are.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378579</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378849</id>
	<title>While I haven't ever used Android</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245356820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've never found any Google products I have used to be inferior to their Microsoft counterparts.</p><p>I trust Nvidia to a point, but suspect they're just protecting their own interests, since their job would be a lot easier if they didn't have to worry about writing drivers for non-x86 architectures.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've never found any Google products I have used to be inferior to their Microsoft counterparts.I trust Nvidia to a point , but suspect they 're just protecting their own interests , since their job would be a lot easier if they did n't have to worry about writing drivers for non-x86 architectures .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've never found any Google products I have used to be inferior to their Microsoft counterparts.I trust Nvidia to a point, but suspect they're just protecting their own interests, since their job would be a lot easier if they didn't have to worry about writing drivers for non-x86 architectures.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380481</id>
	<title>NVIDIA doesn't like Linux in general on TEGRA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245318900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I work for a very large computer manufacture who is coming out with an ARM based PC. We looked at Marvell, Freescale, and NVIDIA. NVIDIA was the only one who has no support for Linux and because of this was marked off right away. Besides there lack of support for Linux there ARM CPU is pretty weak compared to Marvell and Freescale, there only advantage is the GPU. But because of the lack of Linux support we crossed them off right away. There really only hurting themselves.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I work for a very large computer manufacture who is coming out with an ARM based PC .
We looked at Marvell , Freescale , and NVIDIA .
NVIDIA was the only one who has no support for Linux and because of this was marked off right away .
Besides there lack of support for Linux there ARM CPU is pretty weak compared to Marvell and Freescale , there only advantage is the GPU .
But because of the lack of Linux support we crossed them off right away .
There really only hurting themselves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work for a very large computer manufacture who is coming out with an ARM based PC.
We looked at Marvell, Freescale, and NVIDIA.
NVIDIA was the only one who has no support for Linux and because of this was marked off right away.
Besides there lack of support for Linux there ARM CPU is pretty weak compared to Marvell and Freescale, there only advantage is the GPU.
But because of the lack of Linux support we crossed them off right away.
There really only hurting themselves.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380471</id>
	<title>Then I won't buy NVidia's offering...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245318900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...or that of anybody else who goes with Windows CE.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...or that of anybody else who goes with Windows CE .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...or that of anybody else who goes with Windows CE.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28384003</id>
	<title>My god</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245334740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Does anybody know an actual person that has a) used windows CE and b) did not hate it with all her heart?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does anybody know an actual person that has a ) used windows CE and b ) did not hate it with all her heart ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does anybody know an actual person that has a) used windows CE and b) did not hate it with all her heart?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379565</id>
	<title>Re:More business for ATI</title>
	<author>dfghjk</author>
	<datestamp>1245315840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's no such thing as a piece of the Android business.  Android is a means to an end, not the end itself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's no such thing as a piece of the Android business .
Android is a means to an end , not the end itself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's no such thing as a piece of the Android business.
Android is a means to an end, not the end itself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378579</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379757</id>
	<title>Wait a minute</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245316440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1) Poor UI - what he is talking about? Windows CE is a mess. Yes, Windows Mobile 5 was kinda Teletubies land as Windows XP, but still, it's a huge mess stiched together<br>2) Doesn't support devices larger than smartphones? Ohh boy, yes, it doesn't, because it doesn't aim for it!</p><p>Sounds like Microsoft partner trashing competitor. Propably there are technical reasons why Nvidia have chosen Windows CE, but these doesn't sound like valid one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) Poor UI - what he is talking about ?
Windows CE is a mess .
Yes , Windows Mobile 5 was kinda Teletubies land as Windows XP , but still , it 's a huge mess stiched together2 ) Does n't support devices larger than smartphones ?
Ohh boy , yes , it does n't , because it does n't aim for it ! Sounds like Microsoft partner trashing competitor .
Propably there are technical reasons why Nvidia have chosen Windows CE , but these does n't sound like valid one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) Poor UI - what he is talking about?
Windows CE is a mess.
Yes, Windows Mobile 5 was kinda Teletubies land as Windows XP, but still, it's a huge mess stiched together2) Doesn't support devices larger than smartphones?
Ohh boy, yes, it doesn't, because it doesn't aim for it!Sounds like Microsoft partner trashing competitor.
Propably there are technical reasons why Nvidia have chosen Windows CE, but these doesn't sound like valid one.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379939</id>
	<title>Re:Android = no native code support</title>
	<author>ahsile</author>
	<datestamp>1245317040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let's just say that I'm currently working on an application for my employer that targets mobile devices (Win CE/Mobile) and tablet pcs (XP/Vista) at the same time. Even using<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET and the Compact<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET framework we have to do a TON of refactoring for GUIs. Heck, there's even basic classes/methods that you would expect to be available on the mobile version but aren't there. It ends up being a lot of code being ifdef'd (#if...) for each version.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's just say that I 'm currently working on an application for my employer that targets mobile devices ( Win CE/Mobile ) and tablet pcs ( XP/Vista ) at the same time .
Even using .NET and the Compact .NET framework we have to do a TON of refactoring for GUIs .
Heck , there 's even basic classes/methods that you would expect to be available on the mobile version but are n't there .
It ends up being a lot of code being ifdef 'd ( # if... ) for each version .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's just say that I'm currently working on an application for my employer that targets mobile devices (Win CE/Mobile) and tablet pcs (XP/Vista) at the same time.
Even using .NET and the Compact .NET framework we have to do a TON of refactoring for GUIs.
Heck, there's even basic classes/methods that you would expect to be available on the mobile version but aren't there.
It ends up being a lot of code being ifdef'd (#if...) for each version.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378891</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379579</id>
	<title>Why the summary doesn't mention Java?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245315840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>"Windows CE also has a "low memory footprint and a good collection of apps,"</i></p><p>Native Linux can be stripped down to be really low on resources, and has multiple times the apps WinCE can count on. Problem solved.</p><p><i>"For instance, Android screen icons that fit on smartphone screens (usually 4-inches and under) are oversized on a smartbook's 8- or 9-inch screen, he said."</i></p><p>This is of course bullshit told to hide something else, or do we really believe multigazillion dollar companies choose their platform according to icons sizes?<br>Anyway, native Linux already counts on lots of small footprint and themable (ie customizable sizes) interfaces. See some projects at <a href="http://maemo.org/" title="maemo.org" rel="nofollow">maemo.org</a> [maemo.org] for an example of native Linux apps running on ARM hardware. Problem solved.</p><p><i>"Also, all video and graphics rendering in Android is done today by the operating system's Java code, a technique he says is too slow for HD video." "There's no hardware acceleration. It's all software," Rayfield said.</i></p><p>Native linux offers video acceleration. Problem solved.</p><p><i>"The world soundly rejected the first netbooks that came out with Linux," he said. "Printers didn't work, and devices didn't get recognized. The whole thing was a mess."</i></p><p>Well, I have sold a good number of Linux netbooks to a number of non technical people, and all of them asked to install XP after some months citing various difficulties, therefore I can confirm this to be at least in part true. Eventually it turned out all those Linux netbooks recognized their devices, printers, USB stuff and whatnot, but the amount of work required for whatever task the user was doing was "bigger" than on XP, where bigger meant push 4 buttons instead of 3 or open a shell and fire a couple commands instead of pushing a button.<br>It's not about being stabler or whatnot: Linux is good for technical people who enjoy chatting with the shell, while Windows users are lazy people who want to minimize the work on the computer to spend their time on other stuff. From this POV Linux wasn't, isn't and will never become a good operating system for the masses without losing its identity by becoming too Windows like.<br>For the rest of us, and back to the topic, Native Linux *can* be set up in order to recognize a plethora of peripherals.</p><p>The conclusion? All but one, not even a whole one, of these problems would simply not exist if Java wasn't used. Many of us raised some warnings about that, but Java dev^H^H^Hfanboys who love their language because it's the only one they know dismissed the argument. Thankyou very much.</p><p>For those who still didn't wet their toes with Java, stay well away of that crap.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Windows CE also has a " low memory footprint and a good collection of apps , " Native Linux can be stripped down to be really low on resources , and has multiple times the apps WinCE can count on .
Problem solved .
" For instance , Android screen icons that fit on smartphone screens ( usually 4-inches and under ) are oversized on a smartbook 's 8- or 9-inch screen , he said .
" This is of course bullshit told to hide something else , or do we really believe multigazillion dollar companies choose their platform according to icons sizes ? Anyway , native Linux already counts on lots of small footprint and themable ( ie customizable sizes ) interfaces .
See some projects at maemo.org [ maemo.org ] for an example of native Linux apps running on ARM hardware .
Problem solved .
" Also , all video and graphics rendering in Android is done today by the operating system 's Java code , a technique he says is too slow for HD video .
" " There 's no hardware acceleration .
It 's all software , " Rayfield said.Native linux offers video acceleration .
Problem solved .
" The world soundly rejected the first netbooks that came out with Linux , " he said .
" Printers did n't work , and devices did n't get recognized .
The whole thing was a mess .
" Well , I have sold a good number of Linux netbooks to a number of non technical people , and all of them asked to install XP after some months citing various difficulties , therefore I can confirm this to be at least in part true .
Eventually it turned out all those Linux netbooks recognized their devices , printers , USB stuff and whatnot , but the amount of work required for whatever task the user was doing was " bigger " than on XP , where bigger meant push 4 buttons instead of 3 or open a shell and fire a couple commands instead of pushing a button.It 's not about being stabler or whatnot : Linux is good for technical people who enjoy chatting with the shell , while Windows users are lazy people who want to minimize the work on the computer to spend their time on other stuff .
From this POV Linux was n't , is n't and will never become a good operating system for the masses without losing its identity by becoming too Windows like.For the rest of us , and back to the topic , Native Linux * can * be set up in order to recognize a plethora of peripherals.The conclusion ?
All but one , not even a whole one , of these problems would simply not exist if Java was n't used .
Many of us raised some warnings about that , but Java dev ^ H ^ H ^ Hfanboys who love their language because it 's the only one they know dismissed the argument .
Thankyou very much.For those who still did n't wet their toes with Java , stay well away of that crap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Windows CE also has a "low memory footprint and a good collection of apps,"Native Linux can be stripped down to be really low on resources, and has multiple times the apps WinCE can count on.
Problem solved.
"For instance, Android screen icons that fit on smartphone screens (usually 4-inches and under) are oversized on a smartbook's 8- or 9-inch screen, he said.
"This is of course bullshit told to hide something else, or do we really believe multigazillion dollar companies choose their platform according to icons sizes?Anyway, native Linux already counts on lots of small footprint and themable (ie customizable sizes) interfaces.
See some projects at maemo.org [maemo.org] for an example of native Linux apps running on ARM hardware.
Problem solved.
"Also, all video and graphics rendering in Android is done today by the operating system's Java code, a technique he says is too slow for HD video.
" "There's no hardware acceleration.
It's all software," Rayfield said.Native linux offers video acceleration.
Problem solved.
"The world soundly rejected the first netbooks that came out with Linux," he said.
"Printers didn't work, and devices didn't get recognized.
The whole thing was a mess.
"Well, I have sold a good number of Linux netbooks to a number of non technical people, and all of them asked to install XP after some months citing various difficulties, therefore I can confirm this to be at least in part true.
Eventually it turned out all those Linux netbooks recognized their devices, printers, USB stuff and whatnot, but the amount of work required for whatever task the user was doing was "bigger" than on XP, where bigger meant push 4 buttons instead of 3 or open a shell and fire a couple commands instead of pushing a button.It's not about being stabler or whatnot: Linux is good for technical people who enjoy chatting with the shell, while Windows users are lazy people who want to minimize the work on the computer to spend their time on other stuff.
From this POV Linux wasn't, isn't and will never become a good operating system for the masses without losing its identity by becoming too Windows like.For the rest of us, and back to the topic, Native Linux *can* be set up in order to recognize a plethora of peripherals.The conclusion?
All but one, not even a whole one, of these problems would simply not exist if Java wasn't used.
Many of us raised some warnings about that, but Java dev^H^H^Hfanboys who love their language because it's the only one they know dismissed the argument.
Thankyou very much.For those who still didn't wet their toes with Java, stay well away of that crap.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378767</id>
	<title>hilarious</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245356640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is hilarious... Android will be as popular as the Linux desktop. If you subtract the developers that roughly an install base of 3 end users.</p><p>haha.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is hilarious... Android will be as popular as the Linux desktop .
If you subtract the developers that roughly an install base of 3 end users.haha .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is hilarious... Android will be as popular as the Linux desktop.
If you subtract the developers that roughly an install base of 3 end users.haha.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28409295</id>
	<title>Re:corruption and collusion</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245581700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just because Android is developed by google doesnt mean it will be good. It is designed for some other reason as Dragonslicer said.</p><p>Try to be realistic.... not a fanboy!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just because Android is developed by google doesnt mean it will be good .
It is designed for some other reason as Dragonslicer said.Try to be realistic.... not a fanboy !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just because Android is developed by google doesnt mean it will be good.
It is designed for some other reason as Dragonslicer said.Try to be realistic.... not a fanboy!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380693</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378675</id>
	<title>CE for Tegra</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245356400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've heard that the new Zune HD will utilize Nvidia's Tegra platform, so maybe this is their way of paying back the favor.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've heard that the new Zune HD will utilize Nvidia 's Tegra platform , so maybe this is their way of paying back the favor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've heard that the new Zune HD will utilize Nvidia's Tegra platform, so maybe this is their way of paying back the favor.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381711</id>
	<title>Re:Why is this surprising?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245324060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You linux folk should be grateful for the fact that they release a driver at all. It's not like they get any return for creating a driver that allows a handful of people to run a hardware accelerated compiz desktops.</p></div><p>"Troll", huh?  I don't know.  I actually think this is a pretty reasonable perspective.  NVidia must have had their reasons for releasing drivers for Linux - honestly, though, I don't know what those reasons would be.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Until linux becomes a viable platform for the desktop (which it never will be, because of flawed ideologies), be thankful for any corporate *desktop* support you get.</p></div><p>This part, though...  ho hum.  Any time somebody talks about "Linux on the desktop" my brain shuts down.  It's just such a boring issue.  I don't care.  I don't care if "grandma" can't figure Linux out.  Linux is on my desktop (and laptop) and I quite enjoy it.</p><p>Damned if I know what flawed ideologies you refer to...  but I am curious.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You linux folk should be grateful for the fact that they release a driver at all .
It 's not like they get any return for creating a driver that allows a handful of people to run a hardware accelerated compiz desktops .
" Troll " , huh ?
I do n't know .
I actually think this is a pretty reasonable perspective .
NVidia must have had their reasons for releasing drivers for Linux - honestly , though , I do n't know what those reasons would be.Until linux becomes a viable platform for the desktop ( which it never will be , because of flawed ideologies ) , be thankful for any corporate * desktop * support you get.This part , though... ho hum .
Any time somebody talks about " Linux on the desktop " my brain shuts down .
It 's just such a boring issue .
I do n't care .
I do n't care if " grandma " ca n't figure Linux out .
Linux is on my desktop ( and laptop ) and I quite enjoy it.Damned if I know what flawed ideologies you refer to... but I am curious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You linux folk should be grateful for the fact that they release a driver at all.
It's not like they get any return for creating a driver that allows a handful of people to run a hardware accelerated compiz desktops.
"Troll", huh?
I don't know.
I actually think this is a pretty reasonable perspective.
NVidia must have had their reasons for releasing drivers for Linux - honestly, though, I don't know what those reasons would be.Until linux becomes a viable platform for the desktop (which it never will be, because of flawed ideologies), be thankful for any corporate *desktop* support you get.This part, though...  ho hum.
Any time somebody talks about "Linux on the desktop" my brain shuts down.
It's just such a boring issue.
I don't care.
I don't care if "grandma" can't figure Linux out.
Linux is on my desktop (and laptop) and I quite enjoy it.Damned if I know what flawed ideologies you refer to...  but I am curious.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380829</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28389039</id>
	<title>Re:Why is this surprising?</title>
	<author>not already in use</author>
	<datestamp>1245422640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I responded to the child of your post, if interested.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I responded to the child of your post , if interested .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I responded to the child of your post, if interested.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381711</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381733</id>
	<title>ATI driver won't compile without voodoo??</title>
	<author>Tetsujin</author>
	<datestamp>1245324120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"no real support" ? whatever do you mean, there is infinitely better support and drivers from nvidia than from intel or ati.<br>ATI's driver doesn't compile on latest kernels without voodoo</p></div><p>Aw, hell...  Why do I need an old 3dFX card installed just to get my ATI card working??</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" no real support " ?
whatever do you mean , there is infinitely better support and drivers from nvidia than from intel or ati.ATI 's driver does n't compile on latest kernels without voodooAw , hell... Why do I need an old 3dFX card installed just to get my ATI card working ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"no real support" ?
whatever do you mean, there is infinitely better support and drivers from nvidia than from intel or ati.ATI's driver doesn't compile on latest kernels without voodooAw, hell...  Why do I need an old 3dFX card installed just to get my ATI card working?
?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381009</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28386771</id>
	<title>Indeed</title>
	<author>cyclomedia</author>
	<datestamp>1245404460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We need to get ahead of the game by stopping thinking that the mobile, netbook, laptop and desktop are different devices in different boxes. Linux needs to stop bloating and apps need to be able to run in 640x480 NOW without having to edit a config file to allow you to drag an app off the top of the screen to get to its button at the bottom of the screen. If you really needed to have a minimum res of 800x600 then consider that the Amiga could have a desktop area larger than the monitor display area in the early 90s; moving your mouse to the edge of the screen would scroll you around the desktop, how hard would it be to allow that whilst still keeping the taskbar fixed?.
<br> <br>
The HTC Universal (google it) blurs the phone, pda and laptop lines tremendously. It's a phone with built in wifi, ~128MB RAM, an SD card slot an ~500MHz ARM processor a 640x480 touch screen and a full qwerty keyboard. It's got practically the same specs of one of my top-of-the-line development machines from the 90s.
<br> <br>
Currently it runs Windows Mobile 6.1. Android boots but doesnt accept any input, it just sits there. What would be great would be a super abstraction layer - hell it could just be a simple config file. Denoting addresses and types of inputs - so the d-pad could be instantly mapped to control the mouse pointer, so the keyboard's keys could be recognised and the phones extra buttons mapped to anything you like, and the wifi capability has a hex code pointing to it, as well as the GSM/G3/IR/Bluetooth capabilities. That way instead of having to massively rejig and recompile the OS to fit every device, and massively reconfigure it I could just stick the "slim" version on my smart phone and all the hacking i'd need to do to get it to work would be one config file that i could probably download from someone, or tick a box on the website when i download the OS's installer. The config file could a bit like the one that quake engines' use - in fact you could have a run-on-first boot applet that allowed you to press any button on your device and map it to anything just like quake too, move-mouse-left: (press button) 0x34 and even set up predictive texting for phonepad devices, or map keys (like function keys) to key combinations*.
<br> <br>
So the finer points of each device would need proper C coding to get them to work (e.g. the HTC has a keyboard back light) but you could get close to actualy being able to use the darned thing and reduce a lot of pain in the process.
<br> <br>

* this one's a particualr bug bear for me, someone ported UAE to Windows mobile but only allowed you to map the mouse and joystick... i had no way to map the function keys and so no way to load/save games in Bloodwych, which otherwise ran beautifully, big shame!</htmltext>
<tokenext>We need to get ahead of the game by stopping thinking that the mobile , netbook , laptop and desktop are different devices in different boxes .
Linux needs to stop bloating and apps need to be able to run in 640x480 NOW without having to edit a config file to allow you to drag an app off the top of the screen to get to its button at the bottom of the screen .
If you really needed to have a minimum res of 800x600 then consider that the Amiga could have a desktop area larger than the monitor display area in the early 90s ; moving your mouse to the edge of the screen would scroll you around the desktop , how hard would it be to allow that whilst still keeping the taskbar fixed ? .
The HTC Universal ( google it ) blurs the phone , pda and laptop lines tremendously .
It 's a phone with built in wifi , ~ 128MB RAM , an SD card slot an ~ 500MHz ARM processor a 640x480 touch screen and a full qwerty keyboard .
It 's got practically the same specs of one of my top-of-the-line development machines from the 90s .
Currently it runs Windows Mobile 6.1 .
Android boots but doesnt accept any input , it just sits there .
What would be great would be a super abstraction layer - hell it could just be a simple config file .
Denoting addresses and types of inputs - so the d-pad could be instantly mapped to control the mouse pointer , so the keyboard 's keys could be recognised and the phones extra buttons mapped to anything you like , and the wifi capability has a hex code pointing to it , as well as the GSM/G3/IR/Bluetooth capabilities .
That way instead of having to massively rejig and recompile the OS to fit every device , and massively reconfigure it I could just stick the " slim " version on my smart phone and all the hacking i 'd need to do to get it to work would be one config file that i could probably download from someone , or tick a box on the website when i download the OS 's installer .
The config file could a bit like the one that quake engines ' use - in fact you could have a run-on-first boot applet that allowed you to press any button on your device and map it to anything just like quake too , move-mouse-left : ( press button ) 0x34 and even set up predictive texting for phonepad devices , or map keys ( like function keys ) to key combinations * .
So the finer points of each device would need proper C coding to get them to work ( e.g .
the HTC has a keyboard back light ) but you could get close to actualy being able to use the darned thing and reduce a lot of pain in the process .
* this one 's a particualr bug bear for me , someone ported UAE to Windows mobile but only allowed you to map the mouse and joystick... i had no way to map the function keys and so no way to load/save games in Bloodwych , which otherwise ran beautifully , big shame !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We need to get ahead of the game by stopping thinking that the mobile, netbook, laptop and desktop are different devices in different boxes.
Linux needs to stop bloating and apps need to be able to run in 640x480 NOW without having to edit a config file to allow you to drag an app off the top of the screen to get to its button at the bottom of the screen.
If you really needed to have a minimum res of 800x600 then consider that the Amiga could have a desktop area larger than the monitor display area in the early 90s; moving your mouse to the edge of the screen would scroll you around the desktop, how hard would it be to allow that whilst still keeping the taskbar fixed?.
The HTC Universal (google it) blurs the phone, pda and laptop lines tremendously.
It's a phone with built in wifi, ~128MB RAM, an SD card slot an ~500MHz ARM processor a 640x480 touch screen and a full qwerty keyboard.
It's got practically the same specs of one of my top-of-the-line development machines from the 90s.
Currently it runs Windows Mobile 6.1.
Android boots but doesnt accept any input, it just sits there.
What would be great would be a super abstraction layer - hell it could just be a simple config file.
Denoting addresses and types of inputs - so the d-pad could be instantly mapped to control the mouse pointer, so the keyboard's keys could be recognised and the phones extra buttons mapped to anything you like, and the wifi capability has a hex code pointing to it, as well as the GSM/G3/IR/Bluetooth capabilities.
That way instead of having to massively rejig and recompile the OS to fit every device, and massively reconfigure it I could just stick the "slim" version on my smart phone and all the hacking i'd need to do to get it to work would be one config file that i could probably download from someone, or tick a box on the website when i download the OS's installer.
The config file could a bit like the one that quake engines' use - in fact you could have a run-on-first boot applet that allowed you to press any button on your device and map it to anything just like quake too, move-mouse-left: (press button) 0x34 and even set up predictive texting for phonepad devices, or map keys (like function keys) to key combinations*.
So the finer points of each device would need proper C coding to get them to work (e.g.
the HTC has a keyboard back light) but you could get close to actualy being able to use the darned thing and reduce a lot of pain in the process.
* this one's a particualr bug bear for me, someone ported UAE to Windows mobile but only allowed you to map the mouse and joystick... i had no way to map the function keys and so no way to load/save games in Bloodwych, which otherwise ran beautifully, big shame!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379051</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381235</id>
	<title>Re:Non-sense quote about device support</title>
	<author>LWATCDR</author>
	<datestamp>1245321900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually it could be worse.<br>How many people will buy a printer that "works with windows" only to have it fail on a WINCE netbook?<br>Hey Windows is Windows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually it could be worse.How many people will buy a printer that " works with windows " only to have it fail on a WINCE netbook ? Hey Windows is Windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually it could be worse.How many people will buy a printer that "works with windows" only to have it fail on a WINCE netbook?Hey Windows is Windows.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379243</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379835</id>
	<title>Re:Android = no native code support</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1245316620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> If you were to make a similar security framework for C/C++, you would end up with Java.</p></div><p>
No you wouldn't; if you were to start with C, you would design something very simple that sat in kernel space and validated system calls according to a policy before allowing them to proceed.  Fortunately, it turns out all modern UNIX-like systems come with something that can do exactly this (Windows NT does too, but it has such a horrible UI no one uses it properly).  </p><p>
The only way any program, irrespective of language, is able to influence any part of the system outside its own memory space is via system calls. You don't need to run your software in a VM to restrict the system calls it can access.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you were to make a similar security framework for C/C + + , you would end up with Java .
No you would n't ; if you were to start with C , you would design something very simple that sat in kernel space and validated system calls according to a policy before allowing them to proceed .
Fortunately , it turns out all modern UNIX-like systems come with something that can do exactly this ( Windows NT does too , but it has such a horrible UI no one uses it properly ) .
The only way any program , irrespective of language , is able to influence any part of the system outside its own memory space is via system calls .
You do n't need to run your software in a VM to restrict the system calls it can access .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> If you were to make a similar security framework for C/C++, you would end up with Java.
No you wouldn't; if you were to start with C, you would design something very simple that sat in kernel space and validated system calls according to a policy before allowing them to proceed.
Fortunately, it turns out all modern UNIX-like systems come with something that can do exactly this (Windows NT does too, but it has such a horrible UI no one uses it properly).
The only way any program, irrespective of language, is able to influence any part of the system outside its own memory space is via system calls.
You don't need to run your software in a VM to restrict the system calls it can access.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379019</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28382491</id>
	<title>Why?</title>
	<author>Bert64</author>
	<datestamp>1245327660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I never saw the point of using Android or WinCE for netbooks...<br>Android because it's new and designed for phones, and would be rather crippled for a laptop.</p><p>CE seems to sell to people who think it's the same as desktop windows, only it's not and those users who bought it thinking that will end up seriously disappointed... You end up with a very limited set of often crippled apps. The only sensible choice for ARM based netbooks, is a decent linux distribution (not the crippled versions that shipped on x86 netbooks), so you have a full selection of software available in an easy to use repository (if you do the repository well people will lap it up, see the iphone app store)... Getting extra apps onto the eee version of xandros was painful, make it easy like apple has and people will love it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I never saw the point of using Android or WinCE for netbooks...Android because it 's new and designed for phones , and would be rather crippled for a laptop.CE seems to sell to people who think it 's the same as desktop windows , only it 's not and those users who bought it thinking that will end up seriously disappointed... You end up with a very limited set of often crippled apps .
The only sensible choice for ARM based netbooks , is a decent linux distribution ( not the crippled versions that shipped on x86 netbooks ) , so you have a full selection of software available in an easy to use repository ( if you do the repository well people will lap it up , see the iphone app store ) ... Getting extra apps onto the eee version of xandros was painful , make it easy like apple has and people will love it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I never saw the point of using Android or WinCE for netbooks...Android because it's new and designed for phones, and would be rather crippled for a laptop.CE seems to sell to people who think it's the same as desktop windows, only it's not and those users who bought it thinking that will end up seriously disappointed... You end up with a very limited set of often crippled apps.
The only sensible choice for ARM based netbooks, is a decent linux distribution (not the crippled versions that shipped on x86 netbooks), so you have a full selection of software available in an easy to use repository (if you do the repository well people will lap it up, see the iphone app store)... Getting extra apps onto the eee version of xandros was painful, make it easy like apple has and people will love it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379607</id>
	<title>Re:ARM hostile to Linux?</title>
	<author>IonHand</author>
	<datestamp>1245315900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think it's time to come out with an open instruction set architecture and kill these pathetic IP companies.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think it 's time to come out with an open instruction set architecture and kill these pathetic IP companies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think it's time to come out with an open instruction set architecture and kill these pathetic IP companies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378935</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379025</id>
	<title>Re:Android = no native code support</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245357480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would go even further in that there are many useful programs written in a variety of languages like C, python, perl, lua, etc. Years ago there was a lot of hype about a Pascal computer that even had hardware support for the language. It wound up in the the dustbin of history and I predict that a Java based single language computer will fare no better. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would go even further in that there are many useful programs written in a variety of languages like C , python , perl , lua , etc .
Years ago there was a lot of hype about a Pascal computer that even had hardware support for the language .
It wound up in the the dustbin of history and I predict that a Java based single language computer will fare no better .
Those who can not remember the past are condemned to repeat it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would go even further in that there are many useful programs written in a variety of languages like C, python, perl, lua, etc.
Years ago there was a lot of hype about a Pascal computer that even had hardware support for the language.
It wound up in the the dustbin of history and I predict that a Java based single language computer will fare no better.
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378731</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378801</id>
	<title>poor graphics support?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245356700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i'm sure several users have had similar problems... they should google it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i 'm sure several users have had similar problems... they should google it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i'm sure several users have had similar problems... they should google it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379551</id>
	<title>Wrong way around?</title>
	<author>FrankDrebin</author>
	<datestamp>1245315780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Nvidia is busy optimizing its multimedia-savvy Tegra system-on-chip for Windows CE.</p></div></blockquote><p>Apparently someone doesn't appreciate the difference between hardware and software.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nvidia is busy optimizing its multimedia-savvy Tegra system-on-chip for Windows CE.Apparently someone does n't appreciate the difference between hardware and software .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nvidia is busy optimizing its multimedia-savvy Tegra system-on-chip for Windows CE.Apparently someone doesn't appreciate the difference between hardware and software.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379641</id>
	<title>Re:Android = no native code support</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245316080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Java is a nice toy, but unfit for production, get real.</p> </div><p>Troll.  Troll!</p><p>Java is used in production in many places.  There is no functional thing that c++ can do that java cant.  Any many would say that java has better libraries and lower costs.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Java is a nice toy , but unfit for production , get real .
Troll. Troll ! Java is used in production in many places .
There is no functional thing that c + + can do that java cant .
Any many would say that java has better libraries and lower costs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Java is a nice toy, but unfit for production, get real.
Troll.  Troll!Java is used in production in many places.
There is no functional thing that c++ can do that java cant.
Any many would say that java has better libraries and lower costs.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378731</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28387719</id>
	<title>Re:A bunch of FUD?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245415320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Presumably Android would have to implement the rest of DRI (if they don't use the existing Linux infrastructure / didn't do so already), and next their equivalent of a X.org video driver. But what's the big deal?</p></div><p>It's an OS designed to run a phone, that's the big deal.Think of it. X11, DRI, hardware acceleration... On a phone. Why? If somebody else wants to fork it into a netbook OS, that's their prerogative, and nothing stops them from doing it themselves, but why on earth is it so bloody hard to grasp that it's meant to run on a phone, and that phones and laptops have different requirements?</p><p>
&nbsp; </p><p><div class="quote"><p>So, huh? Because it's Java it can't use hardware acceleration?</p></div><p>Uh, no. It's only pointing out that there's no hardware acceleration, only software acceleration (and it happens to be written in Java), which is too slow for HD video - again, because it's meant to run on a phone. You don't really need hardware accelerated video on a phone. </p><p>
&nbsp; </p><p><div class="quote"><p>Other major problems include the fact that the Android icons are too large, and apparently it's gonna take one year to make them small... Well, that makes a lotta sense.</p></div><p>Sure it does. It's just another thing that just begs for the question, why in the blue hell would you boot an OS designed to run on a phone, on a netbook? It makes absolutely no sense! A netbook isn't a phone, there are vastly different requirements that need to be met, for different functionality, and completely different design and implementation requirements, both in terms of UI and the OS itself,</p><p>WinCE is already tooled and designed for use on embedded and real time systems (not to be mistaken for Windows Mobile, which is tooled and designed for mobile devices like phones, expressly), and it's still a fairly silly choice for a netbook, too, given that a netbook is neither an embedded, nor a real-time device, but it's nowhere near as absurd as using an OS designed for use on a phone.</p><p>
&nbsp; </p><p><div class="quote"><p>Now they want to do that for ARM too, and even worse, for something that doesn't use the X.org architecture. I say we better get together again next year."</p></div><p>They don't really use the X11 architecture on x86 Linux, either, in fairness, I'm not certain weather they still do this, but they used to replace huge chunks of the X11 graphics layer with their own code, which was commonly used to explain why the proprietary Nvidia drivers performed so well. </p><p>It really has nothing to do with blobs (their Windows and OS X drivers are blobs, too, after all), it has to do with Android just not having the infrastructure for that sort of thing (by design!), it's one thing to re-write certain chunks of the graphics subsystem on x86 Linux, it's another thing entirely to implement the graphics infrastructure as a whole - that shouldn't be left up to Nvidia.</p><p>Side bar, what's up with Slashdot ignoring line breaks?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Presumably Android would have to implement the rest of DRI ( if they do n't use the existing Linux infrastructure / did n't do so already ) , and next their equivalent of a X.org video driver .
But what 's the big deal ? It 's an OS designed to run a phone , that 's the big deal.Think of it .
X11 , DRI , hardware acceleration... On a phone .
Why ? If somebody else wants to fork it into a netbook OS , that 's their prerogative , and nothing stops them from doing it themselves , but why on earth is it so bloody hard to grasp that it 's meant to run on a phone , and that phones and laptops have different requirements ?
  So , huh ?
Because it 's Java it ca n't use hardware acceleration ? Uh , no .
It 's only pointing out that there 's no hardware acceleration , only software acceleration ( and it happens to be written in Java ) , which is too slow for HD video - again , because it 's meant to run on a phone .
You do n't really need hardware accelerated video on a phone .
  Other major problems include the fact that the Android icons are too large , and apparently it 's gon na take one year to make them small... Well , that makes a lotta sense.Sure it does .
It 's just another thing that just begs for the question , why in the blue hell would you boot an OS designed to run on a phone , on a netbook ?
It makes absolutely no sense !
A netbook is n't a phone , there are vastly different requirements that need to be met , for different functionality , and completely different design and implementation requirements , both in terms of UI and the OS itself,WinCE is already tooled and designed for use on embedded and real time systems ( not to be mistaken for Windows Mobile , which is tooled and designed for mobile devices like phones , expressly ) , and it 's still a fairly silly choice for a netbook , too , given that a netbook is neither an embedded , nor a real-time device , but it 's nowhere near as absurd as using an OS designed for use on a phone .
  Now they want to do that for ARM too , and even worse , for something that does n't use the X.org architecture .
I say we better get together again next year .
" They do n't really use the X11 architecture on x86 Linux , either , in fairness , I 'm not certain weather they still do this , but they used to replace huge chunks of the X11 graphics layer with their own code , which was commonly used to explain why the proprietary Nvidia drivers performed so well .
It really has nothing to do with blobs ( their Windows and OS X drivers are blobs , too , after all ) , it has to do with Android just not having the infrastructure for that sort of thing ( by design !
) , it 's one thing to re-write certain chunks of the graphics subsystem on x86 Linux , it 's another thing entirely to implement the graphics infrastructure as a whole - that should n't be left up to Nvidia.Side bar , what 's up with Slashdot ignoring line breaks ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Presumably Android would have to implement the rest of DRI (if they don't use the existing Linux infrastructure / didn't do so already), and next their equivalent of a X.org video driver.
But what's the big deal?It's an OS designed to run a phone, that's the big deal.Think of it.
X11, DRI, hardware acceleration... On a phone.
Why? If somebody else wants to fork it into a netbook OS, that's their prerogative, and nothing stops them from doing it themselves, but why on earth is it so bloody hard to grasp that it's meant to run on a phone, and that phones and laptops have different requirements?
  So, huh?
Because it's Java it can't use hardware acceleration?Uh, no.
It's only pointing out that there's no hardware acceleration, only software acceleration (and it happens to be written in Java), which is too slow for HD video - again, because it's meant to run on a phone.
You don't really need hardware accelerated video on a phone.
  Other major problems include the fact that the Android icons are too large, and apparently it's gonna take one year to make them small... Well, that makes a lotta sense.Sure it does.
It's just another thing that just begs for the question, why in the blue hell would you boot an OS designed to run on a phone, on a netbook?
It makes absolutely no sense!
A netbook isn't a phone, there are vastly different requirements that need to be met, for different functionality, and completely different design and implementation requirements, both in terms of UI and the OS itself,WinCE is already tooled and designed for use on embedded and real time systems (not to be mistaken for Windows Mobile, which is tooled and designed for mobile devices like phones, expressly), and it's still a fairly silly choice for a netbook, too, given that a netbook is neither an embedded, nor a real-time device, but it's nowhere near as absurd as using an OS designed for use on a phone.
  Now they want to do that for ARM too, and even worse, for something that doesn't use the X.org architecture.
I say we better get together again next year.
"They don't really use the X11 architecture on x86 Linux, either, in fairness, I'm not certain weather they still do this, but they used to replace huge chunks of the X11 graphics layer with their own code, which was commonly used to explain why the proprietary Nvidia drivers performed so well.
It really has nothing to do with blobs (their Windows and OS X drivers are blobs, too, after all), it has to do with Android just not having the infrastructure for that sort of thing (by design!
), it's one thing to re-write certain chunks of the graphics subsystem on x86 Linux, it's another thing entirely to implement the graphics infrastructure as a whole - that shouldn't be left up to Nvidia.Side bar, what's up with Slashdot ignoring line breaks?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28385841</id>
	<title>What they meant to say</title>
	<author>stanjam</author>
	<datestamp>1245351300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Given that Microsoft has offered us discounted product, and has threatened to raise the prices we pay for MS products as well as threatened us with IP infringement suits if we do not comply...we have decided that Windows is 'Oh so great" and nothing could possibly compare with Windows on any platform. We know most of you technically minded people will probably trash the problematic Windows OS in 15 minutes and replace it with a more stable, more flexible, and more powerful, free OS, but that is our story, and Microsoft is making us stick to it."</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Given that Microsoft has offered us discounted product , and has threatened to raise the prices we pay for MS products as well as threatened us with IP infringement suits if we do not comply...we have decided that Windows is 'Oh so great " and nothing could possibly compare with Windows on any platform .
We know most of you technically minded people will probably trash the problematic Windows OS in 15 minutes and replace it with a more stable , more flexible , and more powerful , free OS , but that is our story , and Microsoft is making us stick to it .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Given that Microsoft has offered us discounted product, and has threatened to raise the prices we pay for MS products as well as threatened us with IP infringement suits if we do not comply...we have decided that Windows is 'Oh so great" and nothing could possibly compare with Windows on any platform.
We know most of you technically minded people will probably trash the problematic Windows OS in 15 minutes and replace it with a more stable, more flexible, and more powerful, free OS, but that is our story, and Microsoft is making us stick to it.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379509</id>
	<title>A bunch of FUD?</title>
	<author>xlotlu</author>
	<datestamp>1245315720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe I don't get it, but this looks like a concerted FUD campaign against Android. I don't know much about the Android internals, but isn't graphics hardware acceleration handled in the DRM part of the Linux kernel? What does this have to do with Android?</p><p>Presumably Android would have to implement the rest of DRI (if they don't use the existing Linux infrastructure / didn't do so already), and next their equivalent of a X.org video driver. But what's the big deal?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Also, all video and graphics rendering in Android is done today by the operating system's Java code, a technique he says is too slow for HD video.</p><p>"There's no hardware acceleration. It's all software," Rayfield said.</p></div><p>So, huh? Because it's Java it can't use hardware acceleration?</p><p>Other major problems include the fact that the Android icons are too large, and apparently it's gonna take one year to make them small... Well, that makes a lotta sense.</p><p>It would make more sense if nVidia said "We're already having a hard time with binary blobs for those lousy x86 linux geeks. Now they want to do that for ARM too, and even worse, for something that doesn't use the X.org architecture. I say we better get together again next year."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe I do n't get it , but this looks like a concerted FUD campaign against Android .
I do n't know much about the Android internals , but is n't graphics hardware acceleration handled in the DRM part of the Linux kernel ?
What does this have to do with Android ? Presumably Android would have to implement the rest of DRI ( if they do n't use the existing Linux infrastructure / did n't do so already ) , and next their equivalent of a X.org video driver .
But what 's the big deal ? Also , all video and graphics rendering in Android is done today by the operating system 's Java code , a technique he says is too slow for HD video .
" There 's no hardware acceleration .
It 's all software , " Rayfield said.So , huh ?
Because it 's Java it ca n't use hardware acceleration ? Other major problems include the fact that the Android icons are too large , and apparently it 's gon na take one year to make them small... Well , that makes a lotta sense.It would make more sense if nVidia said " We 're already having a hard time with binary blobs for those lousy x86 linux geeks .
Now they want to do that for ARM too , and even worse , for something that does n't use the X.org architecture .
I say we better get together again next year .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe I don't get it, but this looks like a concerted FUD campaign against Android.
I don't know much about the Android internals, but isn't graphics hardware acceleration handled in the DRM part of the Linux kernel?
What does this have to do with Android?Presumably Android would have to implement the rest of DRI (if they don't use the existing Linux infrastructure / didn't do so already), and next their equivalent of a X.org video driver.
But what's the big deal?Also, all video and graphics rendering in Android is done today by the operating system's Java code, a technique he says is too slow for HD video.
"There's no hardware acceleration.
It's all software," Rayfield said.So, huh?
Because it's Java it can't use hardware acceleration?Other major problems include the fact that the Android icons are too large, and apparently it's gonna take one year to make them small... Well, that makes a lotta sense.It would make more sense if nVidia said "We're already having a hard time with binary blobs for those lousy x86 linux geeks.
Now they want to do that for ARM too, and even worse, for something that doesn't use the X.org architecture.
I say we better get together again next year.
"
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28384375</id>
	<title>It's all about the VM.</title>
	<author>recharged95</author>
	<datestamp>1245337260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><ul>
<li>Palm OS crashes--take battery out and in.
</li><li>WinCE crashes--take battery out and in.
</li><li>iPhone OS crashes--Press power button for 5 seconds.
</li><li>Symbian OS crashes--Press power button for 5 seconds or take battery out.
</li><li>Web OS crashes-- ??? (but looks like no different than above)</li>
</ul><p>
Android OS crashes--??? Haven't seen it crash yet (since Dec 2008). Apps have crashed, or the phone needs a reboot due to lack of <i>force close</i>, but the phone recovers nicely on app crashes. Apps crashing on any of the above devices usually result in an OS crash as well.
</p><p>.</p><p>
There's a reason why VM's make sense. Especially when you're mobile. Nvidia is shooting themselves in the foot on this one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Palm OS crashes--take battery out and in .
WinCE crashes--take battery out and in .
iPhone OS crashes--Press power button for 5 seconds .
Symbian OS crashes--Press power button for 5 seconds or take battery out .
Web OS crashes-- ? ? ?
( but looks like no different than above ) Android OS crashes-- ? ? ?
Have n't seen it crash yet ( since Dec 2008 ) .
Apps have crashed , or the phone needs a reboot due to lack of force close , but the phone recovers nicely on app crashes .
Apps crashing on any of the above devices usually result in an OS crash as well .
. There 's a reason why VM 's make sense .
Especially when you 're mobile .
Nvidia is shooting themselves in the foot on this one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Palm OS crashes--take battery out and in.
WinCE crashes--take battery out and in.
iPhone OS crashes--Press power button for 5 seconds.
Symbian OS crashes--Press power button for 5 seconds or take battery out.
Web OS crashes-- ???
(but looks like no different than above)

Android OS crashes--???
Haven't seen it crash yet (since Dec 2008).
Apps have crashed, or the phone needs a reboot due to lack of force close, but the phone recovers nicely on app crashes.
Apps crashing on any of the above devices usually result in an OS crash as well.
.
There's a reason why VM's make sense.
Especially when you're mobile.
Nvidia is shooting themselves in the foot on this one.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379083</id>
	<title>YOyu FAIL IT</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245357600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>knows fhor sure what</htmltext>
<tokenext>knows fhor sure what</tokentext>
<sentencetext>knows fhor sure what</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379019</id>
	<title>Re:Android = no native code support</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245357420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are talking pure nonsense.<br>First, for many devices it is not about speed, it is about security. Java provides a very robust security framework to run untrusted code. If you were to make a similar security framework for C/C++, you would end up with Java.<br>Second, if Java runs too slow for you - buy a better CPU.<br>Third, I doubt you realize how many productions systems are running Java. My department alone is running a multi-million dollar platform all on Java.<br>Last, you actually can run C/C++ code on Android. You can run ARM assembly, C-Sharp, and Python too. But don't tell anyone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are talking pure nonsense.First , for many devices it is not about speed , it is about security .
Java provides a very robust security framework to run untrusted code .
If you were to make a similar security framework for C/C + + , you would end up with Java.Second , if Java runs too slow for you - buy a better CPU.Third , I doubt you realize how many productions systems are running Java .
My department alone is running a multi-million dollar platform all on Java.Last , you actually can run C/C + + code on Android .
You can run ARM assembly , C-Sharp , and Python too .
But do n't tell anyone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are talking pure nonsense.First, for many devices it is not about speed, it is about security.
Java provides a very robust security framework to run untrusted code.
If you were to make a similar security framework for C/C++, you would end up with Java.Second, if Java runs too slow for you - buy a better CPU.Third, I doubt you realize how many productions systems are running Java.
My department alone is running a multi-million dollar platform all on Java.Last, you actually can run C/C++ code on Android.
You can run ARM assembly, C-Sharp, and Python too.
But don't tell anyone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378731</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28402639</id>
	<title>Re:My god</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245520560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>WinCE and the lack of software available for it killed the PDA market. My grandmother, strangely, was a PDA enthusiast, and after going through several of these devices over the years, ditched them for some sort of 5x10x2 four-pound monster of a mobile device, that has a touchscreen and runs Vista Business.</p><p>WinCE was unfortunate. ActiveSync more so. The reason that PDAs were useless devices had nothing to do with their capabilities; there's little that the iphone/ARM netbooks can do now that could not have been done then.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>WinCE and the lack of software available for it killed the PDA market .
My grandmother , strangely , was a PDA enthusiast , and after going through several of these devices over the years , ditched them for some sort of 5x10x2 four-pound monster of a mobile device , that has a touchscreen and runs Vista Business.WinCE was unfortunate .
ActiveSync more so .
The reason that PDAs were useless devices had nothing to do with their capabilities ; there 's little that the iphone/ARM netbooks can do now that could not have been done then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WinCE and the lack of software available for it killed the PDA market.
My grandmother, strangely, was a PDA enthusiast, and after going through several of these devices over the years, ditched them for some sort of 5x10x2 four-pound monster of a mobile device, that has a touchscreen and runs Vista Business.WinCE was unfortunate.
ActiveSync more so.
The reason that PDAs were useless devices had nothing to do with their capabilities; there's little that the iphone/ARM netbooks can do now that could not have been done then.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28384003</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378573</id>
	<title>Corrupted opinion?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245356100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Isn't this NVIDIA opinion somehow influenced by having Microsoft as customer for their Tegra chips going to upcoming Zune HD?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't this NVIDIA opinion somehow influenced by having Microsoft as customer for their Tegra chips going to upcoming Zune HD ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't this NVIDIA opinion somehow influenced by having Microsoft as customer for their Tegra chips going to upcoming Zune HD?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380719</id>
	<title>Re:More business for ATI</title>
	<author>toleraen</author>
	<datestamp>1245319860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I might be reading your comment wrong, mistaking handheld with netbook, smartbook, etc, but ATI regularly pairs <a href="http://ati.amd.com/products/handheld.html" title="amd.com">embedded graphics chips</a> [amd.com] with the ARM platform, particularly their Imageon line.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I might be reading your comment wrong , mistaking handheld with netbook , smartbook , etc , but ATI regularly pairs embedded graphics chips [ amd.com ] with the ARM platform , particularly their Imageon line .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I might be reading your comment wrong, mistaking handheld with netbook, smartbook, etc, but ATI regularly pairs embedded graphics chips [amd.com] with the ARM platform, particularly their Imageon line.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379017</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28382379</id>
	<title>Re:Who needs Android?</title>
	<author>Xtifr</author>
	<datestamp>1245327000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>No Yum, apt-get, and Synaptic are NOT a replacement for an App store.</p></div><p>Indeed, as someone who uses both on a daily basis, I have to say that apt-get and synaptic are <em>vastly</em> superior to the utter mess that is Android Market.  About 75\% of the apps I download from the Market actually work--apparently this has something to do with something called "cupcake", but nowhere does it explain what a cupcake is or why it would affect my phone.  The reviews are nice, except that so many of them are posted by people who are obviously complete imbeciles; I half-trust the game reviews[*], but aside from that there seems to be no correlation (positive or negative) between an app's rating and its actual qualities[**]</p><p>As a developer, I suppose I can see something to some of your arguments about the advantages of Market <em>to a developer</em>, but as a <em>user</em>, I think Aptitude <em>kicks ass!</em></p><p>[*] with notable exceptions: the reviews for "Zombie, Run", for example, show a widespread ignorance about what the game is and how it's supposed to work.  Granted, a video game that must be played outdoors is pretty unusual, but there are a truly appalling number of reviews posted by people who obviously couldn't figure out that it has to be played outdoors despite the fact that the very first thing it says is, "you must be outdoors with a clear view of the sky to play this game".</p><p>[**] Normally, I tend to see people giving an app a bad review because they're idiots, but sometimes it's the opposite, as with the small handful of virus scanners (!) that are available.  Yes, there are actually companies charging money for Linux virus scanners.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>No Yum , apt-get , and Synaptic are NOT a replacement for an App store.Indeed , as someone who uses both on a daily basis , I have to say that apt-get and synaptic are vastly superior to the utter mess that is Android Market .
About 75 \ % of the apps I download from the Market actually work--apparently this has something to do with something called " cupcake " , but nowhere does it explain what a cupcake is or why it would affect my phone .
The reviews are nice , except that so many of them are posted by people who are obviously complete imbeciles ; I half-trust the game reviews [ * ] , but aside from that there seems to be no correlation ( positive or negative ) between an app 's rating and its actual qualities [ * * ] As a developer , I suppose I can see something to some of your arguments about the advantages of Market to a developer , but as a user , I think Aptitude kicks ass !
[ * ] with notable exceptions : the reviews for " Zombie , Run " , for example , show a widespread ignorance about what the game is and how it 's supposed to work .
Granted , a video game that must be played outdoors is pretty unusual , but there are a truly appalling number of reviews posted by people who obviously could n't figure out that it has to be played outdoors despite the fact that the very first thing it says is , " you must be outdoors with a clear view of the sky to play this game " .
[ * * ] Normally , I tend to see people giving an app a bad review because they 're idiots , but sometimes it 's the opposite , as with the small handful of virus scanners ( !
) that are available .
Yes , there are actually companies charging money for Linux virus scanners .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No Yum, apt-get, and Synaptic are NOT a replacement for an App store.Indeed, as someone who uses both on a daily basis, I have to say that apt-get and synaptic are vastly superior to the utter mess that is Android Market.
About 75\% of the apps I download from the Market actually work--apparently this has something to do with something called "cupcake", but nowhere does it explain what a cupcake is or why it would affect my phone.
The reviews are nice, except that so many of them are posted by people who are obviously complete imbeciles; I half-trust the game reviews[*], but aside from that there seems to be no correlation (positive or negative) between an app's rating and its actual qualities[**]As a developer, I suppose I can see something to some of your arguments about the advantages of Market to a developer, but as a user, I think Aptitude kicks ass!
[*] with notable exceptions: the reviews for "Zombie, Run", for example, show a widespread ignorance about what the game is and how it's supposed to work.
Granted, a video game that must be played outdoors is pretty unusual, but there are a truly appalling number of reviews posted by people who obviously couldn't figure out that it has to be played outdoors despite the fact that the very first thing it says is, "you must be outdoors with a clear view of the sky to play this game".
[**] Normally, I tend to see people giving an app a bad review because they're idiots, but sometimes it's the opposite, as with the small handful of virus scanners (!
) that are available.
Yes, there are actually companies charging money for Linux virus scanners.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381199</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380157</id>
	<title>Re:So...</title>
	<author>katpurz</author>
	<datestamp>1245317640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Windows CE and Windows Mobile share some elements, but are 2 different beasts.

Windows CE is a real-time capable emedded OS...made for low footprint devices (factory machinery, in-car GPS devices, etc).

Windows Mobile is built upon some of the embedded pieces of CE, and then has it's own bits...made for smart phones and pdas and handhelds and such.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows CE and Windows Mobile share some elements , but are 2 different beasts .
Windows CE is a real-time capable emedded OS...made for low footprint devices ( factory machinery , in-car GPS devices , etc ) .
Windows Mobile is built upon some of the embedded pieces of CE , and then has it 's own bits...made for smart phones and pdas and handhelds and such .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows CE and Windows Mobile share some elements, but are 2 different beasts.
Windows CE is a real-time capable emedded OS...made for low footprint devices (factory machinery, in-car GPS devices, etc).
Windows Mobile is built upon some of the embedded pieces of CE, and then has it's own bits...made for smart phones and pdas and handhelds and such.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379047</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380829</id>
	<title>Re:Why is this surprising?</title>
	<author>not already in use</author>
	<datestamp>1245320280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>You linux folk should be grateful for the fact that they release a driver at all. It's not like they get any return for creating a driver that allows a handful of people to run a hardware accelerated compiz desktops.  Until linux becomes a viable platform for the desktop (which it never will be, because of flawed ideologies), be thankful for any corporate *desktop* support you get.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You linux folk should be grateful for the fact that they release a driver at all .
It 's not like they get any return for creating a driver that allows a handful of people to run a hardware accelerated compiz desktops .
Until linux becomes a viable platform for the desktop ( which it never will be , because of flawed ideologies ) , be thankful for any corporate * desktop * support you get .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You linux folk should be grateful for the fact that they release a driver at all.
It's not like they get any return for creating a driver that allows a handful of people to run a hardware accelerated compiz desktops.
Until linux becomes a viable platform for the desktop (which it never will be, because of flawed ideologies), be thankful for any corporate *desktop* support you get.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379147</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379797</id>
	<title>Makes sense.</title>
	<author>rickb928</author>
	<datestamp>1245316500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm guessing nVidia isn't really into the ARM market.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm guessing nVidia is n't really into the ARM market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm guessing nVidia isn't really into the ARM market.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28382271</id>
	<title>Re:So...</title>
	<author>jrumney</author>
	<datestamp>1245326460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You can just as easily turn this around by comparing Linux on ARM based netbooks with Windows Mobile with its inflexible UI and limited display resolution.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can just as easily turn this around by comparing Linux on ARM based netbooks with Windows Mobile with its inflexible UI and limited display resolution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can just as easily turn this around by comparing Linux on ARM based netbooks with Windows Mobile with its inflexible UI and limited display resolution.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378497</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379243</id>
	<title>Non-sense quote about device support</title>
	<author>Joseph Lam</author>
	<datestamp>1245358080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mike Rayfield: </p><p><div class="quote"><p>"The world soundly rejected the first netbooks that came out with Linux," he said. "Printers didn't work, and devices didn't get recognized. The whole thing was a mess."</p></div><p>And how is Windows CE/Mobile any better in that regard? I would think it's even worse.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mike Rayfield : " The world soundly rejected the first netbooks that came out with Linux , " he said .
" Printers did n't work , and devices did n't get recognized .
The whole thing was a mess .
" And how is Windows CE/Mobile any better in that regard ?
I would think it 's even worse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mike Rayfield: "The world soundly rejected the first netbooks that came out with Linux," he said.
"Printers didn't work, and devices didn't get recognized.
The whole thing was a mess.
"And how is Windows CE/Mobile any better in that regard?
I would think it's even worse.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380269</id>
	<title>Re:More business for ATI</title>
	<author>hairyfeet</author>
	<datestamp>1245318060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Uhhh...pardon my ignorance, but does ATI even HAVE anything that competes with Tegra in the smartphone/MID space? Hell I thought I had learned about all the AMD/ATI products since converting from Intel/Nvidia, but I sure haven't heard of anything AMD has for the Tegra space. last I heard it was just Nvidia VS Intel, and of course we all know that Intel sucks for graphics.</p><p>

So if you wouldn't mind, Citation Please?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Uhhh...pardon my ignorance , but does ATI even HAVE anything that competes with Tegra in the smartphone/MID space ?
Hell I thought I had learned about all the AMD/ATI products since converting from Intel/Nvidia , but I sure have n't heard of anything AMD has for the Tegra space .
last I heard it was just Nvidia VS Intel , and of course we all know that Intel sucks for graphics .
So if you would n't mind , Citation Please ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uhhh...pardon my ignorance, but does ATI even HAVE anything that competes with Tegra in the smartphone/MID space?
Hell I thought I had learned about all the AMD/ATI products since converting from Intel/Nvidia, but I sure haven't heard of anything AMD has for the Tegra space.
last I heard it was just Nvidia VS Intel, and of course we all know that Intel sucks for graphics.
So if you wouldn't mind, Citation Please?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378579</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380091</id>
	<title>Re:So...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245317460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Windows CE and Windows Mobile are 2 different things my friend...</p><p>god I hate Slashdot..why do I find it irresistable to read the comments?!?!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows CE and Windows Mobile are 2 different things my friend...god I hate Slashdot..why do I find it irresistable to read the comments ? ! ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows CE and Windows Mobile are 2 different things my friend...god I hate Slashdot..why do I find it irresistable to read the comments?!?
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379047</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379047</id>
	<title>Re:So...</title>
	<author>Xocet\_00</author>
	<datestamp>1245357480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>"No, wait, Windows CE is 13 years old. It's had a little more time to design the window manager for different screen sizes."<br> <br>

While I agree with everything you've said here, and that the age of Windows CE makes the comparative shortcomings in Android somewhat excusable, it doesn't change the fact that Windows CE seems to do what NVidia wants and Android doesn't.<br> <br>

Android being new is a perfectly valid excuse, but in a here-and-now business sense Nvidia just has to go with what works... I guess.<br> <br>

Writing this is hurting me. I really, <i>really</i> hate Windows CE (or Windows Mobile or whatever they call it these days.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>" No , wait , Windows CE is 13 years old .
It 's had a little more time to design the window manager for different screen sizes .
" While I agree with everything you 've said here , and that the age of Windows CE makes the comparative shortcomings in Android somewhat excusable , it does n't change the fact that Windows CE seems to do what NVidia wants and Android does n't .
Android being new is a perfectly valid excuse , but in a here-and-now business sense Nvidia just has to go with what works... I guess .
Writing this is hurting me .
I really , really hate Windows CE ( or Windows Mobile or whatever they call it these days .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"No, wait, Windows CE is 13 years old.
It's had a little more time to design the window manager for different screen sizes.
" 

While I agree with everything you've said here, and that the age of Windows CE makes the comparative shortcomings in Android somewhat excusable, it doesn't change the fact that Windows CE seems to do what NVidia wants and Android doesn't.
Android being new is a perfectly valid excuse, but in a here-and-now business sense Nvidia just has to go with what works... I guess.
Writing this is hurting me.
I really, really hate Windows CE (or Windows Mobile or whatever they call it these days.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378497</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381009</id>
	<title>Re:Why is this surprising?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245321000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"no real support" ? whatever do you mean, there is infinitely better support and drivers from nvidia than from intel or ati.<br>ATI's driver doesn't compile on latest kernels without voodoo, Intel's hasn't worked properly for over 8 months, check out freedesktop's bugtracker, see for yourself, all those hard crashes when switching VTs and suspending/resuming, running GL apps..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" no real support " ?
whatever do you mean , there is infinitely better support and drivers from nvidia than from intel or ati.ATI 's driver does n't compile on latest kernels without voodoo , Intel 's has n't worked properly for over 8 months , check out freedesktop 's bugtracker , see for yourself , all those hard crashes when switching VTs and suspending/resuming , running GL apps. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"no real support" ?
whatever do you mean, there is infinitely better support and drivers from nvidia than from intel or ati.ATI's driver doesn't compile on latest kernels without voodoo, Intel's hasn't worked properly for over 8 months, check out freedesktop's bugtracker, see for yourself, all those hard crashes when switching VTs and suspending/resuming, running GL apps..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379147</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380647</id>
	<title>Re:Android = no native code support</title>
	<author>Bill, Shooter of Bul</author>
	<datestamp>1245319560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was going to moderate your post, but I couldn't decide which way to mod it. I should have modded it up because you were right in complaining that android doesn't make use of existing libraries,c using a lot of code to be rewritten. But, I also wanted to mod it down for bashing Java unnecessarily. So I just commented instead.  Its really just an innocent bystander, that really is fit for production and used heavily by a number of developers on platforms big and small. The walled garden of andriod is the really problem the fact that the grass is made out of Java doesn't change that fact.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was going to moderate your post , but I could n't decide which way to mod it .
I should have modded it up because you were right in complaining that android does n't make use of existing libraries,c using a lot of code to be rewritten .
But , I also wanted to mod it down for bashing Java unnecessarily .
So I just commented instead .
Its really just an innocent bystander , that really is fit for production and used heavily by a number of developers on platforms big and small .
The walled garden of andriod is the really problem the fact that the grass is made out of Java does n't change that fact .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was going to moderate your post, but I couldn't decide which way to mod it.
I should have modded it up because you were right in complaining that android doesn't make use of existing libraries,c using a lot of code to be rewritten.
But, I also wanted to mod it down for bashing Java unnecessarily.
So I just commented instead.
Its really just an innocent bystander, that really is fit for production and used heavily by a number of developers on platforms big and small.
The walled garden of andriod is the really problem the fact that the grass is made out of Java doesn't change that fact.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378731</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380337</id>
	<title>Re:corruption and collusion</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245318300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Nvidia has strong ties to Microsoft, and when Microsoft tells them to jump, they simply ask 'how high'."</p><p>Ha! If they were actually true I would have had drivers for Windows Vista launch that were not crap.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Nvidia has strong ties to Microsoft , and when Microsoft tells them to jump , they simply ask 'how high'. " Ha !
If they were actually true I would have had drivers for Windows Vista launch that were not crap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Nvidia has strong ties to Microsoft, and when Microsoft tells them to jump, they simply ask 'how high'."Ha!
If they were actually true I would have had drivers for Windows Vista launch that were not crap.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379529</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378935</id>
	<title>ARM hostile to Linux?</title>
	<author>chrb</author>
	<datestamp>1245357120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was at a conference in 2002 where the chairman of ARM, Sir Robin Saxby, gave a keynote talk on ARM. In the Q&amp;A session afterwards one of the attendees asked what Mr. Saxby thought of Linux - he replied that it was a toy operating system that would never amount to anything, and that open source was a useless strategy for developing software and he didn't see any place for it in the business world. The hall erupted with various PhD students and postgrads raising their hands, and after three people all said basically the same thing - that they use Linux and think open source is great - the chair had to say no more Linux questions. But after hearing what the guy at the top had to say, it would never surprise me to hear that ARM might be hostile to Linux and open source, even when it's running on their own chipsets.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was at a conference in 2002 where the chairman of ARM , Sir Robin Saxby , gave a keynote talk on ARM .
In the Q&amp;A session afterwards one of the attendees asked what Mr. Saxby thought of Linux - he replied that it was a toy operating system that would never amount to anything , and that open source was a useless strategy for developing software and he did n't see any place for it in the business world .
The hall erupted with various PhD students and postgrads raising their hands , and after three people all said basically the same thing - that they use Linux and think open source is great - the chair had to say no more Linux questions .
But after hearing what the guy at the top had to say , it would never surprise me to hear that ARM might be hostile to Linux and open source , even when it 's running on their own chipsets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was at a conference in 2002 where the chairman of ARM, Sir Robin Saxby, gave a keynote talk on ARM.
In the Q&amp;A session afterwards one of the attendees asked what Mr. Saxby thought of Linux - he replied that it was a toy operating system that would never amount to anything, and that open source was a useless strategy for developing software and he didn't see any place for it in the business world.
The hall erupted with various PhD students and postgrads raising their hands, and after three people all said basically the same thing - that they use Linux and think open source is great - the chair had to say no more Linux questions.
But after hearing what the guy at the top had to say, it would never surprise me to hear that ARM might be hostile to Linux and open source, even when it's running on their own chipsets.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28382819</id>
	<title>Re:Who needs Android?</title>
	<author>Bert64</author>
	<datestamp>1245329040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>X is not the big performance hit it was in the days when workstations had 4mb of ram and isa videocards, and you could run a stripped down version on a small device which removed the network transparency and other such featured.</p><p>Open source applications are also CPU agnostic, they can be and usually are compiled for all different kinds of CPU.</p><p>The app store is basically a copy of the repositories like apt which Linux has had for years, they could do with a better interface and some promotion so that users know they are actually there, but it's the same functionality.</p><p>The ability of authors to update their apps in an app store can easily be replicated to a distro repository, and third party repositories are easy to set up... Maemo (nokia's tablet platform) seems to handle it quite well, you can click on a link in the browser and it will add a repository then install the package for you.</p><p>Repositories can also handle closed source apps, tho obviously this is discouraged because of all the disadvantages of not having the source available.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>X is not the big performance hit it was in the days when workstations had 4mb of ram and isa videocards , and you could run a stripped down version on a small device which removed the network transparency and other such featured.Open source applications are also CPU agnostic , they can be and usually are compiled for all different kinds of CPU.The app store is basically a copy of the repositories like apt which Linux has had for years , they could do with a better interface and some promotion so that users know they are actually there , but it 's the same functionality.The ability of authors to update their apps in an app store can easily be replicated to a distro repository , and third party repositories are easy to set up... Maemo ( nokia 's tablet platform ) seems to handle it quite well , you can click on a link in the browser and it will add a repository then install the package for you.Repositories can also handle closed source apps , tho obviously this is discouraged because of all the disadvantages of not having the source available .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>X is not the big performance hit it was in the days when workstations had 4mb of ram and isa videocards, and you could run a stripped down version on a small device which removed the network transparency and other such featured.Open source applications are also CPU agnostic, they can be and usually are compiled for all different kinds of CPU.The app store is basically a copy of the repositories like apt which Linux has had for years, they could do with a better interface and some promotion so that users know they are actually there, but it's the same functionality.The ability of authors to update their apps in an app store can easily be replicated to a distro repository, and third party repositories are easy to set up... Maemo (nokia's tablet platform) seems to handle it quite well, you can click on a link in the browser and it will add a repository then install the package for you.Repositories can also handle closed source apps, tho obviously this is discouraged because of all the disadvantages of not having the source available.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381199</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380025</id>
	<title>Re:So...</title>
	<author>qoncept</author>
	<datestamp>1245317280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What the hell are you trying to say here? At first it looks like your argument is that both OS's are designed for netbooks/PDAs/whatever, and that because of that, its impossible for one to be better. Just as an F-22 couldn't possibly be better at shooting down other planes than an F-16, because they were both designed to do it.

<br> <br>Then it looks like you concede that "Yeah, Windows CE probably is better." But instead of just leaving it alone, you make an excuse for Android. As if the guy said "Windows CE is better and it's due to a fault of Google's." Who fucking cares WHY one choice is better than the other? Are you going to choose inferior software because they had a sloppy drunk dev team, so, considering the handicap, they did alright?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What the hell are you trying to say here ?
At first it looks like your argument is that both OS 's are designed for netbooks/PDAs/whatever , and that because of that , its impossible for one to be better .
Just as an F-22 could n't possibly be better at shooting down other planes than an F-16 , because they were both designed to do it .
Then it looks like you concede that " Yeah , Windows CE probably is better .
" But instead of just leaving it alone , you make an excuse for Android .
As if the guy said " Windows CE is better and it 's due to a fault of Google 's .
" Who fucking cares WHY one choice is better than the other ?
Are you going to choose inferior software because they had a sloppy drunk dev team , so , considering the handicap , they did alright ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What the hell are you trying to say here?
At first it looks like your argument is that both OS's are designed for netbooks/PDAs/whatever, and that because of that, its impossible for one to be better.
Just as an F-22 couldn't possibly be better at shooting down other planes than an F-16, because they were both designed to do it.
Then it looks like you concede that "Yeah, Windows CE probably is better.
" But instead of just leaving it alone, you make an excuse for Android.
As if the guy said "Windows CE is better and it's due to a fault of Google's.
" Who fucking cares WHY one choice is better than the other?
Are you going to choose inferior software because they had a sloppy drunk dev team, so, considering the handicap, they did alright?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378497</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28390713</id>
	<title>Re:Who needs Android?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245429480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Technically correct, but (remaining anonymous) I remember when someone first explained http to me back in the dark ages. I said that I thought that it was interesting, but what did it really provide the ftp didn't? I could already visit a site, look for information and download what I needed. All http added (especially in the early days) was a slightly nicer view.</p><p>How is that different from Android/Linux today?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Technically correct , but ( remaining anonymous ) I remember when someone first explained http to me back in the dark ages .
I said that I thought that it was interesting , but what did it really provide the ftp did n't ?
I could already visit a site , look for information and download what I needed .
All http added ( especially in the early days ) was a slightly nicer view.How is that different from Android/Linux today ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Technically correct, but (remaining anonymous) I remember when someone first explained http to me back in the dark ages.
I said that I thought that it was interesting, but what did it really provide the ftp didn't?
I could already visit a site, look for information and download what I needed.
All http added (especially in the early days) was a slightly nicer view.How is that different from Android/Linux today?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379051</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379921</id>
	<title>Re:So...</title>
	<author>Chris Burke</author>
	<datestamp>1245316980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm still just confused by the terminology.  In the explosion of marketing names for things in between a phone and a laptop, I guess I missed the "smartbook".  I assume that's like a netbook, only retarded?  Because if there's one thing I know about computer terminology, it's that the word "Smart" always means anything but.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm still just confused by the terminology .
In the explosion of marketing names for things in between a phone and a laptop , I guess I missed the " smartbook " .
I assume that 's like a netbook , only retarded ?
Because if there 's one thing I know about computer terminology , it 's that the word " Smart " always means anything but .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm still just confused by the terminology.
In the explosion of marketing names for things in between a phone and a laptop, I guess I missed the "smartbook".
I assume that's like a netbook, only retarded?
Because if there's one thing I know about computer terminology, it's that the word "Smart" always means anything but.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378497</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380057</id>
	<title>Re:Why the summary doesn't mention Java?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245317400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Linux is good for technical people who enjoy chatting with the shell, while Windows users are <b>lazy</b> people who want to minimize the work on the computer to spend their time on other stuff.</p></div><p>Even though I am someone who hates Windows I have to challenge this. You are saying that if Windows users want to do things <i> other than</i> work on their computer, then they are lazy? I supposed someone who wants to work on research curing cancer instead of spending more time getting their computer to work is lazy.

<br> <br>Damn, I hate lazy people.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Linux is good for technical people who enjoy chatting with the shell , while Windows users are lazy people who want to minimize the work on the computer to spend their time on other stuff.Even though I am someone who hates Windows I have to challenge this .
You are saying that if Windows users want to do things other than work on their computer , then they are lazy ?
I supposed someone who wants to work on research curing cancer instead of spending more time getting their computer to work is lazy .
Damn , I hate lazy people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Linux is good for technical people who enjoy chatting with the shell, while Windows users are lazy people who want to minimize the work on the computer to spend their time on other stuff.Even though I am someone who hates Windows I have to challenge this.
You are saying that if Windows users want to do things  other than work on their computer, then they are lazy?
I supposed someone who wants to work on research curing cancer instead of spending more time getting their computer to work is lazy.
Damn, I hate lazy people.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379579</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28387767</id>
	<title>"Rock-solid"?</title>
	<author>Money for Nothin'</author>
	<datestamp>1245415800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Tell that to my AT&amp;T Fuze running WinMo 6.1, which spontaneously reboots at least once/day, and from which I send about 20 application exception reports to MSFT each week.  Oh gee, "cprog.exe" or "device.exe" died again?  Let me send that to Redmond and hope they have a project manager who gives a damn!</p><p>"Rock solid" my ass.  I've had 3 WinMo phones; my next phone will be either an iPhone or Android-based.  Windows Mobile is a steaming heap of shit.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...not that I would expect an <b>executive</b> of any non-trivially-sized firm to actually know anything about technology...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Tell that to my AT&amp;T Fuze running WinMo 6.1 , which spontaneously reboots at least once/day , and from which I send about 20 application exception reports to MSFT each week .
Oh gee , " cprog.exe " or " device.exe " died again ?
Let me send that to Redmond and hope they have a project manager who gives a damn !
" Rock solid " my ass .
I 've had 3 WinMo phones ; my next phone will be either an iPhone or Android-based .
Windows Mobile is a steaming heap of shit .
...not that I would expect an executive of any non-trivially-sized firm to actually know anything about technology.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tell that to my AT&amp;T Fuze running WinMo 6.1, which spontaneously reboots at least once/day, and from which I send about 20 application exception reports to MSFT each week.
Oh gee, "cprog.exe" or "device.exe" died again?
Let me send that to Redmond and hope they have a project manager who gives a damn!
"Rock solid" my ass.
I've had 3 WinMo phones; my next phone will be either an iPhone or Android-based.
Windows Mobile is a steaming heap of shit.
...not that I would expect an executive of any non-trivially-sized firm to actually know anything about technology...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379017</id>
	<title>Re:More business for ATI</title>
	<author>xlotlu</author>
	<datestamp>1245357420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If NVidia does not want a piece of Android business, it is NVidia's loss.</p><p>And AMD/ATI gain.</p></div><p>Modded interesting? Interestingly offtopic?</p><p>This is an ARM story. AMD doesn't do ARM, and while ATI <a href="http://www.amd.com/us/products/embedded/graphics-processors/Pages/embedded-display-graphics.aspx" title="amd.com">does produce</a> [amd.com] embedded graphics chips, I've never heard of them being paired with handheld devices.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If NVidia does not want a piece of Android business , it is NVidia 's loss.And AMD/ATI gain.Modded interesting ?
Interestingly offtopic ? This is an ARM story .
AMD does n't do ARM , and while ATI does produce [ amd.com ] embedded graphics chips , I 've never heard of them being paired with handheld devices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If NVidia does not want a piece of Android business, it is NVidia's loss.And AMD/ATI gain.Modded interesting?
Interestingly offtopic?This is an ARM story.
AMD doesn't do ARM, and while ATI does produce [amd.com] embedded graphics chips, I've never heard of them being paired with handheld devices.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378579</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28489375</id>
	<title>Re:So...</title>
	<author>carlmenezes</author>
	<datestamp>1246016640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is good. Really good. Because this will drive more people towards AMD's video cards. This will also make those who are contributing to getting AMD's video cards working well in Linux redouble their efforts. This is essentially the beginning of the end for NVIDIA. Yes, it is a good business decision for them in the short term, but a VERY bad one for them in the long term and somebody high up will be paying the price a few years down the line because it was their call.

So I say again, buy AMD and make the AMD drivers better than the binaries that NVIDIA is shipping. Take away the reason for anyone who is using Linux to buy NVIDIA. Keep competition alive and support companies that support open source. Whether NVIDIA sees it or not, Linux's mind share is going to increase by an order of magnitude over the next couple of years simply because of smart phones. More people are also going to be running it as their desktop, in particular the mum and dad types who just want to browse the internet on cheap hardware and not worry about viruses.

Again, the reason I say this is good is that this is an opportunity for us, the open source community to show companies who are watching from the sidelines, what a difference supporting open source can make. Use your coding skills. Contribute. Help AMD and others who support Linux and open source. We can make a huge difference to a company's fortunes. Flaming NVIDIA is not going to help. Contributing to make sure the competition's products work so well that there is no need for NVIDIA's products is.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is good .
Really good .
Because this will drive more people towards AMD 's video cards .
This will also make those who are contributing to getting AMD 's video cards working well in Linux redouble their efforts .
This is essentially the beginning of the end for NVIDIA .
Yes , it is a good business decision for them in the short term , but a VERY bad one for them in the long term and somebody high up will be paying the price a few years down the line because it was their call .
So I say again , buy AMD and make the AMD drivers better than the binaries that NVIDIA is shipping .
Take away the reason for anyone who is using Linux to buy NVIDIA .
Keep competition alive and support companies that support open source .
Whether NVIDIA sees it or not , Linux 's mind share is going to increase by an order of magnitude over the next couple of years simply because of smart phones .
More people are also going to be running it as their desktop , in particular the mum and dad types who just want to browse the internet on cheap hardware and not worry about viruses .
Again , the reason I say this is good is that this is an opportunity for us , the open source community to show companies who are watching from the sidelines , what a difference supporting open source can make .
Use your coding skills .
Contribute. Help AMD and others who support Linux and open source .
We can make a huge difference to a company 's fortunes .
Flaming NVIDIA is not going to help .
Contributing to make sure the competition 's products work so well that there is no need for NVIDIA 's products is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is good.
Really good.
Because this will drive more people towards AMD's video cards.
This will also make those who are contributing to getting AMD's video cards working well in Linux redouble their efforts.
This is essentially the beginning of the end for NVIDIA.
Yes, it is a good business decision for them in the short term, but a VERY bad one for them in the long term and somebody high up will be paying the price a few years down the line because it was their call.
So I say again, buy AMD and make the AMD drivers better than the binaries that NVIDIA is shipping.
Take away the reason for anyone who is using Linux to buy NVIDIA.
Keep competition alive and support companies that support open source.
Whether NVIDIA sees it or not, Linux's mind share is going to increase by an order of magnitude over the next couple of years simply because of smart phones.
More people are also going to be running it as their desktop, in particular the mum and dad types who just want to browse the internet on cheap hardware and not worry about viruses.
Again, the reason I say this is good is that this is an opportunity for us, the open source community to show companies who are watching from the sidelines, what a difference supporting open source can make.
Use your coding skills.
Contribute. Help AMD and others who support Linux and open source.
We can make a huge difference to a company's fortunes.
Flaming NVIDIA is not going to help.
Contributing to make sure the competition's products work so well that there is no need for NVIDIA's products is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378497</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381773</id>
	<title>Re:While I haven't ever used Android</title>
	<author>psychokitten</author>
	<datestamp>1245324240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>While Android may not be nearly as mature as Windows Mobile - from my own experience it's vastly inferior to Microsoft's product  It has potential, but it still has a ways to go.  Granted, my own experience may be influenced by the fact that HTC decided to make the G1 a fairly sub-par platform for Android, giving it next to no storage and leaving it very little ram to run apps after Android sucks up the majority of it - but the same hardware running WinMo would be able to do so much more.</htmltext>
<tokenext>While Android may not be nearly as mature as Windows Mobile - from my own experience it 's vastly inferior to Microsoft 's product It has potential , but it still has a ways to go .
Granted , my own experience may be influenced by the fact that HTC decided to make the G1 a fairly sub-par platform for Android , giving it next to no storage and leaving it very little ram to run apps after Android sucks up the majority of it - but the same hardware running WinMo would be able to do so much more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While Android may not be nearly as mature as Windows Mobile - from my own experience it's vastly inferior to Microsoft's product  It has potential, but it still has a ways to go.
Granted, my own experience may be influenced by the fact that HTC decided to make the G1 a fairly sub-par platform for Android, giving it next to no storage and leaving it very little ram to run apps after Android sucks up the majority of it - but the same hardware running WinMo would be able to do so much more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378849</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381139</id>
	<title>So you propose a "fuck the future" plan</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245321480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>A "here and now" business sense makes a pretty bleak future.  Eventually software built on a "here and now" business sense will be a big patch-ball of tape and you'll be looking at OSS again.  Why avoid it?  Don't use proprietary solutions, whether they be WinCE or Android or whatever.  Invest your efforts into protecting yourself with compatibility and refinement of the software you use by building on OSS.  It reduces the initial investment and provides a good base to build on, and whatever you build will be well defined, adaptable, and compatible in future scenarios.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A " here and now " business sense makes a pretty bleak future .
Eventually software built on a " here and now " business sense will be a big patch-ball of tape and you 'll be looking at OSS again .
Why avoid it ?
Do n't use proprietary solutions , whether they be WinCE or Android or whatever .
Invest your efforts into protecting yourself with compatibility and refinement of the software you use by building on OSS .
It reduces the initial investment and provides a good base to build on , and whatever you build will be well defined , adaptable , and compatible in future scenarios .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A "here and now" business sense makes a pretty bleak future.
Eventually software built on a "here and now" business sense will be a big patch-ball of tape and you'll be looking at OSS again.
Why avoid it?
Don't use proprietary solutions, whether they be WinCE or Android or whatever.
Invest your efforts into protecting yourself with compatibility and refinement of the software you use by building on OSS.
It reduces the initial investment and provides a good base to build on, and whatever you build will be well defined, adaptable, and compatible in future scenarios.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379047</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28386457</id>
	<title>Re:So...</title>
	<author>V!NCENT</author>
	<datestamp>1245443580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Simple. nVidia doesn't have a driver. nVidia is not ready for the arm. Period. Nothing to see here. Move along...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Simple .
nVidia does n't have a driver .
nVidia is not ready for the arm .
Period. Nothing to see here .
Move along.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Simple.
nVidia doesn't have a driver.
nVidia is not ready for the arm.
Period. Nothing to see here.
Move along...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378497</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379633</id>
	<title>Re:So...</title>
	<author>sexconker</author>
	<datestamp>1245316080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They're in fact two different things.</p><p>Windows CE is used in a lot of places.<br>Windows CE is in fact rock solid, as Nvidia says.</p><p>Android is not targeted for the same applications (as in uses, not as in programs) that Windows CE is.</p><p>Regardless, this is all marketing.  MS agrees to use Nvidia's platform in shit like the Zune HD.<br>Nvidia agrees to praise Windows CE and say they're optimizing for it.  Nvidia doesn't give a rat's ass what they actually use, as long as it's competent (as Windows CE and Android both are).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're in fact two different things.Windows CE is used in a lot of places.Windows CE is in fact rock solid , as Nvidia says.Android is not targeted for the same applications ( as in uses , not as in programs ) that Windows CE is.Regardless , this is all marketing .
MS agrees to use Nvidia 's platform in shit like the Zune HD.Nvidia agrees to praise Windows CE and say they 're optimizing for it .
Nvidia does n't give a rat 's ass what they actually use , as long as it 's competent ( as Windows CE and Android both are ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're in fact two different things.Windows CE is used in a lot of places.Windows CE is in fact rock solid, as Nvidia says.Android is not targeted for the same applications (as in uses, not as in programs) that Windows CE is.Regardless, this is all marketing.
MS agrees to use Nvidia's platform in shit like the Zune HD.Nvidia agrees to praise Windows CE and say they're optimizing for it.
Nvidia doesn't give a rat's ass what they actually use, as long as it's competent (as Windows CE and Android both are).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379047</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380717</id>
	<title>Re:Wait a minute</title>
	<author>nxtw</author>
	<datestamp>1245319800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Poor UI - what he is talking about? Windows CE is a mess. Yes, Windows Mobile 5 was kinda Teletubies land as Windows XP, but still, it's a huge mess stiched together</p></div></blockquote><p>Although Windows Mobile is based on Windows CE, they are not the same thing.  Windows Mobile is a specific set of applications on top of Windows CE with a single (visible) application - a PDA or phone.  Windows CE itself can be used with a keyboard and mouse and has the ability to act as a standard desktop system (with multiple windows visible, a method to switch between windows, etc.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Poor UI - what he is talking about ?
Windows CE is a mess .
Yes , Windows Mobile 5 was kinda Teletubies land as Windows XP , but still , it 's a huge mess stiched togetherAlthough Windows Mobile is based on Windows CE , they are not the same thing .
Windows Mobile is a specific set of applications on top of Windows CE with a single ( visible ) application - a PDA or phone .
Windows CE itself can be used with a keyboard and mouse and has the ability to act as a standard desktop system ( with multiple windows visible , a method to switch between windows , etc .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Poor UI - what he is talking about?
Windows CE is a mess.
Yes, Windows Mobile 5 was kinda Teletubies land as Windows XP, but still, it's a huge mess stiched togetherAlthough Windows Mobile is based on Windows CE, they are not the same thing.
Windows Mobile is a specific set of applications on top of Windows CE with a single (visible) application - a PDA or phone.
Windows CE itself can be used with a keyboard and mouse and has the ability to act as a standard desktop system (with multiple windows visible, a method to switch between windows, etc.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379757</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380507</id>
	<title>The real issue ....</title>
	<author>taniwha</author>
	<datestamp>1245319020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Android doesn't use X - nVidia have drivers for X and for Windows - but not for Android - so no one's choosing nVidia hardware for Android - so nVidia's discouraging people from using Android<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....</p><p>Just wait, if they're smart a year from now they'll have Android drivers and wont have a problem with it</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Android does n't use X - nVidia have drivers for X and for Windows - but not for Android - so no one 's choosing nVidia hardware for Android - so nVidia 's discouraging people from using Android ....Just wait , if they 're smart a year from now they 'll have Android drivers and wont have a problem with it</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Android doesn't use X - nVidia have drivers for X and for Windows - but not for Android - so no one's choosing nVidia hardware for Android - so nVidia's discouraging people from using Android ....Just wait, if they're smart a year from now they'll have Android drivers and wont have a problem with it</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379047</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381287</id>
	<title>Re:ARM hostile to Linux?</title>
	<author>mejogid</author>
	<datestamp>1245322140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>now that Linux is crucial for their survival.</p></div><p>While I'd agree that linux has started to make an impact on mobile devices, thanks primarily to its non<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/GNU implementation in Android, it's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM\_architecture" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">clearly not</a> [wikipedia.org] the only thing keeping ARM alive (apologies for the wikipedia link, the sources seem to check out).  While their profit/unit may be low, they've got &#194;&pound;50 million net income, 1,500 employees and and have shipped 10 billion devices including 98\% of phones.  Linux may be a growing market, but suggesting it's keeping them afloat is ludicrous.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>now that Linux is crucial for their survival.While I 'd agree that linux has started to make an impact on mobile devices , thanks primarily to its non /GNU implementation in Android , it 's clearly not [ wikipedia.org ] the only thing keeping ARM alive ( apologies for the wikipedia link , the sources seem to check out ) .
While their profit/unit may be low , they 've got     50 million net income , 1,500 employees and and have shipped 10 billion devices including 98 \ % of phones .
Linux may be a growing market , but suggesting it 's keeping them afloat is ludicrous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>now that Linux is crucial for their survival.While I'd agree that linux has started to make an impact on mobile devices, thanks primarily to its non /GNU implementation in Android, it's clearly not [wikipedia.org] the only thing keeping ARM alive (apologies for the wikipedia link, the sources seem to check out).
While their profit/unit may be low, they've got Â£50 million net income, 1,500 employees and and have shipped 10 billion devices including 98\% of phones.
Linux may be a growing market, but suggesting it's keeping them afloat is ludicrous.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379819</id>
	<title>Optmizing hardware for Windows?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245316560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does any one find this sentence scary: "Nvidia is busy optimizing its multimedia-savvy Tegra system-on-chip for Windows CE."?</p><p>Why are we now optimizing hardware for software?  Hardware should be designed to be as accurate and effective as possible.  Let the OS optimize itself for the hardware.  It is much more difficult to redesign hardware than software (hence the hard- and soft- prefixes).  Hopefully, this is just a poorly worded sentence and we are not headed towards Winvidia.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does any one find this sentence scary : " Nvidia is busy optimizing its multimedia-savvy Tegra system-on-chip for Windows CE .
" ? Why are we now optimizing hardware for software ?
Hardware should be designed to be as accurate and effective as possible .
Let the OS optimize itself for the hardware .
It is much more difficult to redesign hardware than software ( hence the hard- and soft- prefixes ) .
Hopefully , this is just a poorly worded sentence and we are not headed towards Winvidia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does any one find this sentence scary: "Nvidia is busy optimizing its multimedia-savvy Tegra system-on-chip for Windows CE.
"?Why are we now optimizing hardware for software?
Hardware should be designed to be as accurate and effective as possible.
Let the OS optimize itself for the hardware.
It is much more difficult to redesign hardware than software (hence the hard- and soft- prefixes).
Hopefully, this is just a poorly worded sentence and we are not headed towards Winvidia.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379119</id>
	<title>Re:More business for ATI</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245357720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>AMD/ATI sold its mobile graphics to Qualcomm, so they're no longer competing in the mobile graphics market. Hence, Tegra's only [worthy] competitor at the moment is Qualcomm's Snapdragon platform.</htmltext>
<tokenext>AMD/ATI sold its mobile graphics to Qualcomm , so they 're no longer competing in the mobile graphics market .
Hence , Tegra 's only [ worthy ] competitor at the moment is Qualcomm 's Snapdragon platform .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>AMD/ATI sold its mobile graphics to Qualcomm, so they're no longer competing in the mobile graphics market.
Hence, Tegra's only [worthy] competitor at the moment is Qualcomm's Snapdragon platform.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378579</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381465</id>
	<title>Re:Non-sense quote about device support</title>
	<author>dunkelfalke</author>
	<datestamp>1245322920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>CE 6 comes with a lot of drivers. The fact that it was offered for a lot of time for lots of very different devices helps.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>CE 6 comes with a lot of drivers .
The fact that it was offered for a lot of time for lots of very different devices helps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>CE 6 comes with a lot of drivers.
The fact that it was offered for a lot of time for lots of very different devices helps.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379243</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380541</id>
	<title>Re:So...</title>
	<author>Klistvud</author>
	<datestamp>1245319200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Corporations have a deep aversion toward anything that is "free" -- be it free as in beer or as in libre! This is an important factor to consider.</p><p>No matter what level of maturity a product may reach, if it's a "freebie", the corporate world will simply frown upon it. It's just too much of a contradiction to their business model: it's almost like expecting the oil producers to give an honest judgment on, say, solar energy cars. And it's not about "malice" either -- they are not "evil", they simply have a blind spot for everything "free".</p><p>The sad thing however, is that the hardware vendors, incapable of making unbiased, merit-based evaluations of various operating systems, are the ones who decide which OS gets approved in the end...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Corporations have a deep aversion toward anything that is " free " -- be it free as in beer or as in libre !
This is an important factor to consider.No matter what level of maturity a product may reach , if it 's a " freebie " , the corporate world will simply frown upon it .
It 's just too much of a contradiction to their business model : it 's almost like expecting the oil producers to give an honest judgment on , say , solar energy cars .
And it 's not about " malice " either -- they are not " evil " , they simply have a blind spot for everything " free " .The sad thing however , is that the hardware vendors , incapable of making unbiased , merit-based evaluations of various operating systems , are the ones who decide which OS gets approved in the end.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Corporations have a deep aversion toward anything that is "free" -- be it free as in beer or as in libre!
This is an important factor to consider.No matter what level of maturity a product may reach, if it's a "freebie", the corporate world will simply frown upon it.
It's just too much of a contradiction to their business model: it's almost like expecting the oil producers to give an honest judgment on, say, solar energy cars.
And it's not about "malice" either -- they are not "evil", they simply have a blind spot for everything "free".The sad thing however, is that the hardware vendors, incapable of making unbiased, merit-based evaluations of various operating systems, are the ones who decide which OS gets approved in the end...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379047</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28387539</id>
	<title>Re:ARM hostile to Linux?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245413340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Crucial? How do you figure?<br>ARM deals largely in the embedded space, Linux is a minor player at best in the embedded space.<br>It's the opposite, really, ARM has become crucial for Linux, which desperately needs some sort of gimmick on a gimmick (ARM netbooks) since the last gimmick (netbooks) failed quite miserably.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Crucial ?
How do you figure ? ARM deals largely in the embedded space , Linux is a minor player at best in the embedded space.It 's the opposite , really , ARM has become crucial for Linux , which desperately needs some sort of gimmick on a gimmick ( ARM netbooks ) since the last gimmick ( netbooks ) failed quite miserably .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Crucial?
How do you figure?ARM deals largely in the embedded space, Linux is a minor player at best in the embedded space.It's the opposite, really, ARM has become crucial for Linux, which desperately needs some sort of gimmick on a gimmick (ARM netbooks) since the last gimmick (netbooks) failed quite miserably.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379309</id>
	<title>Of Course</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245358260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Zune HD that has been said to have a version of Win CE as the OS.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Zune HD that has been said to have a version of Win CE as the OS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Zune HD that has been said to have a version of Win CE as the OS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378573</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28390855</id>
	<title>Re:Why is this surprising?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245430260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As someone who's worked at NVIDIA, you're probably correct. NVIDIA is a company, not a person, and their decisions don't reflect any sort of "attitude" for or against Linux; they do what makes business sense. Most of the engineers are good guys who are concerned only with making a decent product that people will want to buy, and they complain about Windows just as much as we do<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:) Plenty of them use linux themselves, and hell, down the hall someone had a poster up (from a redhat conference I think) of the whole linux 0.1 source.</p><p>Also, I wouldn't say they support Linux only "begrudgingly", as most of their non-gamer market uses linux (hello, render farms). It makes up a substantial slice of their market. I guess though that any 'attitude' they do have is warranted by the fact that the loudest linux users are the ones with complaints. (They actually post all the good mail they get from linux users, saying "See, not all of them are rude.")</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As someone who 's worked at NVIDIA , you 're probably correct .
NVIDIA is a company , not a person , and their decisions do n't reflect any sort of " attitude " for or against Linux ; they do what makes business sense .
Most of the engineers are good guys who are concerned only with making a decent product that people will want to buy , and they complain about Windows just as much as we do : ) Plenty of them use linux themselves , and hell , down the hall someone had a poster up ( from a redhat conference I think ) of the whole linux 0.1 source.Also , I would n't say they support Linux only " begrudgingly " , as most of their non-gamer market uses linux ( hello , render farms ) .
It makes up a substantial slice of their market .
I guess though that any 'attitude ' they do have is warranted by the fact that the loudest linux users are the ones with complaints .
( They actually post all the good mail they get from linux users , saying " See , not all of them are rude .
" )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As someone who's worked at NVIDIA, you're probably correct.
NVIDIA is a company, not a person, and their decisions don't reflect any sort of "attitude" for or against Linux; they do what makes business sense.
Most of the engineers are good guys who are concerned only with making a decent product that people will want to buy, and they complain about Windows just as much as we do :) Plenty of them use linux themselves, and hell, down the hall someone had a poster up (from a redhat conference I think) of the whole linux 0.1 source.Also, I wouldn't say they support Linux only "begrudgingly", as most of their non-gamer market uses linux (hello, render farms).
It makes up a substantial slice of their market.
I guess though that any 'attitude' they do have is warranted by the fact that the loudest linux users are the ones with complaints.
(They actually post all the good mail they get from linux users, saying "See, not all of them are rude.
")</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379147</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381199</id>
	<title>Re:Who needs Android?</title>
	<author>LWATCDR</author>
	<datestamp>1245321780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Android has some real advantages over just Linux in this space.<br>From a technical point of view it doesn't use X. X is a bit big and trades performance for other virtues that are not an advantage on a smallish embedded device.<br>Also Android applications are CPU agnostic. They will run on any CPU you port Android too.<br>The big advantage of Android is that it has an App store.<br>No Yum, apt-get, and Synaptic are NOT a replacement for an App store.</p><p>You can not sell your software through Synaptic, you can not see reviews or ratings. CNR is at best a poor version of an App store.</p><p>An App store give more control to the author of the application than repositories do. With repositories you have to wait for the Distro to decide to include your app, update your app, and they me even patch your app.  You could take the time and setup your own repository but what a PAIN that is and do you want the author to worry about packaging and running a repository or writing code?<br>Also you can not sell your code through a repository.<br>Yes there is a lot of great FOSS but FOSS has yet to produce great software that fills every need.<br>With the iPhone app store there is a large selection of software a lot of it free and even more really cheap. Yes there is a lot of junk but take a look at any repository and look at how many really bad FOSS programs there are.<br>Or go to Sourceforge and Freshmeat and see how many barely working projects you find.<br>Android offers a viable market place where FOSS and closed source both thrive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Android has some real advantages over just Linux in this space.From a technical point of view it does n't use X. X is a bit big and trades performance for other virtues that are not an advantage on a smallish embedded device.Also Android applications are CPU agnostic .
They will run on any CPU you port Android too.The big advantage of Android is that it has an App store.No Yum , apt-get , and Synaptic are NOT a replacement for an App store.You can not sell your software through Synaptic , you can not see reviews or ratings .
CNR is at best a poor version of an App store.An App store give more control to the author of the application than repositories do .
With repositories you have to wait for the Distro to decide to include your app , update your app , and they me even patch your app .
You could take the time and setup your own repository but what a PAIN that is and do you want the author to worry about packaging and running a repository or writing code ? Also you can not sell your code through a repository.Yes there is a lot of great FOSS but FOSS has yet to produce great software that fills every need.With the iPhone app store there is a large selection of software a lot of it free and even more really cheap .
Yes there is a lot of junk but take a look at any repository and look at how many really bad FOSS programs there are.Or go to Sourceforge and Freshmeat and see how many barely working projects you find.Android offers a viable market place where FOSS and closed source both thrive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Android has some real advantages over just Linux in this space.From a technical point of view it doesn't use X. X is a bit big and trades performance for other virtues that are not an advantage on a smallish embedded device.Also Android applications are CPU agnostic.
They will run on any CPU you port Android too.The big advantage of Android is that it has an App store.No Yum, apt-get, and Synaptic are NOT a replacement for an App store.You can not sell your software through Synaptic, you can not see reviews or ratings.
CNR is at best a poor version of an App store.An App store give more control to the author of the application than repositories do.
With repositories you have to wait for the Distro to decide to include your app, update your app, and they me even patch your app.
You could take the time and setup your own repository but what a PAIN that is and do you want the author to worry about packaging and running a repository or writing code?Also you can not sell your code through a repository.Yes there is a lot of great FOSS but FOSS has yet to produce great software that fills every need.With the iPhone app store there is a large selection of software a lot of it free and even more really cheap.
Yes there is a lot of junk but take a look at any repository and look at how many really bad FOSS programs there are.Or go to Sourceforge and Freshmeat and see how many barely working projects you find.Android offers a viable market place where FOSS and closed source both thrive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379051</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28389421</id>
	<title>AFAIK you CAN upload native code into the app stor</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245424140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Doom for example uses a native JNI library.</p><p>In fact you can port any C/C++ application over to a android device like stock Tmobile G1, see this tutorial: http://davanum.wordpress.com/2007/12/09/android-invoke-jni-based-methods-bridging-cc-and-java/</p><p>I have just installed doom on my Tmobile G1 from the android app store, and it works well. No hacks necessary.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Doom for example uses a native JNI library.In fact you can port any C/C + + application over to a android device like stock Tmobile G1 , see this tutorial : http : //davanum.wordpress.com/2007/12/09/android-invoke-jni-based-methods-bridging-cc-and-java/I have just installed doom on my Tmobile G1 from the android app store , and it works well .
No hacks necessary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doom for example uses a native JNI library.In fact you can port any C/C++ application over to a android device like stock Tmobile G1, see this tutorial: http://davanum.wordpress.com/2007/12/09/android-invoke-jni-based-methods-bridging-cc-and-java/I have just installed doom on my Tmobile G1 from the android app store, and it works well.
No hacks necessary.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379111</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28387149</id>
	<title>Re:ARM hostile to Linux?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245408900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In the Q&amp;A session afterwards one of the attendees asked what Mr. Saxby thought of Linux - he replied that it was a toy operating system that would never amount to anything, and that open source was a useless strategy for developing software and he didn't see any place for it in the business world.</p></div><p>When I was working at ARM on a processor (around 2007), we were paying and giving technical details to <a href="http://www.codesourcery.com/sgpp/lite/arm" title="codesourcery.com" rel="nofollow">codesourcery</a> [codesourcery.com], to add gcc support for the processor; many of the engineering tools were run on linux, and ARM's development software could run as Eclipse add-ons. There's no shortage of Linux support at ARM at the moment.</p><p>That said, when push comes to shove ARM is an IP company. Their business centres around charging people for processor designs, both upfront and per processor produced. So even given their use of and support for Linux, if someone asked them "why not open source your products and make money by charging for support, customization and improvements" they would probably reply "we don't think that would make as much money as our current closed-source licensing model".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In the Q&amp;A session afterwards one of the attendees asked what Mr. Saxby thought of Linux - he replied that it was a toy operating system that would never amount to anything , and that open source was a useless strategy for developing software and he did n't see any place for it in the business world.When I was working at ARM on a processor ( around 2007 ) , we were paying and giving technical details to codesourcery [ codesourcery.com ] , to add gcc support for the processor ; many of the engineering tools were run on linux , and ARM 's development software could run as Eclipse add-ons .
There 's no shortage of Linux support at ARM at the moment.That said , when push comes to shove ARM is an IP company .
Their business centres around charging people for processor designs , both upfront and per processor produced .
So even given their use of and support for Linux , if someone asked them " why not open source your products and make money by charging for support , customization and improvements " they would probably reply " we do n't think that would make as much money as our current closed-source licensing model " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the Q&amp;A session afterwards one of the attendees asked what Mr. Saxby thought of Linux - he replied that it was a toy operating system that would never amount to anything, and that open source was a useless strategy for developing software and he didn't see any place for it in the business world.When I was working at ARM on a processor (around 2007), we were paying and giving technical details to codesourcery [codesourcery.com], to add gcc support for the processor; many of the engineering tools were run on linux, and ARM's development software could run as Eclipse add-ons.
There's no shortage of Linux support at ARM at the moment.That said, when push comes to shove ARM is an IP company.
Their business centres around charging people for processor designs, both upfront and per processor produced.
So even given their use of and support for Linux, if someone asked them "why not open source your products and make money by charging for support, customization and improvements" they would probably reply "we don't think that would make as much money as our current closed-source licensing model".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378935</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379529</id>
	<title>corruption and collusion</title>
	<author>speedtux</author>
	<datestamp>1245315720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>After twenty years of Microsoft corrupting the industry and colluding with other companies to place their products, how can anybody take such statements seriously?  Nvidia has strong ties to Microsoft, and when Microsoft tells them to jump, they simply ask "how high".</p><p>Personally, I think Android is not a very good choice for netbooks; Ubuntu Netbook edition is a much better choice.  But Windows CE wouldn't even make my list of a usable netbook operating system.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>After twenty years of Microsoft corrupting the industry and colluding with other companies to place their products , how can anybody take such statements seriously ?
Nvidia has strong ties to Microsoft , and when Microsoft tells them to jump , they simply ask " how high " .Personally , I think Android is not a very good choice for netbooks ; Ubuntu Netbook edition is a much better choice .
But Windows CE would n't even make my list of a usable netbook operating system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After twenty years of Microsoft corrupting the industry and colluding with other companies to place their products, how can anybody take such statements seriously?
Nvidia has strong ties to Microsoft, and when Microsoft tells them to jump, they simply ask "how high".Personally, I think Android is not a very good choice for netbooks; Ubuntu Netbook edition is a much better choice.
But Windows CE wouldn't even make my list of a usable netbook operating system.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28385903</id>
	<title>Re:corruption and collusion</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245352140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I dunno, maybe they are saying one thing, and doing another?<br> <br>NVIDIA can't afford to lose the love of Microsoft right now, so maybe, just maybe, they are saying that WinCE is the "best thing evar", while working to build support for Andriod (or whatever).  It is clear that Microsoft is not doing a very good job supporting the mobile device ecosystem, but that doesn't mean that NVIDIA can walk away from the desktop market and publicly embrace non-Microsoft offerings in the mobile market.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I dunno , maybe they are saying one thing , and doing another ?
NVIDIA ca n't afford to lose the love of Microsoft right now , so maybe , just maybe , they are saying that WinCE is the " best thing evar " , while working to build support for Andriod ( or whatever ) .
It is clear that Microsoft is not doing a very good job supporting the mobile device ecosystem , but that does n't mean that NVIDIA can walk away from the desktop market and publicly embrace non-Microsoft offerings in the mobile market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I dunno, maybe they are saying one thing, and doing another?
NVIDIA can't afford to lose the love of Microsoft right now, so maybe, just maybe, they are saying that WinCE is the "best thing evar", while working to build support for Andriod (or whatever).
It is clear that Microsoft is not doing a very good job supporting the mobile device ecosystem, but that doesn't mean that NVIDIA can walk away from the desktop market and publicly embrace non-Microsoft offerings in the mobile market.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379529</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379715</id>
	<title>Re:More business for ATI</title>
	<author>sexconker</author>
	<datestamp>1245316320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Like how they got Nvidia support into Linux, right?</p><p>Oh wait.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Like how they got Nvidia support into Linux , right ? Oh wait .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like how they got Nvidia support into Linux, right?Oh wait.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378579</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379243
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381235
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28387719
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378497
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379047
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380501
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378731
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379641
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378935
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379525
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28387539
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28390393
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378497
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380025
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379051
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28386771
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378497
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379047
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380091
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378935
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379525
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381207
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378579
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381435
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378731
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378891
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379939
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378849
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381773
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378573
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379309
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379529
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28385903
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379147
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380829
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381711
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28389039
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378731
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378891
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380055
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379529
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28409295
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378497
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379047
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379633
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378935
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379525
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381287
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378497
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380931
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379147
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28390855
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379051
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381199
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28382911
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378731
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28389421
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379579
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380057
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378497
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379047
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28392713
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378579
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380269
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378731
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28472313
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378497
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379047
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381139
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379243
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381465
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379757
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380717
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378579
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380719
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378497
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379047
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380507
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378579
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379565
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379051
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28390713
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378731
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378947
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378731
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379311
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379051
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381199
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28382819
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378579
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380537
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379529
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28382549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378497
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379047
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380541
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378731
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379025
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378497
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379047
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380157
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378579
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379715
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379147
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381009
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381733
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378935
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28387149
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378731
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379019
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379765
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379147
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380829
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381711
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28392563
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378497
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379047
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28382351
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379051
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381199
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28382379
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28384003
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28402639
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378497
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380289
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379529
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380337
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379757
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380539
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378731
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380647
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379051
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380505
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378935
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379607
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378731
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379889
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378497
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28386457
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379757
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380823
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378731
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379019
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378497
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28382271
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378579
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379119
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380419
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378731
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379759
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378935
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380493
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378497
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379921
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_1848234_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378497
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28489375
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1848234.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28384375
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1848234.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379243
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381465
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381235
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1848234.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379551
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1848234.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28382891
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1848234.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378675
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1848234.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380457
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1848234.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28384003
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28402639
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1848234.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379819
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1848234.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378935
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379607
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28387149
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379525
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381207
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28387539
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381287
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380493
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1848234.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379509
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28390393
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28387719
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1848234.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379529
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28385903
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380337
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380693
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28409295
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28382549
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1848234.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380481
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1848234.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378731
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380647
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379311
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379889
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379641
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379025
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379019
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379765
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379835
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378891
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379939
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380055
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379111
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28389421
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28472313
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379759
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378947
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1848234.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379147
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381009
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381733
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28390855
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380829
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381711
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28392563
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28389039
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1848234.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378849
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381773
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1848234.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379757
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380539
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380823
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380717
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1848234.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379579
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380057
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1848234.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379051
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28386771
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381199
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28382911
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28382379
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28382819
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28390713
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380505
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1848234.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378497
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380931
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380025
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28382271
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380289
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28489375
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379047
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381139
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380157
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380541
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28392713
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380501
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380091
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380507
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379633
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28382351
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28386457
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379921
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1848234.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378579
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380269
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379119
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380419
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379715
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379017
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28381435
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380719
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28380537
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379565
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_1848234.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28378573
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_1848234.28379309
</commentlist>
</conversation>
